1/n
Some musings about how there are 2 fundamental modes of being.
I have increasingly observed that people fall into 2 broad categories. Those who are more 'pessimistic' and those who are more 'optimistic'. However this has nothing to do with how they conceptualize their future

The 'pessimism' or 'optimism' has to do with how they view themselves, others and life in general.
So I am talking about beliefs here and I am not blaming someone for their beliefs; the belief people have is due to a long history of experiences but imho every1 can change theirs

before we even start its good to recollect Martin Seligman's learned helplessness experiments, where uncontrollable/unpredictable shocks were internalized by experimental subjects as helplessness/hopelessness & generalized to other situations. That is an imp theory of depression.

The bottom line is that people end up with their beliefs due to various reasons, but once they realize the counter productiveness of their beliefs it behooves of them to modify those & replace with better and more helpful ones.
I'm not contesting that reality is one way or other

A popular example is that of growth mindset vs fixed mindset.

Believing that intelligence/abilities can be developed works better than assuming we can do nothing about it; the actual facts of the matter may be complex and nuanced, but the belief matters more than reality!

So with this out of the way, lets look at how people may systematically differ from each other in their beliefs about self, others and life in general.

Self can be either deterministic or driven by free will;

Others can be either good/ bad;

Life can be full of suffering/ joy!

Lets unpack this further.
Our most important belief is regarding why we act the way we do; some believe its determined by our genes/ upbringing or is due to our current/ historical socio economic factors. No matter what the external factor, it is not us. We don't feel in control!

To make it concrete consider addiction. Someone with this view will either blame his genes(and susceptibility thereof) or availability of drugs and peer pressure or the loneliness that has resulted from his family situation and upbringing for his addiction. And that may be true.

Another way 2 view why we act the way we do is to take personal responsibility & ownership. To attribute our actions to our choices & free will.
The addicted person, maybe in 12 step programs, will admit his own role in perpetuating his addiction & use alternate coping mechanisms

Addiction, of course, like any other phenomenon, is complex and probably maintained due to both deterministic and agentic reasons. And both conceptualizations may be helpful in one way or the other, but what fascinates me is the inability of both camps to see the other viewpoint.

Thus the optimistic conceptualization of self may also be problematic but I lean towards that especially when thinking about oneself.
imho, its always better, on the whole, to have a more 'optimistic/positive' view of self & its efficacy. We may not be in control, but we can be!

Now consider our views about other people or if generalized about the human nature (for we are special and beyond human nature so our view of ourselves need not contradict our view of others).
Others can be either bad and thus to be distrusted or good and thus to be trusted.

Accordingly, you will either find people who are cynical and who mistrust other peoples actions/ intentions (and again they may have a history of relationship mishaps where their trust was taken for a ride), or we will have people who seem gullible and too trusting/ accommodating

On the surface the positive/ optimistic conceptualization of others (that others are basically good) seems to have no dependence on positive / optimistic conceptualization of self (that we can choose our attitude/ acts); but I think there is a strong and mutual connection.

When we interact with others & the inevitable deception/ cheating happens, we can exercise a choice to still trust the next person. When we choose to start every interaction/ relationship afresh, we increase the chances of it turning out well & our view of others remains good

Also, when you exercise choice you can cut off the person who cheated you from your life, thus decreasing -ve interactions. With deterministic mindset you may feel trapped with that relationship & generalize the -ve interactions to others. Thus you end up with -ve view of others.

The reality of course may be somewhere in between: other people may neither be basically bad nor basically good; they may have bad and good aspects and qualities within them.
But overall imho its better to trust others by default than otherwise. Being cynical is self limiting.

Now consider life in general.

If your predominant view is that others are bad & you also feel that you cannot do much about the situation, you are going to find life very hard & something to be suffered and endured: the world will start looking hostile rather than indifferent.

On the other hand, when you think others are basically good & you have a lot of say in what happens to you, you will take steps to ensure good interactions with good people & end up with good experiences bolstering your faith in life as a privilege to be enjoyed in a benign world

This is the ultimate dichotomy or different conceptualizations of life: life is suffering vs life is joy ; of course life just is.
This is also the major point of contention between the 2 camps: whether life's hardship have to be acknowledged or life's beauty is to be glorified.

Many mental health activists believe that they should rail against those championing 'toxic positivity' as 1) its not the natural state of things: life is full of suffering 2) they have some product to peddle (a distrust about motives) 3) are just lucky fools (haven't suffered).

The fact that anyone talking about positivity brings up these judgements in such people says a lot about their underlying worldview that is steeped in determinism, cynicism and pessimism. As a person who champions positivity let me set it straight- its borne out of suffering too

When a person has suffered, but not lost hope, he talks about positivity: that life is & can potentially be source of great joy; that suffering and the realization that other good people can suffer and will appreciate help is the reason he is likely to champion positivity.

To some he may appear to be the happy go lucky person who lives with his head in the clouds and hasn't suffered; but its precisely because he has suffered in the past and chosen not to do so that he is likely to talk about positivity and try moving others to his side.

While I do not wish to belittle the lived experience of people who may have suffered greatly & repeatedly & thus are locked in the 'pessimistic' mindset for now, I do strongly believe that they can, & should, try to change their beliefs about self, others & life. What else to do?

At the very least pls don't put down someone who is championing the role of positive emotions/ positivity in mental health: there is a lot of evidence that it helps in prevention/resilience as well as treatment. That it acts as a buffer. That it makes life worth living.

East is east and west is west, and we may have different worldviews but in our inability to see from where the other is coming lets not do a disservice by shooting down perfectly good ideas like the utility of positive emotions, experiences and relationships.
End of 2 am rant.