Criticism can be negative and positive. If criticism leads to improvement of work, then it is possible. But if it is used to show drawbacks and demerits , then it is negative.

Hazim Al Dilaimy

Yes, constructive criticisms have good results.

Thanks

Если критика носит конструктивный характер, она способствует развитию человека. Однако если критика неконструктивная, огульная, то она приносит только вред как эмоционально, так и социально.

I can take only constructive criticism! It is really important to learn when and to whom you should and should not listen!

Criticism is needed, especially among friends. Soon I had to tell a truth in my eyes, but I'm clean in front of my conscience. Is not that all the more important?

It is needed. But not just to criticize, but to be positive and orient to the right situation

Following.

Every criticising person is giving free advice ,so keep critics nearby and always listen to them and doing/following is in your hand

1/ Critique as a typical form of social control is part of public life. In the vertically structured, feudal world of the Middle Ages (and in today's societies that have not been changed by an age of "Enlightenment"), criticism of certain practice of religion, of the ruling dictatorship, of class society, and of the injustice of social inequality is still life-threatening. In modern life, critique is a component of public discussion in politics, culture and science.

2/ Critique as a social institution requires the public sphere, which in earlier societies existed only as a confirmation of existing rule (in the form of rites and solemnity on certain days), and - to deter the people - in executions.

3/ The language and culture of ancient Greece became central to the development of the concept of "critique" and the broad field of its word meanings in early modernity (from about the 17th century). RG has enough linguists who can say more about it.

4/ It is also interesting whether the concept of critique, as it developed today in the Arab-African cultural sphere, in India, China and other countries far removed from Europe, is to some extent probably independent of European influence. The linguists should provide us with information about this.

5/ If someone constantly criticises someone else, he is not called a critic, but a "Kritikaster" (German), and in the discussion he is also socially ostracized as a word twister and troublemaker. With this argument, however, dictators also try to eliminate any criticism of their rule.

6/ On the other hand, a "critic" in German also means a journalist whose task it is to evaluate cultural events and products, such as new plays, films or books, in the feuilleton of a newspaper. Such an eloquent critic can be a very sensitive husband and father of his children in his family.

7/ In modern (liberal) society, public criticism of freedom of expression is necessary and self-evident. Since time immemorial also in science. The doctorates in the Middle Ages always had an "opponent" who had to contradict the thesis of the doctoral student.

8/ With the Age of Enlightenment, criticism also became a part of self-criticism: one has to answer for one's actions as a politician or scientist before the public. When conflicts, immoral or unlawful actions occur here (as in the case of corruption), e.g. in science, the statutes of the universities provide for the establishment of a committee to examine the accusations. These are important forms of institutionalized criticism in the modern state.

Very good question Dr. Zafar sir, yes, I do agree with Anastas Ivanov Ivanov

Friends are those who sustained with criticisms. We must be logical and respect each other towards friendship.

Muhammad Abdullah Al Mamun Hein Retter Satish Narula Zakaria Al-Qodah Anastas Ivanov Ivanov

Thank you all respected professors, dignified researchers . YES, We should consider criticisms from the positive angle. On the other hand, a critic should maintain his/her criticism from the honesty point of view. By participation, you made me valued. I am obliged to you all. If , criticism is not done from the purpose of development, it will be really a hate speech , which is a great offense to the society and sin to the religion .

Thanks to all.

There are good and bad criticism so it can have good or bad results.

Yes its needed. It depend how to use and type of feedback.

1/ The question posed regarding "criticism" can be considered from at least two different angles:

(a) from the societal aspect and (b) from the personal aspect in my social relations, with my own family, with friends and relatives, with employees at work, with the social network in which I find myself.

2/ The degree to which I criticize others in my private life also depends on my character, temperament and capacity for social participation: There are people who criticize others at the slightest provocation; on the other hand some indivudals lack the ability to protest when another dominant person constantly plays out their superiority over others. Also men against women: see the #me-too debate!

3/ If I answer the question from a socio-political point of view then is important: Social life in public flourishes when there is the possibility of criticism and freedom of opinion and when it functions without restriction. This is necessary in order to publicly discuss injustice and existing social problems.

4/ Several months ago I asked the question whether journalism and free reporting work well in the country of origin of the RG participants. The vast majority of the answers were: No, there is no free journalism in our country, journalists have to expect prison and torture if they work investigatively and report critically. That is sad.

5/ My thesis is: The more public criticism is institutionalized in the own country (and also becomes visible in the daily newspaper or on TV), the less citizens of the country have to criticize. On this basis, also citizens' trust in the state and government grows. But in many countries, freedom of expression is apparently suppressed, and that can only be regretted.

Hein Retter

Sir,

Thank you for your insightful, detailed hardworking contributions. It will work as a great in this research.

Thanks

Follow

Of course, we should criticize our closest colleagues and employees. It helps the cause. Most often, they are activated and try not to be the object of criticism in the future. As well as we should accepting criticism constructively, even if it is unfair, this indicates the absence indifference to the matter from critic.

But with family and friends, the situation is somewhat different.

If I see that my friend’s actions make me want to criticize him - it’s better not to torture myself and him, but just to disperse. The problem is that the vast majority of people do not forgive criticism. Formally, he/she may agree with you, even several times, but in the relationship there is still tension anyway. Sooner or later he will get bored. And being in the position of a mentor, as well as the position of constant correction and directionis, not the best thing that can be in a close relationship ... It is even more difficult with relatives, they are known not to be chosen (with rare exceptions). Instead of constant criticism, in these cases I use various psychological techniques that lead a person to his own correct (or, at least, acceptable) decision. Or I enforce (undirectly) a person to consult with me, because it is much easier to make someone else’s ready-made decision than to give up your own, even stupid, if he have already expressed it. Sometimes I even make a proposal that requires a small, metered adjustment. The partner, as a rule, makes this step, and after that the decision becomes already “his”. And own decision is executed much more efficiently ...

On the other hand, over the years, the desire to teach, guide, correct is becoming increasingly apparent. I struggle with it, but it turns out badly, as you see.

Vadim S. Gorshkov

From your answer :

...............................The problem is that the vast majority of people do not forgive criticism. Formally, he/she may agree with you, even several times, but in the relationship there is still tension anyway. Sooner or later he will get bored. And being in the position of a mentor, as well as the position of constant correction and directions, not the best thing that can be in a close relationship ... It is even more difficult with relatives, they are known not to be chosen (with rare exceptions) .... True

Thanks

Sometimes critics can be helpful for your development. But only sometimes.

I think It is important and wise to criticize people and to be a constructive criticism especially those you care about. But you have to be carful to whom you do so , as some might take it offensively.

There are two types of criticism, the first one that leads to flourish a life is called constructive criticism and it is issued by people interested to advise us to overcome errors or misconduct and these are true friends, and there is a constructive reflection is issued by people who care to fail in our lives and the kind of criticism we have because it destroys our lives if we care about him and we took him and worked under him, and he is issued by people who do not love us.

Yes criticisms is required to flourish a life.

No, i dont think so, criticism is important for me but critics (friends/enemies) are not iportant in this case.

Criticism gives us the future direction, where we need to be concern or not.

Every sphere in our life except personal issues criticism is important.

Thanks

Ali Alhayany

Criticism is not easy to digest. On the other hand, the critics should criticize from the honesty point of view to help others. So, constructive criticism is required. Unfortunately , sometimes we go in the wrong directions.

Maryam Kuzekanani

Sometimes, I faced this type of situations, but not always.

Thanks

ليس مهم ان يكونو اصدقاء حقيقيون ام لا .. المهم يكون نقد بناء ويساعدني ع تقيم ذاتي بشكل موجب .. وهو ضرورة لا بد منها

Criticism that is publicly voiced against a scientist does not come from friends, but from opponents or - in the case of a justified cause - from those responsible who criticise, for example, a strongly interest-driven study with a flawed method in the public interest. A friend reads the criticism beforehand, so that mistakes and aspects worthy of criticism can be removed before publication.

For my life to flourish, I imagine other conditions than criticism. Criticism is usually practiced in a way that is hurtful. I cannot imagine that life suddenly begins to flourish as a result - at most the lives of those whose flourishing lives are sustained by constant criticism. If you want to bring up unseemly behaviour or a work worthy of criticism in a human way, you don't write a newspaper article about it in order to expose the person concerned. One speaks with him in private, makes one's own argument, and tries to understand why the problematic behaviour arose. This has nothing to do with a flourishing life, however, but is part of everyday life, without this leading to a conflict, for the critic is grateful for advice.