We Should Judge More

"Don't judge me, bro," examined...

“When faced with people’s bad behavior, ask yourself the following question: What fault of mine most nearly resembles the one I am about to criticize?”
— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, 10.30

Judgment isn’t cruelty — it’s clarity.

Refusing to judge reality and the human actions constructing it isn’t a kindness to be extended, but a disservice to ourselves and society. It’s a surefire way to become ungrounded and confused.

But let’s start with the obvious: the impossibility of nonjudgment.

You’re always judging, whether you think you are or not. At best, you’re suppressing or distracting yourself from the judgments that arise automatically, or choosing not to air them.

Judgments are so reflexive that the ancient Stoics used the term “phantasiai,” to represent their initial form. Yet these pre-cognitive judgments have little relation to reality; one of humanity’s great problems is our reluctance to push back against them.

Anyone devoted to the truth examines phantasiai closely before giving or withholding assent.

Stoics think worthwhile judgements are:

• Deliberate, not reflexive.

• Rooted in fact, not assumption.

• Compassionate, since humans are ignorant and error-prone, including those who judge.

So justice demands we judge more, not less. We need to dive deep into subjects and get to their core if we want to treat them fairly. We do this with skepticism about what we can know, and an understanding of our limited scope of expertise. But when it matters, we load up the scales and weigh.

Thinking about judging his subjects’ actions, the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius reminded himself:

“…you don’t know for sure it is a mistake. A lot of things are means to some other end. You have to know an awful lot before you can judge other people’s actions with real understanding.” — Meditations, 11.18

Yet in any given moment, the virtue Marcus cherished demanded he grapple with these things. Historical documentation indicates he was a keen legal thinker intent on reforming the law code to protect the most vulnerable. You can’t do this without making value judgments about what’s right.

Advice:

Over the last five years a strange thing happened — people started asking me for advice. Perhaps it’s because I’m getting older or have the appearance of contentment.

But I suspect it’s simpler: In our increasingly nihilistic age, I have beliefs. I think some things matter beyond mere platitudes, and that we can make worthwhile value judgements about what’s right. At the same time, my frame of reference doesn’t stem from a religious text, so I can lay out a compelling chain of reasoning for the things I examine (though they may well be flawed).

I’ve fielded requests for opinions on romantic and business partners, mostly, but also some more generic topics.

Much of my advice amounts to some variation of the following:

• Find masts to tie yourself to so you can get through life’s storms.

• Regularly seek awe and gratitude.

• Avoid the laws of misery.

• Get into an internet void, slave.

• Practice taming the excesses of emotions, such as anger.

• Beware those without masts, and the spiritual but not religious types. They’re prone to life fluxes that make them unstable long-term relationship partners. They don’t know what they value or where they’re going, so why would you expect them to keep going in your direction?

My impression is that most people don’t implement my advice, so I’m not sure why they ask. Stranger still, I’ve had two people who ignored my advice tell other people to ask me for advice because “he gives good advice.” I have no idea what to make of that.

The Benefits of Good Judgement:

When I talk to the people seeking advice, I’m often dismayed at their inability to judge. Oh, they have conclusions, but they’re mostly just phantasiai.

They never say:

“Wait a while for me, my impression, let me see what you are, and what you’re an impression of; let me test you out.” — Epictetus, Discourses, 2.18.24

Because that testing actually requires that they have something solid to test them against. For a Stoic, that’s virtue, reason, and an understanding of human limitations.

Many have been taught since childhood to be so open minded that they never call bullshit on anything — themselves or others. They have platitudes, sure, but few solid beliefs or an understanding of what it means to live by them.

This likely costs them.

• People who can accurately assess the traits of others have higher life satisfaction, interpersonal support, and feel more positive emotions.

• When individuals in a group avoid critical judgment, groupthink crops up and assumptions go unchallenged.

• According to some philosophers, deferral of judgment led to some of history’s greatest disasters. For instance, Hannah Arendt wrote:

“There exists in our society a widespread fear of judging . . . Who am I to judge? actually means We’re all alike, equally bad, and those who try, or pretend that they try, to remain halfway decent are either saints or hypocrites, and in either case should leave us alone. Hence the huge outcry the moment anyone fixes specific blame on some particular person.” — Responsibility and Judgement

What It’s Good For:

The greatest beneficiary of well-tuned judgement is us.

We’re unlikely to change anyone’s mind. I can’t even change the minds of people asking me for advice!

But thinking things through to the end and testing them against virtue makes us less prone to mistakes. It’s a hard task, but one we can get better at as long as we keep this in mind:

“When someone does wrong, say: He thought it right. It is not easy to convince another of error.” — Epictetus, Discourses, 1.18

---

Thanks for reading Socratic State of Mind.

If you liked this article, please like and share it, which helps more readers find my work.