There is a big difference between constructive criticism and abusive abuse. They are two different things that are never the same. The first is a stand-alone science that has its own style, laws and important rules that make it a life necessity in any society. It is an advanced step forward that helps in building and correcting mistakes for the sake of Reaching for the best, and not leading to division, spreading rancor and frustration, a knowledge raised by its owner about the abuse and personalization of matters, and it is often better to choose his critical words that reach their goal, without offending anyone, or belittling anyone.
The only real objective of constructive criticism is to achieve a public interest that does not mix with personal interests and does not aim to settle old accounts. As for the abuse that currently prevails, and whose owners believe that they exercise freedom of criticism, it is very negative, it is closer to the crime, in which there is a complete absence For all moral concepts, it is mostly directed at the person, not to his work, idea or opinion, and its owners are not keen on choosing the right words, but deliberately choose insulting or ugly words, and they believe that insulting, insulting and mocking are synonyms of boldness, courage of personality, or strength The word, while the truth is just the opposite, is synonyms for weak argument, lack of knowledge, and absence of high morals!
What we currently see, unfortunately, on most social media sites is rejected criticism, whether it is directed at individuals, officials, or government institutions, because it exceeds the limits of moral decency and moral decency, especially with the entry of hurtful methods and words that we have not experienced in the UAE society, and that Most of these abusers deliberately speak and offend the person himself, and sometimes his family, not his idea or project.
Most of them criticize in an angry, jerky style, and try to harm the dignity of the person, believing that this means victory and bridging him, and most of them also resort to criticism without appropriate, so the criticism is not in place.
No one will prevent you from criticizing the public interest, but let everyone who criticizes know that constructive criticism uses scientific methods, does not use personal defamation, and the constructive critic is keen to provide the idea and advice, and is keen to hint more than the statement, and he is also keen to provide the abstract truth, and another His concern is to prove that he won in the end.
Whoever criticizes the public interest is keen to confirm the positives and clarify the negatives, and who criticizes for another goal, he seeks only to draw attention to the negative side only, and the constructive critic focuses on the idea, and he has a unified opinion about the idea, regardless of its owner, while the destructive critic has duplication, he is Criticizes according to the person’s position.
Theorizing is always very easy, so theorists outnumber the scholars in number, and criticism of any project, idea, decision, procedure, or action is very easy, but providing solutions, alternatives and development ideas is very difficult, so destructive critics do not care to provide solutions, insofar as they care to harm the owners of ideas !
twitter @ samialreyami
reyami@emaratalyoum.com
To read the previous articles of the writer please click on its name.