This was originally posted on blogger.

Many people in my life have called me judgmental. The truth is that I speak my mind a lot, and sometimes people don’t like it. Judgement is seen as something that is bad and I’ve never understood this. So this blogpost aims to breakdown the stages of judgement.

Let’s say you are a doctor working with a diabetes patient. The patient has been diabetic for a long time, and you notice they continue to eat sugary foods and drinks being told it will lead to more diabetes. That is stage 1 of judgement: observation and evaluation. The doctor observes may predict that the patient will continue to eat sugar if they continue on the current path.

Stage 2 is about the doctor’s inner world. What does the doctor think of this person? Do they think they are a bad person? Lazy? Un-attending to their health? The subjective term “lazy” is commonly seen as a negative critique of another person. You are bad, I am good.

Stage 3 is about expressing the inner world. Does the doctor give subtle cues that they think the patient is a bad person? Do they tsk tsk when they hear how much Coca Cola the patient has been drinking? Do they directly say the person is lazy, through tone of speech, imply they are bad person?

So now let me evaluate what I think of these stages.

• Stage 1 of judgement, observation, I believe is a normal, healthy thing for human beings to do. In this case, it is the doctor’s job to have an understanding of the patient and their behaviors. Not making this evaluation would be irresponsible. Even other people in the patient’s life may have noticed their sugar-eating habits. For instance, if you look at someone who is obese, you will know so immediately and you cannot avoid it.
• Stage 2 of judgement is subjective internal criticism. I believe this is something to be avoided. There are no wrong notes in jazz (see here). If you believe life is a sandbox game, then you should also believe that people are entitled to lead the lives they want to lead. If someone wants to ingest sugar, tobacco, or other drugs, or pursue an unconventional life path, I believe that’s their decision – what you do in life, I believe, is an aesthetic choice. At the same time, I frequently, involuntarily, have internal subjective criticisms of others. It is natural. There are institutions at work that promote certain values over others, and we are but mere mammals socially programmed to uphold social conventions. You cannot control the thoughts you have, but you can control what you do with them.
• Stage 3 of judgement is sharing. When someone goes to see a doctor, they are probably hoping for the doctor’s objective assessment of how they’re doing in managing diabetes. Insofar as this will be positively received, it’s good. If the person legitimately needs a reminder that they should get back on the train of diabetes for the good of their health, then they will appreciate the doctor’s objective evaluation and take it seriously: something needs to change. However, what if the doctor’s objective evaluation is tinged with subjective criticism? This may in fact add to the strength of the feedback. Like parents forcing their child to practice piano or look both ways when crossing the road. However, there’s a potential issue with sharing negative critique: it isn’t inspiring. It may make the patient stressed and/or strain the relationship with their doctor. They may not want to come back for more visits in the future, in which case sharing internal critiques, even non-verbally, caused more harm than good.

So to reiterate, judgement has three stages:

• Stage 1: Objective observation/assessment. Sometimes helpful.
• Stage 2: Subjective internal criticism. Often harmful.
• Stage 3: Sharing observations/criticism. A fine line!

Stage 3 is by far the thorniest part of this. Ideally, when you have a beneficial, objective observation of someone, you can share it to their listening ears. But how do you know that when you share your observation, it is not tinged with your subconscious judgement of their behavior? And even if you don’t have subjective internal criticisms, will the other person understand that you are simply trying to share an objective statement? Intent of non-judgement may have a judgmental impact.

Those who speak their mind too much are called judgmental, presumptuous, or bigoted. Simultaneously, they have the courage to share personal truths that people may appreciate. A prime example is Donald Trump. He is someone who certainly is bigoted and arrogant and over-shares. And yes, he is also speaking to concerns people have: concerns about crime, immigrants, woke culture. Personally, I am grateful for Trump, because without him we wouldn’t have known about the division that ails this country. Of course, in illuminating this he has spread discord and violence as well.

I tell friends I love them dearly, and I tell them that certain behaviors of theirs piss me off beyond belief. I’ve sent letters to teachers and professors telling them how much their class means to mean, and when I feel like their class is meaningless. All the times I am speaking a truth I feel, and to do so is intrinsically good. Yet I realize that such truth must be tempered with compassion and tactful delivery. I don’t pretend I do a good job at this. But, for now, I do what I do and it’s a process of learning.