A Case Against Brutal Honesty
The Lazy Critique Is a Specific Kind of Poison
It’s hard to watch online judgment become the default setting for discourse. While I may sound like I’m about to launch my own cynical essay, I am actually here to fight a very specific kind of poison. The lazy critique. I keep seeing notes, particularly across platforms like Substack, about people complaining about the trend of “The Personal Curriculum” or whatever is deemed “too trendy.” The reaction is always the same: 800+ comments agreeing, “Thank God someone said it!”
But why the judgment? Why the need to posture like you know best or turn your nose up at someone else’s sincere path to growth?
As a teacher, I have a vested interest in the idea of a “personal curriculum.” I’m obsessed with it. I love hearing all the different things people are into because it helps me grow and become more creative. Also, if what they are doing is helping them to learn and become a more connected citizen, then why does your opinion matter?
Creative work, whether it’s a personal syllabus or a piece of writing, requires high-effort vulnerability. Cynicism, on the other hand, is low-effort, low-investment energy. We have to stop letting low-effort voices drain the energy from high-effort attempts at growth.
The Case Against Brutal Honesty
Judgment often hides behind the shield of “honesty.” I recoil every time someone prefaces a cruel remark with, “Can I be honest?” when an opinion isn’t warranted. Bruce Kasanoff said it best: “Honesty without compassion is cruelty.” The kind of critique that starts with “Can I be honest?” and ends with zero actionable advice and maximum emotional damage.
As a teacher, I see the bravery it takes for a student to turn in a rough draft. Writing or sharing online or otherwise is incredibly vulnerable. Online, every post is a rough draft of a public identity. As Bob Goff says, ‘We are all rough drafts of the people we’re still becoming.” My job is to protect that initial vulnerability, not weaponize critique against it.
The balance between courage and critique doesn’t only exist online. It’s also alive in schools, where creativity can be quietly undermined. I’ve seen students deflate after a negative comment from a teacher or a friend. We need to let failure and vulnerability happen and encourage them whenever possible, because confidence and creativity go hand in hand. Students need to try and fail to discover their skills and gaps. Ideally, this specific journey carries on into adulthood. If we are to build productive citizens of the world, we need to redirect and guide, not demean and belittle. When students see harsh judgment modeled online or in school, it teaches insecurity instead of efficacy, and unfortunately, that lesson sticks.
I once had a student come to me in tears after her junior ELA paper was marked up. Most of the red pen focused on small grammar errors, while her insightful analysis and passion for the book were ignored. She had laid the groundwork for deeper thinking, but the feedback completely missed it. This is what happens when we prioritize surface-level critique over genuine engagement. Dysregulated people, concerned only with an external gaze, prioritize pleasing the proverbial ‘them’. This is problematic as it completely undermines the core of true intrinsic motivation. There’s a time for developing ideas and a time for revision, but some people forget that, and it shows.
The fatal flaw of today is the expert crisis. Someone reads an article or glances at a post and immediately assumes they know more than a person who has studied and practiced the subject deeply. As Brené Brown says, “If you’re not in the arena getting your ass kicked, I don’t want your advice.” Yet here we are. Critique from the “cheap seats,” those who aren’t doing the hard work themselves, isn’t valuable, and the risk of creation deserves our full respect. Unless you have the training or experience, the kindest response is often silence or possibly the start of your own research and self-learning journey.
No one cares about your opinion if your only objective is to tear someone down. Some people share with the world simply to feel alive and to believe they are making a difference, even if it’s small. To critique that impulse is to critique the very thing that makes us human, and it’s rude.
However, let us be clear: The right to ignore petty aesthetic judgment does not extend to silence in the face of injustice. The call for grace is not a shield for harm. We must speak up, loudly and clearly, when comments cross the line into hate speech, discrimination, or abusive behavior. The question of whether an opinion is warranted is immediately answered when that opinion causes measurable harm to a marginalized group. In those instances, our objective shifts from graceful patience to necessary moral defense.
In my own writing and teaching, I always ask the core questions that frame a mindful critique: What is my true objective? Why do I feel like this needs to be said?
As adults so far removed from the classroom or the HR office, we forget we should be held to the same standard that every teacher gives their students:
Is it Kind?
This is not about being sentimental. This is about acknowledging the humanity and effort behind the action you are judging.
Is it Necessary?
If your opinion doesn’t actively help the creator or the conversation, it’s just noise. If you can literally ignore it, you should.
Is it True?
Based on facts and evidence, or based on your personal aesthetic bias?
Note: These principles, often called the “Three Gates,” have a long philosophical history, dating back to concepts applied by writers like Mary Ann Pietzker (1872). They are not merely sentimental; they are foundational standards for ethical communication and professional conduct.
To those, I would add two essential ethical questions:
Does it open a dialogue, and is it timely?
And yes, you can use this same approach the next time someone tries to offer unsolicited critique in real life; a simple response is:
“Thanks for sharing, but I wasn’t asking for feedback; I was just filling you in.”
It’s polite, sets boundaries, and keeps the conversation civil. Keeping these principles in mind can help you respond gracefully when critique comes uninvited.
The easiest prescription here is simple. Start caring more about people and less about your own intellectual posturing. If someone is doing something you don’t like, you can literally ignore them. The constant need to comment in a pretentious manner reveals less about the topic and more about the commentator. Did we all collectively forget this salient fact? Hold tight to the belief that the only thing you should ever be embarrassed by is a lack of grace—never someone else’s external pursuits.
Next time you feel the urge to critique, remember: kindness, necessity, and truth. Grace first, judgment later.
As always, take good notes and subscribe if you’re cool.