Criticism - Wikipedia

…
Search
Criticism
This article has multiple issues.

Please help improve it or discuss
Learn more
these issues on the talk page.
Criticism is the practice of
judging the merits and faults of
something.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

Page 1 of 106
Crítica, engraving by Julio Ruelas, ca.
1907
The judger is called a critic.

To engage in criticism is to
criticise (in British English – see
American and British English
spelling differences.)
One specific item of criticism is

Page 2 of 106
called a criticism or critique.
Criticism is an evaluative or
corrective exercise that can occur
in any area of human life. Criticism
can therefore take many different
forms (see below). How people go
about criticizing, can vary a great
deal. In specific areas of human
endeavour, the form of criticism
can be highly specialized and
technical; it often requires
professional knowledge to
appreciate the criticism. For
subject-specific information, see

Page 3 of 106
the Varieties of criticism page.
To criticize does not necessarily

imply "to find fault", but the word
is often taken to mean the simple
expression of an object against
prejudice, no matter positive or
negative. Often criticism involves
active disagreement, but it may
only mean "taking sides".
Constructive criticism will often
involve an exploration of the
different sides of an issue.
Criticism is often presented as

Page 4 of 106
something unpleasant, but there
are friendly criticisms, amicably
discussed, and some people find
great pleasure in criticism
("keeping people sharp",
"providing the critical edge"). The
Pulitzer Prize for Criticism has
been presented since 1970 to a
newspaper writer who has
demonstrated 'distinguished
criticism'.
When criticism involves a

dialogue of some kind, direct or
indirect, it is an intrinsically social

Page 5 of 106
activity.
Criticism is also the study,

evaluation, and interpretation of
literature, artwork, film, and social
trends (see the article links
below). The goal is to understand
the possible meanings of cultural
phenomena, and the context in
which they take shape. In so
doing, it is often evaluated how
cultural productions relate to
other cultural productions, and
what their place is within a
particular genre, or a particular

Page 6 of 106
cultural tradition.
Etymology
This section is about the origin
and evolution of the meanings of
the expression "criticism".
Early English meaning …
The English word criticism is

derived from the French
critique, which dates back to at
least the 14th century.
The words "critic" and "critical"

Page 7 of 106
existed in the English language
from the mid-16th century, and
the word "criticism" first made
its appearance in English in the
early 17th century.[1]
In turn, the French expression
critique has roots in Latin
("criticus" – a judger, decider,
or critic), and, even earlier,
classical Greek language
("krites" means judge, and
"kritikos" means able to make
judgements, or the critic).
Related Greek terms are krinein

Page 8 of 106
(separating out, deciding), krei-
(to sieve, discriminate, or
distinguish) and krisis (literally,
the judgement, the result of a
trial, or a selection resulting
from a choice or decision).
Crito is also the name of a pupil
and friend of the Greek
philosopher Socrates, as well
as the name of an imaginary
dialogue about justice written
by the philosopher Plato in the
context of the execution of
Socrates.

Page 9 of 106
The early English meaning of
criticism was primarily literary
criticism, that of judging and
interpreting literature. Samuel
Johnson is often held as the
prime example of criticism in the
English language, and his
contemporary Alexander Pope's
Essay on Criticism is a significant
landmark. In the course of the
17th century, it acquired the more
general sense of censure, as well
as the more specialized meaning
of the "discernment of taste", i.e.
the art of estimating the qualities

Page 10 of 106
and character of literary or artistic
works, implicitly from the point of
view of a consumer.
To be critical meant, positively, to

have good, informed judgement
about matters of culture (to be
cultivated, to be a man or woman
of distinction), but negatively it
could also refer to the
(unreasonable) rejection or
(unfair) treatment of some outside
group ("to be critical of them").
Derivatively, "a criticism" also
referred to a nice point or a

Page 11 of 106
distinction, a tiny detail, a
pedantic nicety, a subtlety, or a
quibble (the sense of what today
is called a "minor criticism").
Often criticism was governed by
very strict cultural rules of
politeness, propriety and decency,
and there could be immediate
penalties if the wrong words were
said or written down (in 17th
century England, more than half
of men and about three-quarters
of women could not read or write).
In the 19th century, criticism also

Page 12 of 106
gained the philosophical meaning
of "a critical examination of the
faculty of knowledge", particularly
in the sense used by Immanuel
Kant. (See Oxford English
Dictionary). Such criticism was
carried out mainly by academic
authorities, businessmen and
men of property with the leisure to
devote themselves to the pursuit
of knowledge.
20th century …
In the 20th century, all these

Page 13 of 106
meanings continued, but criticism
acquired the more general
connotation of voicing an
objection, or of appraising the
pros and cons of something.
The shape and meanings of

criticism were influenced
considerably by wars (including
two world wars) occurring
almost continuously
somewhere in the world.
With the growth of
specializations in the division of
labour, and the growth of

Page 14 of 106
tertiary education, innumerable
different branches of criticism
emerged with their own rules
and specialized technical
meanings.
Philosophers such as Karl
Popper and Imre Lakatos have
popularized the idea that
criticism is a normal part of
scientific activity. Relatedly,
"scientific criticism" has
become a standard expression,
just as much as "literary
criticism".

Page 15 of 106
Gradually it was accepted that
criticism is a normal process in
a democratic society, rather
than a sign of inadequacy, or
something that should be
strictly controlled or repressed.
From the 1970s onward, under

the influence of neo-Marxism,
critical theory and Michel
Foucault, it became fashionable in
the English-speaking academic
social sciences and humanities to
use the French word "critique",
instead of the ordinary "criticism".

Page 16 of 106
The suggestion is that there is a
difference between the two
terms, but what exactly it is, is
often not altogether clear. Often
the connotation is that if a
deliberation is a "critique" and not
just a "criticism", then there is "a
lot of extra thought and profound
meaning" behind what is being
said. A "critique" in the modern
sense is normally understood as a
systematic criticism, a critical
essay, or the critical appraisal of a
discourse (or parts of a
discourse). Thus, many academic

Page 17 of 106
papers came to be titled or
subtitled "a critique". From the
1970s, English-speaking
academics and journalists also
began to use the word "critique"
not only as a noun, but as a verb
(e.g. "I have critiqued the idea",
instead of "I have criticized the
idea"). What is often implied is,
that "critiqueing" goes deeper
into the issue, or is more
complete, than "criticizing",
possibly because the specialist
criteria of a particular discipline
are being applied.

Page 18 of 106
21st century …
From the 1990s, the popular

meanings of the word criticism
have started to evolve more
strongly toward "having an
objection", "expressing
dissent", "stating a dislike",
"wanting to dissociate from
something", or "rejecting
something" ("If you liked it, you
would not be criticizing it"). In
the contemporary sense,
criticism is often more the
expression of an attitude,

Page 19 of 106
where the object of criticism
may only be vaguely defined.
For example, somebody
"unlikes" something on
Facebook or "unfriends"
somebody.
In general, there is less money
in literary criticism, while it has
become easier for anyone to
publish anything at a very low
cost on the Internet – without
necessarily being vetted
through critically by others.
Professionally, "what it means

Page 20 of 106
to criticize" has become a
much more specialized and
technical matter, where "inside
knowledge" is required to
understand the criticism truly;
this development is linked to
the circumstance, that the right
to criticize, or the propriety
(appropriate use) of criticism, is
regarded nowadays much more
as depending on one's position,
or on the context of the
situation ("I would like to say
something, but I am not in a
position to criticize").

Page 21 of 106
Because many more people are
able to travel to, or have contact
with, worlds completely
different from their own, new
problems are created of how to
relativize criticisms and their
limitations, how to put
everything into meaningful
proportion. This affects what a
criticism is understood to be, or
to mean, and what its overall
significance is thought to be.
Digital information technology
and telecommunications have

Page 22 of 106
begun to change drastically the
ways people have for getting
attention, or for being taken
seriously. In turn, this has
begun to change the ways
people have for going about
criticizing, and what criticism
means for people.
With more possibilities for
sophisticated expression,
criticism has tended to become
more "layered". Beneath the
observable surface
presentation of criticism, which

Page 23 of 106
is freely advertised, there are
often additional layers of
deeper criticism. These are not
directly accessible, because
they require additional
information, or insight into
additional meanings. To gain
access to the "whole story"
about a criticism, and not just
"part of the story", may be
conditional on fulfilling certain
entry requirements ("if you
don't have the ticket, you don't
get the knowledge").

Page 24 of 106
Together with the ability to
make finer distinctions of
meaning with the aid of digital
equipment, the possibilities for
ambiguity in criticism have
increased: is a criticism being
implied, or is it not, and if so,
what exactly is the criticism? It
can take more effort to unravel
the full story.
Classifications
Criticism can be:
directed toward a person or an

Page 25 of 106
animal; at a group, authority or
organization; at a specific
behaviour; or at an object of
some kind (an idea, a
relationship, a condition, a
process, or a thing).
personal (delivered directly
from one person to another, in a
personal capacity), or
impersonal (expressing the
view of an organization, and not
aimed at anyone personally).
highly specific and detailed, or
very abstract and general.

Page 26 of 106
verbal (expressed in language)
or non-verbal (expressed
symbolically, or expressed
through an action or a way of
behaving).
explicit (the criticism is clearly
stated) or implicit (a criticism is
implied by what is being said,
but it is not stated openly).
the result of critical thinking[2]
or spontaneous impulse.
Different kinds of criticisms can

be distinguished as types using
the following criteria:

Page 27 of 106
Point of view from which the
criticism is made ("in what
framework", "from what angle
or perspective" is the criticism
made).
Content of criticism, what it
consists of ("what" is the
criticism).
Purpose, motive, use or
function of criticism ("why" is
the criticism being raised, what
is its aim).
Form of criticism, language
used or medium of expression

Page 28 of 106
(in what "style" or format is the
criticism presented).
Method of delivery,
transmission or communication
for the criticism ("how", or by
what means, is the criticism
conveyed).
Type of critic or the source
making the criticism ("from
whom" criticism originates).
Target or object of the criticism
(criticism "of whom" or criticism
"of what").
Context, place, setting or

Page 29 of 106
situation for the criticism
("where" is the criticism being
made).
Recipients or audience of the
criticism, intended or
unintended (criticism directed
or addressed "to where" or "to
whom").
In dealing with criticisms, usually

the most important aspects are
who makes the criticism, what the
criticism is about, and what or
whom it is aimed at. It can also
make a big difference though

Page 30 of 106
whether a criticism is e.g.
communicated in person, or
whether it is communicated with a
letter or telephone message.
For an overview of criticisms from

particular political or philosophical
perspectives, see Varieties of
criticism. For subject-specific
information, see the critical pages
on art, film, literature, theatre, or
architecture.
Psychology

Page 31 of 106
In general, the psychology of
criticism studies the cognitive and
emotional effects of criticism, the
behavioral characteristics of
criticism, and its influence on how
people are reacting.
Area of study …
The psychology of criticism is

primarily concerned with:
the motivation, purpose or

intent which people have for
making criticisms – healthy or

Page 32 of 106
unhealthy.
the meaning of criticism for the
self, and for others – positive or
negative.
the effect which criticism has
on other people – good or bad.
how people respond to
criticisms, or cope with them –
negatively or positively.
the quantity and quality of
criticism required to achieve
the desired effect or outcome.
the form in which criticisms are
delivered – effective or

Page 33 of 106
ineffective.
how people learn to give and
receive criticism successfully.
the sublimation, repression or
denial of criticism.
Parents, teachers, lawyers,

managers and politicians are
often concerned with these
issues, because it can make a
great deal of difference to how
problems are tackled and
resolved.
The motivation as well as the

Page 34 of 106
effect of criticism may be rational,
or it may be non-rational or
arbitrary; it may be healthy or
unhealthy.
When psychologists study

criticism as a type of human
behavior, they do not usually
study it "in general" – such a
general study is often considered
to be more a philosophical
concern. Psychologists usually
study it in specific contexts and
situations. The reason is partly
technical (it is difficult to

Page 35 of 106
construct and prove universal
generalizations about criticism as
a human behavior) and partly
practical (it is more useful to
understand particular behaviors
which are of direct practical
concern).
The most basic rule …
The most basic "rule-of-thumb"

of criticism which psychologists
usually recommend is:
"Respect the individual,

Page 36 of 106
focus the criticism on the
behavior that needs
changing – on what people
actually do or actually say."
Rationale …
The thought behind this basic

norm for criticism is:
If individuals are attacked for

their personal characteristics
(for "being who they are") it
may be impossible for them to
change, therefore making the
criticism useless.

Page 37 of 106
If it is not actually clear what
the person does, or what they
are really saying, the criticism
may miss the mark. By
concentrating clearly and only
on observation of what the
individual as a matter of fact
does or says, it is less likely, that
the criticism will be misplaced,
confused or misinterpreted; it is
less likely, that the person being
criticized is being
misunderstood. It would be
unfair and unjust, not to say
irrelevant, to criticize people for

Page 38 of 106
something they have not
actually done. It would be a
false accusation.
Inversely, if the individuals are
respected with a bit of humor,
and due credit is given to their
positive intentions as human
beings, it is vastly more likely
that the criticism will be
understood, and taken
seriously. And if the criticism is
clearly directed only to "what
people actually do" that is
wrong, instead of "who they

Page 39 of 106
are", it creates possibilities,
options and choices for doing
something different and better.
They can't change who they
are, but they can change their
actions. Because people's
sense of dignity is secure in this
case, they are better able to
respond to the criticism, and
indeed do something about it.
The critics may just want to

provoke or vent a bit of hostility,
but it might backfire, because the
people criticized may make a

Page 40 of 106
nasty response. The nasty
response may "prove" to the
critics, that the criticism was
justified, but the critics have
brought this on themselves, they
have produced their own
nastiness. It is easy to do, but may
be difficult to live with. In the
process, the whole point of the
criticism may be lost – all that
happens is, that there is a quarrel
between people who just vent
their hostility. This is very unlikely
to produce any solution that all
concerned can live with.

Page 41 of 106
The basic psychological rule of
criticism assumes that people
want to use criticism to achieve
an improvement, usually "in
good faith" (bona fide). It
assumes the critic has a positive
intention in making the criticism.
The rule may not make much
sense if there is an all-out war
going on, where the opposition is
just trying to destroy and discredit
the target as much as possible,
using almost any means they can
find. Nevertheless, psychologists
recommend to respond by

Page 42 of 106
attacking what the opponents
actually do, not who they are.
That way, the critic cannot be
accused of unfair or prejudiced
treatment of others.
Application …
The basic rule is not always easy

to apply.
It may be difficult to have

respect for somebody who is
the target of criticism,
especially if there is a history of
grievances.

Page 43 of 106
It may be that it seems as
though people are being
respected, but in reality (if you
understand the full meaning)
they are being disrespected. It
might look formally like they are
treated as equals, but in reality
(informally speaking, practically
and substantively) they are
being denigrated.
It may be difficult to consider
the action which is being
criticized, in its own right,
separately from the person

Page 44 of 106
("only you could do something
awful like this to me").
Consequently, psychologists
often recommend that before a
criticism is being stated to a
person, the critic should try to get
into rapport with the person being
criticized ("get in sync" with the
other person, "on the same
wavelength"). If that is not
possible (because they are
enemies), the best thing may be
not to express the criticism at all,
or get a mediator. It may take

Page 45 of 106
considerable strategy in order to
find a way of making a criticism,
so that it "really hits home".
Rather than "shooting their mouth
off", it may be wise if people say
nothing, until the right time and
place arrives to make the
criticism.
One problem at the receiving end

is that a criticism may be taken
more seriously than it really
merits, or that it is taken "too
personally", even though that was
not the intention of the critic.

Page 46 of 106
Criticisms are often voiced
without knowing exactly what the
response will be. It may be that
this problem cannot be entirely
removed; the best one can do is
to judge, on the basis of
experience, what would be the
most likely effect of the criticism,
and communicate the criticism as
well as one can.
Another sort of problem is the

limited attention span of
individuals. To express a criticism
may require detailed explanation

Page 47 of 106
or clarification; it presupposes
that the knowledge exists to
understand what it is about, and
that people are willing to listen.
That takes time, and the time may
not be available, or people are
reluctant to take the time. This
can get in the way of the mutual
respect required. It may be
possible to overcome this
problem only by formulating the
criticism as briefly as possible,
and communicate it in a form
which takes the least time to
understand it. Failing that, people

Page 48 of 106
must "make time" to discuss the
criticism. It can take considerable
effort to create the situation in
which the criticism will be
"heard".
Exception to the rule …
The exception to the basic

psychological rule consists of
cases where, it is argued, the
individuals and their behaviors
cannot be distinguished. This
would be the case, for example, if
the criticism itself consisted of

Page 49 of 106
"being there" (intruding,
trespassing, causing property
damage), or "not being there"
(non-response).
In some cases people deliberately

seek "loopholes" in the ordinary
rules and channels for criticism, in
order to make a criticism which,
although strictly not illegal, may
have a malicious intention, or
offends the target of the criticism.
That can cause the ordinary
consideration which people have
for others to be abandoned. What

Page 50 of 106
is legitimate and illegitimate
criticism is not always easy to
establish, and there may be "grey
areas" in the law. It is rarely
possible to make rules for every
detail of what people may or may
not do. The law itself can also be
contested with criticism, if it is
perceived as unfair. Nevertheless,
the courts usually draw the line
somewhere.[3]
Learning to criticize …
The ability to criticize is

Page 51 of 106
something which rarely occurs
naturally; it must be learnt. Good
critics exhibit several kinds of
qualities:
Insight: critics should clearly

understand why they are
criticizing.
Attitude: critics should be
emotionally confident and
morally comfortable, both
about making a criticism, and
about dealing with the
response to criticism.
Inquiry: critics should be

Page 52 of 106
willing to question authority,
popular opinion, and
assumptions.
Knowledge: critics should
research the subject of their
criticism to maintain the factual
integrity of their criticism.
Skills: critics should choose
and apply the correct kind of
criticism to an issue, so that the
criticism will be balanced,
complete and persuasive.
Critics require adequate skills in
reasoning, research, and

Page 53 of 106
communication.
Integrity: critics should remain
consistent and honest before,
during, and after a criticism is
expressed.
These qualities are learned

through practical experience in
which people have a dialogue or
debate and give each other
feedback. Often, teachers can
design assignments specifically
to stimulate students to acquire
these qualities. But the facility for
critical thought usually requires

Page 54 of 106
some personal initiative. There are
plenty of "lazy critics", but one
must work hard to be a good
critic. The lazy critic is soon
forgotten, but a good critic is
remembered for years.
Balance …
With criticism it is always

important to keep things in
proportion, neither overdoing
things, nor being too timid.
People can be too critical, but

Page 55 of 106
they can also be insufficiently
critical. It is important to strike a
good balance: to be neither
excessively critical nor
completely uncritical.
People who are too critical and
focus only on the downside or
limitation of things run into the
problem that others perceive
them as being "too negative",
and lacking a "constructive
attitude". If there is too much
criticism, it gets in the way of
getting anything done – people

Page 56 of 106
are just "anti", but "it does not
lead anywhere".
People who are uncritical,
however, are often regarded as
naive and superficial
("suckers"); they lack
discernment, they are prone to
being deceived and tricked,
because they readily believe all
kinds of things, which they
should not accept just like that,
for their own good. If they
thought more critically, they
would not give in so easily to

Page 57 of 106
what others say or do. The idea
here is that "one should not be
so open-minded that one's
brains fall out."
An important reason why

balanced criticism is desirable is,
that if things get totally out of
proportion, the critics or their
targets can lose their balance
themselves. Criticism can wreak
havoc, and therefore people have
to know how to handle it from
both ends. If the criticism is
balanced, it is more likely to be

Page 58 of 106
successful, or, at any rate, it has
more credibility.
Effect on others …
This section does not cite any

sources. Learn more
When psychologists analyze the

effect of criticism on others, they
are concerned with how people
respond to criticism (cognitively
and emotionally), and how
criticism influences the recipient's
behavior.

Page 59 of 106
Positive and negative effects …
When people criticize, it can have

a fruitful, enriching and
constructive effect on the
recipient, because new ideas and
viewpoints may be generated in
trying to solve a problem.
People can also be hurt by

criticisms, when they experience
the criticism as a personal attack.
Psychologists concerned with
human communication, such as
therapists, therefore often

Page 60 of 106
recommend that people should
choose the right words to express
their criticism. The same criticism
can be raised in different ways,
some more successful than
others.
Formulation …
If people formulate their criticism

in the right way, it is more likely
that other people will accept it. If
the criticism is badly expressed,
people might reject it, not
because it is wrong in itself, but

Page 61 of 106
because they do not like being
talked to in that way. Even if the
content of a criticism is quite
valid, the form in which it is
expressed may be so counter-
productive, that the criticism is
not accepted. The content may
be something that people can
work out on their own, but the
form concerns the social
relationship between people.
Feedback fallacy …
The term "feedback" is often used

Page 62 of 106
instead of criticism, because
"feedback" may sound more
neutral, while criticism may seem
to be about "finding fault". A more
polite language may be used
when there are issues of authority
and obedience ("who has to
follow whom"), as well as the
need for cooperative teamwork to
get a job done ("constructive
collegial attitude"). The question
is often "who controls the
feedback", "who is allowed to
criticize", "who owns the
problem" and "who is to do

Page 63 of 106
something about the problem". It
may be that managers educate
employees to employ a more
positive and professional
language, in order to get them to
see things in a way that is more
productive for the enterprise.
Quality …
This section does not cite any

sources. Learn more
Especially educators, but also e.g.

lawyers, managers and politicians
are very concerned with the

Page 64 of 106
quality of criticisms. People might
raise all kinds of objections and
criticisms, but how good are
they? Criticisms can be just
"noise". They can also be a
nuisance if they are misdirected,
they get in the way of getting
things done.
Good …
Ideally, a criticism should be:
timely, not too early nor too

late.

Page 65 of 106
brief and succinct, with a
clear start and a finish, not
endless.
relevant and to the point, not
misplaced.
clear, specific and precise,
not vague.
well-researched, not based
on hear-say or speculative
thought.
sincere and positively
intended, not malicious.
articulate, persuasive and
actionable, so that the

Page 66 of 106
recipient can both understand
the criticism and be motivated
to act on the message.[4][5]
Not all criticisms have all these

features, but if one or more of
them is missing, the criticism is
less likely to achieve its goal.
Almost all guidelines for criticism
mention these seven points,
although in particular contexts
their meaning may be more
exactly specified (for example,
what it means to be "articulate
and persuasive" can vary

Page 67 of 106
according to the circumstances).
Lousy …
Logically, there are just as many

ways to get a criticism wrong as
to get the criticism right.
Criticism is made at the wrong

time and place: people might
accept that the critic has a
point, but "they can't do
anything about it now."
Criticism is too long: people
get confused over what it is all

Page 68 of 106
about, they get lost in it, and
become disoriented.
Criticism is vague: people are
likely to say, "so what"?
Criticism is inappropriate, or
the critic is not really in a
position to make it: people will
say "you're way out of line".
Criticism has no clear target:
people are likely just to
conclude that "so-and-so is in
a bad mood right now" or "he's
had too much of it."
Criticism assigns blame or

Page 69 of 106
states problems without
suggesting solutions ("empty
criticism"): people are likely to
conclude this information is not
very useful.[6]
Critic did no research before
making the criticism: people
will say, "very interesting, but
this cuts no ice."
Criticism has no clear
motivation: "why are you
telling me this, and why are you
telling me about it now?".
Critic makes bad criticisms

Page 70 of 106
regularly: it discredits the
critic.
The main effect of lousy criticism

is usually that, rather than
clarifying things, it becomes
disorienting or confusing to
people. Therefore, lousy criticism
is usually regarded as unhelpful,
or as an unwanted distraction
getting in the way of things. The
only thing a lousy criticism
achieves is to make it clear that
somebody has an objection
(although the objection is not

Page 71 of 106
well-taken).
Techniques of
constructive criticism
…
Techniques of constructive
criticism aim to improve the
behavior or the behavioral results
of a person, while consciously
avoiding personal attacks and
blaming. This kind of criticism is
carefully framed in language
acceptable to the target person,
often acknowledging that the
critics themselves could be

Page 72 of 106
wrong. Insulting language and
hostile language are avoided, and
phrases are used like "I feel..."
and "It's my understanding that..."
and so on. Constructive critics try
to stand in the shoes of the
person criticized, and consider
what things would look like from
their perspective.[7]
Giving and receiving the

message …
Some people are not open to any

criticism at all, even constructive

Page 73 of 106
criticism.[8] Also, there is an art to
truly constructive criticism: being
well-intentioned is neither a
necessary nor sufficient condition
for constructively criticizing, since
one can have good intentions but
poor delivery ("I don't know why
my girlfriend keeps getting mad
when I tell her to stop with the
fries already; I'm just concerned
about her weight"), or egocentric
intentions but appropriate delivery
("I'm sick of my subordinate
coming in late for work, so I took
her aside and we had a long,

Page 74 of 106
compassionate talk about her
work-life balance. I think she
bought it."). As the name
suggests, the consistent and
central notion is that the criticism
must have the aim of
constructing, scaffolding, or
improving a situation, something
which is generally obstructed by
hostile language or personal
attacks.
People can sometimes be afraid

to express a criticism, or afraid to
be criticized. Criticism can "press

Page 75 of 106
all the wrong buttons." The threat
of criticism can be sufficient to
silence people, or cause them to
stay away. So self-confidence can
play a big role in criticism – the
confidence to criticize, and the
confidence to face criticism. If
people's emotions are not
properly considered, criticism can
fail to succeed, even although it is
well-intentioned, or perfectly
sensible. Hence criticism is often
considered an "art", because it
involves human insight into "what
one can say and cannot say" in

Page 76 of 106
the given situation.
Hamburger method …
One style of constructive criticism

employs the "hamburger
method",[9] in which each
potentially harsh criticism (the
"meat") is surrounded by
compliments (the "buns"). The
idea is to help the person being
criticized feel more comfortable,
and assure the person that the
critic's perspective is not entirely
negative. This is a specific

Page 77 of 106
application of the more general
principle that criticism should be
focused on maintaining healthy
relationships, and be mindful of
the positive as well as the
negative.[10]
Psychopathology …
The psychopathology of criticism

refers to the study of unhealthy
forms of criticism, and of
unhealthy kinds of response to
criticism. Psychologists often
associate these with particular

Page 78 of 106
categories of mental disorders,
especially personality disorders,
as classified in the U.S.
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders (this manual
is also used in other countries,
although the forms of personality
disorders can be somewhat
different in different countries,
reflecting ethnic differences and
differences in social systems).
Low self-esteem: emotionally

vulnerable individuals that are
often excessively sensitive to

Page 79 of 106
criticism, or to being defeated,
they can't handle it.
Narcissistic personality
disorder: although they may
not show it outwardly, criticism
may "haunt" or leave them
feeling humiliated, degraded,
hollow, and empty. They may
react with disdain, revenge,
narcissistic rage, or
defiance.[11] Narcissists are
extremely sensitive to personal
criticism and extremely critical
of other people. They think they

Page 80 of 106
must be seen as perfect or
superior or infallible or else they
are worthless. There's no
middle ground.[12]
Paranoid personality
disorder: these people are
often rigidly critical of others,
but have great difficulty
accepting criticism
themselves.[13]
Avoidant personality
disorder: these people are
hypersensitive to criticism or
rejection. They build up a

Page 81 of 106
defensive shell. If the criticism
seems to imply something bad
about them, a defensive shell
immediately snaps into place.
Dependent personality
disorder: individuals that will
often apologize and "self-
correct" in response to criticism
at the drop of a hat.
Hypercriticism: these people
are often regarded as anal
retentive or nitpickers (see
nagging). Nitpickers engage in
minute, trivial, and unjustified

Page 82 of 106
faultfinding to excess.[14]
Nagging means endless
scolding, complaints, and
faultfinding.[15]
Hypocriticism: these
individuals are hypocrites who
criticize and accuse others
about the vice that they are
guilty of themselves.[16]
Hypocrisy contains some kind
of deception, and therefore
involves a kind of lying.[16]
To understand pathological
criticism and pathological

Page 83 of 106
responses to criticism, it is often
not sufficient to see the
individuals concerned in isolation
– they should be placed in the
total context in which the criticism
or the response to it occurs.
Particular situations can "bring
out" the "bad side" of people,
which in the normal run of events
would not occur. Pathological
criticism occurs especially in
situations of intense conflict or
competition, where the normal
internal and external controls on
people's behaviour begin to break

Page 84 of 106
down. Not just personal change
but also a "change of scene" may
be required to get rid of the
disorder.
A term describing pathologic

criticism may be used as
argumentum ad hominem without
proven diagnosis (see also anti-
psychiatry movement).
Anti-psychiatry
movement
…
The anti-psychiatry movement

Page 85 of 106
opposes labeling persons who
engage in criticism as having a
"disease" (or "abuse" or
"addiction").
The medicalization of criticism

rejects the criticism as a
disease. The critics are
silenced, and their viewpoint is
denied. They are regarded as
incapable of sensible criticism,
but their disease often cannot
be proved – other than saying
that voicing a criticism in a
certain way is proof of a

Page 86 of 106
disease.
Why exactly a criticism is
"unhealthy" can be difficult to
prove, nevermind its rights or
wrongs – it could be subjective
interpretation, a matter of
personal likes and dislikes, or a
matter of point of view. What is
"healthy" or "unhealthy" might
depend on the context, or on
how it is understood.
People labelled as "ill" cannot
be held morally responsible for
their critical utterances, but

Page 87 of 106
people can often choose their
own behaviour with regard to
criticism, and they should take
responsibility for their own
behaviour, if they can
practically do so.
Even if it is possible to kill the
criticism with a pill, the cause or
the target of the criticism may
not go away. A bad situation
may remain; the only difference
is that somebody is doped
sufficiently, so that no overt
criticism is made or received.

Page 88 of 106
Confronted with unhealthy
criticism or unhealthy responses
to criticism, it may be unwise to
get scared, and it may be
unnecessary to run to the doctor
straightaway. It may be sufficient
to talk it out, even if it is not the
most pleasant discussion. If
people are simply labelled "ill",
they get away with behaviour
that, arguably, they ought to be
taking responsibility for,
themselves. It should not be too
easily assumed that people are
incapable of making conscious

Page 89 of 106
choices about their own
behaviour, unless they are
deranged (crazy), in great pain,
extraordinarily confused, heavily
intoxicated, or in some way
trapped or locked down.
Authority issues …
Criticism can cause harm as well

as good things. Criticism can hurt
or people can feel offended. It can
"upset the apple cart", cause
chaos, or do real damage. For
these reasons, people often try to

Page 90 of 106
keep the flow of criticism under
control with rules. Such rules
often state:
Who has the right to criticize,

and who isn't allowed to
criticize.
Who or what can be criticized,
and who or what cannot be
criticized.
What sorts of criticism are
acceptable.
When and how the criticism
may be made (the appropriate

Page 91 of 106
situations and formats for
criticism).
What counts as an appropriate
motivation for criticism.
These rules can be successful if

people accept them, and work
with them. But it can also happen
that a criticism can only be made
"against the rules." In that case, a
conflict can develop between the
critics and the people in charge,
where the authorities try to
enforce the rules, and the critics
try to make their criticism

Page 92 of 106
regardless. The conflict could be
ended in many different ways; but
usually it is difficult to suppress a
valid criticism altogether,
permanently. A lot of critical
activity may consist simply of a
battle to get one's ideas taken
seriously.
Purpose
Here the purpose of criticism and
its relative merits in particular
situations are discussed.

Page 93 of 106
Negative arguments …
Criticism may not be a positive

response to an individual, action,
or belief in all circumstances.
There are two reasons that this
might be the case:
The recipient of the critique

may be hurt by it. This is
particularly true when the
object of criticism is personal (a
political or religious belief, for
example) or when the critique is
composed in a malicious way,

Page 94 of 106
rather than in an attempt to
improve the recipient.
The critique may not result in
any positive change. If the
critique is not written in a
persuasive manner, if the
recipient of the criticism isn't
willing to acknowledge their
faults, or if the recipient lacks
the resources needed for
change, then the critique will
not have an impact.
Affirmative arguments …

Page 95 of 106
However, there are also
significant reasons why a critique
may be necessary or desirable in
particular situations.
Diagnosis and error correction:

critiques identify the limitations
of the object of criticism. A film
critic, for example, might
discuss the extent to which a
particular film was able to
communicate a theme.
Criticisms also identify
prejudices, biases, and hidden
assumptions.

Page 96 of 106
Improvement: by evaluating the
ability of an individual, action,
or idea to accomplish a given
objective, critiques identify
possible improvement areas.
Criticisms may also present
alternative perspectives or
suggestions, both of which
facilitate improvement.
Ethical implications: critiques of
societal norms or public
policies have the potential to
affect a large number of people
in a profound way and are thus

Page 97 of 106
ethically desirable.
See also
All pages with titles beginning
with criticism
Art criticism
Dance critique
Complaint
Connoisseur
Controversy
Critic
Critical philosophy
Critical theory
Critical thinking
Page 98 of 106
Critical thinking
Critique
Film criticism
Literary criticism
Music journalism
Protest
Self-criticism
Social criticism
Textual criticism
Theatre criticism
Translation criticism
Varieties of criticism
References
Page 99 of 106
i. Raymond Williams,
Keywords: a vocabulary of
culture and society.
Fontana, 1976, pp. 74–76.
j. "Module: Critical thinking" .
Philosophy.hku.hk.
Retrieved 2013-11-17.
k. Andale Gross and Tammy
Webber, "Prosecutor faces
new criticism over Ferguson
case." The Seattle Times,
26 November 2014.[1]
l. J.R. Hackman and G.R.
Oldham. Work Redesign.
Upper Saddle River, N.J.:
Page 100 of 106
Upper Saddle River, N.J.:
Pearson Education, Inc,
1980; pp. 78–80.
m. Katz, Ralph. Motivating
Technical Professionals
Today. IEEE Engineering
Management Review, Vol.
41, No. 1, March 2013, pp.
28–38
n. Edgar H. Schein (with Peter
S. DeLisi, Paul J. Kampas
and Michael Sonduck), DEC
is Dead, Long Live DEC –
The Lasting Legacy of
Digital Equipment
Corporation (Lessons on
Page 101 of 106
Corporation (Lessons on
Innovation, Technology and
the Business Gene),
Berrett-Koehler Publishers,
2003
o. Ross Bonander (2008-10-
19). "AskMen How to: Give
Constructive Criticism" .
Askmen.com. Retrieved
2013-11-17.
p. "WiseGeek What is
Constructive Criticism?" .
Wisegeek.com. 2013-10-
19. Retrieved 2013-11-17.
q. "The Hamburger Method of
Page 102 of 106
q. "The Hamburger Method of
Constructive Criticism" .
N8tip.com. 2007-09-05.
ir. "The 4-1-1 On Constructive
Criticism" . Inc.com. 2001-
08-03. Retrieved
2013-11-17.
ii. "Internet Mental Health" .
Mentalhealth.com.
ij. "Narcissistic Personality
Disorder (NPD) : How to
Recognize a Narcissist" .
Halcyon.com. Retrieved
2013-11-17.
Page 103 of 106
2013-11-17.
ik. "Internet Mental Health –
paranoid personality
disorder" .
Mentalhealth.com. Archived
from the original on 2013-
01-31. Retrieved
2013-11-17.
il. "nitpicking – definition of
nitpicking by the Free
Online Dictionary,
Thesaurus and
Encyclopedia" .
Thefreedictionary.com.
Page 104 of 106
im. "nagging – definition of
nagging by the Free Online
Dictionary, Thesaurus and
Encyclopedia" .
Thefreedictionary.com.
in. "Definition of "Hypocrite" on
dictionary.com" .
Dictionary.reference.com.
External links
Wikiquote has quotations

related to: Criticism

Page 105 of 106
Look up critic, critical, or
critique in Wiktionary, the
free dictionary.
Retrieved from
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Criticism&oldid=932669281"
Last edited 26 days ago by Daask
Content is available under CC BY-SA

3.0 unless otherwise noted.

Page 106 of 106

Criticism - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criticism - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

…

This article has multiple issues.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

The judger is called a critic.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

To criticize does not necessarily

Criticism is often presented as

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

When criticism involves a

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

Criticism is also the study,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

Early English meaning …

The English word criticism is

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

To be critical meant, positively, to

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

In the 19th century, criticism also

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

In the 20th century, all these

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

The shape and meanings of

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

From the 1970s onward, under

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

From the 1990s, the popular

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

directed toward a person or an

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

Different kinds of criticisms can

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

In dealing with criticisms, usually

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

For an overview of criticisms from

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

The psychology of criticism is

the motivation, purpose or

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

Parents, teachers, lawyers,

The motivation as well as the

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

When psychologists study

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

The most basic rule …

The most basic "rule-of-thumb"

"Respect the individual,

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism 1/22/20, 8;04 PM

The thought behind this basic