Optimism and Pessimism vs. Skepticism

[Decaf]

I've been juggling this thought in my head for a while and I thought I'd share it for scrutiny.

Optimism and Pessimism are both lazy. They are an attitude that seeks to define the meaning of an observation for easy categorization. Now, clearly you can't leave the meaning of every observation in your life up in the air or it would be hard to make much progress, but I'd be happy if more people at least showed some reluctance to decide.

The most common alternative to optimist and pessimist I've heard is "realist". The term is used by people from both camps (mostly pessimists) who seek to undermine the credibility of the other camp, and so I refuse to use it. In seeking a better alternative I stumbled one what I think is the true opposite.

A skeptic is someone who attributes uncertainty to everything. Often confused with a cynic (which I believe is actually a pessimist in disguise, usually calling themselves a realist), a skeptic is willing to believe something, but not without thorough examination.

I guess the whole point of posting this is because I enjoy the mental gymnastics of finding true opposites (like zealots and apathists). Do you think I'm right or have I missed something about either group of people? Clearly I'm biased in favor of the skeptic, so I wouldn't put it past me.

 

[Beat Mango]

The problem is, the term "pessimism" has become an insult in and of itself. I see a pessimist as someone who views the world as essentially bad, or life as unavoidably entailing suffering. If we then seek to overcome this suffering, we're a pragmatic pessimist, which is exactly what I am.

The problem with skepticism is that you'll be waiting forever for certainty and it'll still never come. But then, maybe that's just the pessimist in me talking

 

[Enne]

Elaborate on the skeptic stance. Right now it just sounds like someone who is unsure of anything.

 

[Decaf]

Elaborate on the skeptic stance. Right now it just sounds like someone who is unsure of anything.

Fair enough. To my understanding a skeptic is someone who is unwilling to say whether or not something is innately positive or negative. When I was younger I was told a story that strongly affected my perspective.

A man lives in a small town. One day his beloved uncle dies just before a scheduled visit and his neighbors think him unlucky.

When the event is sorted out it turns out that the uncle left the man his prize thoroughbred, that the man had been very fond of and his neighbors thought him lucky.

While riding that horse he was thrown and shattered his leg. His neighbors again thought him unlucky.

Later that year the draft was initiated and many of his neighbors children were sent off to war, but he wasn't eligible. His neighbors again thought him lucky.​

I heard that story as a kid and promised myself that I would not be like those people who could not view an event as neither good nor bad, but simply as something that happened that we must now respond to. Does that make me, perhaps unnecessarily, unsure of many things that seem clear to others? Perhaps, but I've decided that its better not to know then to make an assumption that brings inaccurate clarity.

A skeptic is someone who represses the desire to decide when it isn't necessary to do so. There are pitfalls of indecisiveness, but no more severe than a pessimist's lost opportunities or an optimist's unexpected misfortunes. Learning to recognize when a decision is necessary and to decide quickly when the time comes is a more attractive evolution than what I can imagine from the other perspectives.

 

[Cavallier]

I actually hashed this out a few years back and it's given me some insight into how I should approach big decisions.

Here is my basic working definition of each position:

Pessimist/Cynic: The outcome of any situation is ultimately predetermined to be bad. It's never going to work no matter what you do.

Optimist: The outcome of any situation is ultimately predetermined to be good. It'll all work out no matter what you do.

Realist/Skeptic: The outcome of any situation is not predetermined. The outcome will be good if you figure out the correct course of action or it will be bad if you do not find the correct course of action.

Pessimism and Optimism are merely different flavors of the same predetermined philosophy while Realism is the opposite belief that the outcome is not predetermined.

It seems natural to me that as an INTP you would find the position of the skeptic to be the most appealing of the three. The skeptic thinks that given enough information he/she can change the outcome. Aren't we all in search of more information?

Edit: Upon re-reading my comment I've decided I have more to say. It does seem lazy to go the predetermined route. Then you don't have to put out any effort. It's easier in the short run but harder in the long run. Ultimately you have to deal with the consequences of a choice whether or not you thought it was predetermined to turn out good or bad. Why give up control over your own life? I find strength in the thought that even if I make the wrong choice at least I did my best to make an informed choice and that it was mine to make.

 

[NoID10ts]

I consider myself a skeptic and, to me, it is an approach that takes into account probabilities rather than certainties. But that doesn't mean the skeptic is forever unsure of anything. The skeptical mind is forever asking "what's most likely" given the available information and that usually leads to a decision one way or another. Sometimes something is so probable as to be virtually certain. It's just that skepticism does not automatically accept conventional wisdom or group think or metaphysical explanations for things that likely have a perfectly reasonable explanation. It's thinking outside of the box and having the courage to step apart from the masses and say "not so fast." I make no apologies for that.

I really don't understand why the word skeptic has such a negative connotation.

 

[shoeless]

honestly? i think people have a misconceived notion of what optimism/pessimism is. my definitions:

an optimist is someone who believes that things can get better.
a pessimist is someone who believes that things cannot get better.

i consider myself an optimist. that does not mean that i think everything is sunshine and daisies, or that i believe that outcomes will always be good. that's stupid. i don't think anyone really thinks that way.

however, i do believe that, even when times are down and things suck, there is the potential for something good to come out of it. there is the potential for a good outcome. and so i try to focus my energy on reaching that potential, rather than shitting all over it with the believe that it's probably gonna always suck. pessimism.

as far as this "skepticism" business goes... i think that's a whole other can of beans altogether.

 

[Words]

Optimist. Or perhaps I'm just lying to myself and, unconsciously, really a pessimist. sigh ...the lengths we go to avoid depression.

 

[wadlez]

Optimism: A general disposition to expect the best in things.
Pessimism: A general disposition to expect the worst in things.
Skepticism: Doubt about the truth of something.

The first two stand in contrast to each other: An optimist views the glass as half full while the pessimist see's the glass half empty. A skeptic doubts the glass is real? See how the skeptic doesnt fit in this situation.

as far as this "skepticism" business goes... i think that's a whole other can of beans altogether.

Exactly

 

[Decaf]

Optimism: A general disposition to expect the best in things.
Pessimism: A general disposition to expect the worst in things.
Skepticism: Doubt about the truth of something.

The first two stand in contrast to each other: An optimist views the glass as half full while the pessimist see's the glass half empty. A skeptic doubts the glass is real? See how the skeptic doesnt fit in this situation.

We may have to agree to disagree. The skeptical perspective in this situation is to doubt whether or not the glass is specifically half full or half empty. A skeptic must be comfortable with maintaining doubt. A religious zealot is not the opposite of a militant atheist. They are both the opposite of the one who doesn't feel the need to decide on one or the other.

 

[Dormouse]

This undermines my title as a skeptic-optimist.

 

[Decaf]

This undermines my title as a skeptic-optimist.

If you flip a coin 50 times and it always lands on heads, and you believe the coin is not special, how likely do you think it is that the coin lands on tails?

If you answer an unequivocal 50%, you have the makings of a skeptic.

A skeptic can still be optimistic on the whole, but they are not optimists. If you believe that things tend to work out well, but you don't jump to the conclusion that they will without some evidence to support that conclusion, you're not a glass if half-full person. There is no evidence that the glass is anything but half occupied by water, and half by a lack thereof.

Maybe you could be an optimistic-skeptic?

 

[Cavallier]

Hmmm...optimistic or pessimistic flavored skepticism...

I wonder where the idea of "hope" might fall in this discussion.

If Dormouse is an optimistic skeptic does that mean they hope things will work out in a beneficial way if they do their best to make an informed decision?

Please Dormouse, enlighten me. I am curious.

 

[Zero]

Hmm, an interesting topic as I tend to call myself both a cynic and a skeptic. I'm a skeptic, but I have pessimistic tendencies. I can not be entirely pessimistic, as I would become too depressed and die. I probably appear more of a pessimist, as it is the attitude I often extrovert. My skepticism tends to be introverted.

I expect the worst, because I don't like to be disappointed. From the "four/five temperament" standpoint I tend to accept myself as melancholy. So, perhaps I'm a hopeless pessimist.

Is it wrong to strive to be otherwise? At least, I shall try.

 

[wadlez]

Still dont see how a skeptic is exclusive of optimism or pessimism.
Believing in creation and evolution exclude each other, its like then saying that a person who likes cats is a third category of this. Im a creationist-cat lover.
Maybe your confused as you see skepticism as critical of only positive things.

 

[Decaf]

Still dont see how a skeptic is exclusive of optimism or pessimism.
Believing in creation and evolution exclude each other, its like then saying that a person who likes cats is a third category of this. Im a creationist-cat lover.
Maybe your confused as you see skepticism as critical of only positive things.

Skepticism is a perspective that resists the pull of pessimism and optimism. Sure, as a skeptic you can have a positive outlook or a negative outlook, but you're not going to assume that things will or will not work out on their own. This is not the mutual exclusivity of Creation and evolution, but rather of Creationism and Agnosticism. There are certainly shades of gray, but they are different perspectives.

Why would I see skepticism as critical of only positive things? I call myself a skeptic and I'm a fairly positive person.

 

[LAM]

Shoeless has the best definition here :=/

an optimist is someone who believes that things can get better.
a pessimist is someone who believes that things cannot get better.

So a skeptic would be a person that thinks neither of those? So what is a skeptic then. (According to this definition.)

Just because I am an optimist doesn't mean I won't consider asll alternatives and possibilities before making a decision. Which is what you are implying that skeptics do. Even though both optimists and pessimists do too. Its just that pessimist don't see the silver lining as that important or as much as optimists do.

 

[Malt]

I would classify myself as a skeptic on day to day things. A short-term skeptic? I analyse and decide based on evidence and reason.

On the longer scale of time I am cynical (The sun is going to expand and this planet is doomed eventually) about the world.

In the long run I am an optimist with my own life, there would have to be some severely bad "luck" for my life to turn for the worse.

This thread did remind me of this pic though:
http://www.kelowna.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/glass-half-full-empty-or-10902-1258672177-151.jpg

 

[Decaf]

Shoeless has the best definition here :=/

an optimist is someone who believes that things can get better.
a pessimist is someone who believes that things cannot get better.

So a skeptic would be a person that thinks neither of those? So what is a skeptic then. (According to this definition.)

Those definitions are unfair to the pessimist. Perhaps you means "can get better" and "can get worse" or "cannot get worse" and "cannot get better". Regardless, a skeptic is someone who believes that things may get better or they may get worse. Deciding which it will be based on your own predisposition is lazy regardless of rationale.

Just because I am an optimist doesn't mean I won't consider asll alternatives and possibilities before making a decision. Which is what you are implying that skeptics do. Even though both optimists and pessimists do too. Its just that pessimist don't see the silver lining as that important or as much as optimists do.

I made no reference to how people act once they've put the circumstances into perspective, simply how they see the circumstances. Describing a situation as a dark cloud with a silver lining is, perhaps, helpful in processing your observations, but it naturally excludes perspectives that treat the cloud itself as a potential positive. I'm not suggesting that skeptics will catch what others won't, but I think they try to put themselves into a position to miss less.

 

[LAM]

Those definitions are unfair to the pessimist. Perhaps you means "can get better" and "can get worse" or "cannot get worse" and "cannot get better". Regardless, a skeptic is someone who believes that things may get better or they may get worse. Deciding which it will be based on your own predisposition is lazy regardless of rationale.



I made no reference to how people act once they've put the circumstances into perspective, simply how they see the circumstances. Describing a situation as a dark cloud with a silver lining is, perhaps, helpful in processing your observations, but it naturally excludes perspectives that treat the cloud itself as a potential positive. I'm not suggesting that skeptics will catch what others won't, but I think they try to put themselves into a position to miss less.

I agree the definitions might be somewhat limited. I shall redo this;

An optimist and pessimist both believe things may get better or worse. I know that my chances of winning the lottery are microscopic. I am not a blind fool who is predetermined to think something is going to get better or worse, and the same can be said of pessimists.

However, I usually value the "silver lining" more than pessimists and often I find it more often and in greater amounts than a pessimist does. It is quite simply, all about perception.

Although I do understand that there are people who are "hopelessly" optimistic or pessimistic. Anybody, whether pessimistic or optimistic can see that they can fail and win. Its just that a pessimist might value or see the failure/ bad side more than a optimist and an optimist might value or see the good side/ achievements more.

Its just that some pessimists or optimists overvalue these things. A skeptic is just a person who doesn't come to a conclusion until he feels he has enough information from (probably) several sources. This has absolutely nothing to do with your perception of good and bad.

 

[Decaf]

Its just that some pessimists or optimists overvalue these things. A skeptic is just a person who doesn't come to a conclusion until he feels he has enough information from (probably) several sources. This has absolutely nothing to do with your perception of good and bad.

That's the point of the story I told. I know I'm suggesting a new idea and not simply rehashing definitions. I believe that a skeptic in the arena of good/bad is someone who decides not to call things good or bad. If you don't label them as innately positive or negative, how can you be an optimist or a pessimist?

 

[LAM]

That's the point of the story I told. I know I'm suggesting a new idea and not simply rehashing definitions. I believe that a skeptic in the arena of good/bad is someone who decides not to call things good or bad. If you don't label them as innately positive or negative, how can you be an optimist or a pessimist?

I call for using a different/new word to describe this. But this still sounds quite dodgy. We are basically describing a person who desn't see the positive or the negative (if they did, then they would have to be either an optimist or a pessimist because even if they only did it at a minuscule level, it would still be labelling things positive or negative.)

And the only people that do that as far as I know are people who don't care; apathetic to an extreme.

Or we could say this new type will only label things negative or positive when they are 100% postive or 100% negative (in his mind.) But I don't think that this is the thing you are thinking of.

Or that type doesn't care about anything but 100% positive and 100% negative things (from his perspective.) Actually I have no idea wtf I am talkiing about right now.

 

[Decaf]

Actually I have no idea wtf I am talkiing about right now.

lol, that's how I felt when I first tried to describe it before I brought it here. Skeptic may not be perfect, but I like it.

No one is 100% optimist, and no one is 100% skeptic. Anytime someone becomes 100% something, they become deficient in some way. I think the key word is try. Skeptics try not to view situations as good or bad, but simply as they are. If a man falls off a horse and breaks his leg, you don't need to believe its a terrible thing in order to know you should take him to the hospital. Course, you probably won't TELL you him you don't think its a terrible thing, but believing it doesn't impair your ability to act.

 

[Ever]

The poster, and the following dissenters, of the defining of the words pessimism v optimism v skeptic/cynic both seem to be stuck on connotations of the words. I think you mean objective, not skeptical. Maybe "objectively and appropriately inquisitive with an added zeal to compensate for the realization of most peoples naivety, and subsequent fear of being categorized therein by other objectively and appropriately inquisitive people". English is complex enough to cater to a definition that length I think. Words with shorter definitions are frustrating, don't you think?
Also this whole topic is very typical of an intp. trying to disassociate one's self from emotion while trying to be specific and careful with the words is all too typical of us. Don't forget, nobody cares but us

I'll add a quote to seem better smart: "He who never changes his mind loves himself more than the truth" - Someguy It'stoolatetogooglehisname

 

[Zionoxis]

You are confusing opinion with how one perceives the outcome will be. An optimist may try to find a way for a situation to be good, even if they know the most probable outcome based on concrete evidence. If I flip a coin as an optimist, I could know that there is a 50% chance of either side taking place. An optimist, however, would find a way to find joy in whatever outcome it happens to be whether he had an idea of it or not.

A pessimist, will consider in opinion, the outcome to be innately bad. Do not confuse the two.

Of course, these are the definitions I am using. I consider optimist/pessimist how one views an outcome, not how one goes about finding the outcome. The way someone goes about finding the most probable outcome is up to how one processes information.

 

[SkyWalker]

***********************************

Se/Ne = optimistic <vs> Si/Ni = pessimistic

***********************************

Te/Fe = convinced <vs> Ti/Fi = skeptical

***********************************

 

[Zionoxis]

Or Optimistic/Pessimistic: Personal choice.

Coming to correct conclusions regardless of choice: Ti
Coming to incorrect conclusions regardless: Not Ti.

Perfectly unbiased.

 

[scorpiomover]

I've come across at least 4 types of people:

1) Pessimists. My old self. Always look on the black side. Always prepare for the worst scenarios. So death is rare. Lose out on all the good opportunities, because we didn't prepare for them, and thus are left with only the unpleasant sides of life. Life feels pretty unpleasant.

2) Positivists. People who go around wearing what used to be called "rose-tinted glasses". Would look for and prepare for the best. Life would go OK for a few months, and then something would happen that messed them up, and they had not prepared for it, so for them, it was really, really bad. Their lives were full of big highs and big lows. Most people thought they probably felt good about themselves, but had such problems, that few were willing to even try that route. Talking to them, they didn't like their lives at all.

3) Sceptics. They were all sceptical about some things. They would happily believe in plenty of other things, with not that much solid evidence. Generally happier, though, and their lives went better.

4) Optimists. SEEMED to be like positivists. But seemed much more flexible in the face of change. Talking to them, they would claim their lives WERE better. However, I persevered. They eventually admitted that their lives were NOT better, but that they chose to always look for the advantages and opportunities in life, so as to optimise their lives, and get the most out of it. They talked on the positive, because thinking about the good stuff in life makes you happier, and that in turn would make them think about the opportunities and advantages, and so helped them on both counts. Seemed to really enjoy life, and get far more out of it than anyone else. Also seemed to recover very quickly from the major stressful events in life, like divorces, and moving town.

 

[A22]

Hope for the best. Be prepared to the worst

 

[blarg]

The dichotomy of pessimism and optimism just isn't accurate enough to encompass every person's perception of reality. The only thing you can ascertain with this is people's personality, and even then, it's way too vague. IMO it's better to use the classifications of static and dynamic, the former replacing pessimism and the latter replacing optimism. It's not that they mean similar things, but they're just a better way to express internal philosophy.

 

[scorpiomover]

The dichotomy of pessimism and optimism just isn't accurate enough to encompass every person's perception of reality. The only thing you can ascertain with this is people's personality, and even then, it's way too vague. IMO it's better to use the classifications of static and dynamic, the former replacing pessimism and the latter replacing optimism. It's not that they mean similar things, but they're just a better way to express internal philosophy.

Possibly.

But if they are, then I would classify a LOT of Scientific Positivists as "statics", and a LOT of religious people as "dynamics". Sorry, but it's on my mind, because I've just spent a LOT of time going through a post about Creationists, which I realise was nothing at all to do with anything I ever wrote.

Mind you, if it is true, then it would explain why studies repeatedly show that people who regularly attend religious services are much better at dealing with traumatic events, and generally have a longer life.

 

[Holmes]

I feel people have a misinterpretation of what an optimist is. I find myself falling into that category, and actually wrote a poem about it awhile ago about how misunderstood we are:


On Optimism.

Sure, the tire’s flat, but at least we have a spare. It may not take us very far but, it’ll get us there. The roses may be dead, but they’ll make great potpourri. The idea of a drink being green makes me, queasy, but hey, the tea is good for me. Some people say death to the optimists; they only say that ‘cause they don’t really know us.

Optimists acknowledge the bad, however we find a way to see the positive out of everything. Pessimists see the bad side in everything and disregard the good. Skeptics just don't believe unless fact is presented, a separate discussion entirely. You can be a skeptic yet still an optimist, or even a skeptic as well as a pessimist.

 

[SkyWalker]

You can be a skeptic yet still an optimist, or even a skeptic as well as a pessimist.

optimist/pessimist is from your perception functions, the way you see things

skeptic is from your judging functions, seperate

 

[SkyWalker]

I've come across at least 4 types of people:

1) Pessimists. My old self. Always look on the black side. Always prepare for the worst scenarios. So death is rare. Lose out on all the good opportunities, because we didn't prepare for them, and thus are left with only the unpleasant sides of life. Life feels pretty unpleasant.

2) Positivists. People who go around wearing what used to be called "rose-tinted glasses". Would look for and prepare for the best. Life would go OK for a few months, and then something would happen that messed them up, and they had not prepared for it, so for them, it was really, really bad. Their lives were full of big highs and big lows. Most people thought they probably felt good about themselves, but had such problems, that few were willing to even try that route. Talking to them, they didn't like their lives at all.

3) Sceptics. They were all sceptical about some things. They would happily believe in plenty of other things, with not that much solid evidence. Generally happier, though, and their lives went better.

4) Optimists. SEEMED to be like positivists. But seemed much more flexible in the face of change. Talking to them, they would claim their lives WERE better. However, I persevered. They eventually admitted that their lives were NOT better, but that they chose to always look for the advantages and opportunities in life, so as to optimise their lives, and get the most out of it. They talked on the positive, because thinking about the good stuff in life makes you happier, and that in turn would make them think about the opportunities and advantages, and so helped them on both counts. Seemed to really enjoy life, and get far more out of it than anyone else. Also seemed to recover very quickly from the major stressful events in life, like divorces, and moving town.

your positivist = strong Se (lives in the moment, does not prepare for future)
your optimist = strong Ne (prepares for future)
your skeptic = strong Ti

your pessimist can be splitted into Si-pessimists and Ni-pessimists.

 

[blarg]

Possibly.

But if they are, then I would classify a LOT of Scientific Positivists as "statics", and a LOT of religious people as "dynamics". Sorry, but it's on my mind, because I've just spent a LOT of time going through a post about Creationists, which I realise was nothing at all to do with anything I ever wrote.

Mind you, if it is true, then it would explain why studies repeatedly show that people who regularly attend religious services are much better at dealing with traumatic events, and generally have a longer life.

Just to clarify...

When I say "static" I'm talking about people who take in everything superficially or "traditionally" and do not try to mentally change it so much. It's like everything is just there. Dynamic people see reality as something that is malleable and that their sensory input doesn't immediately get slammed by whatever connotations are already in their heads. I can't easily put it in words, but I hope I've explained the basic pattern.

Fundies would be static, but they comprise a low amount of the religious population. Most religious people accept that they can't fully understand spiritual things, and that vibe would extend (either consciously or unconsciously) to their perception of other things. The nature of positivism is very static, but I'm quite sure that most scientists these days aren't rigid positivists.

Optimism and pessimism are pure philosophies, but in reality, they just aren't applicable (also, ignore my statement about ascertaining people's personality; I meant that optimism/pessimism can only be used as a basic way to study someone's temperament).

 

[blarg]

On a side note, I know an annoying girl (ESFP?) who calls me a pessimist for constantly finding errors (Ti) and making people feel stupid/pissed off. So this relates to Skywalker's post. Se "optimist" who lives in the moment doesn't like Ti cynic who seems "pessimistic".

 

[scorpiomover]

***********************************

Se/Ne = optimistic <vs> Si/Ni = pessimistic

***********************************

Te/Fe = convinced <vs> Ti/Fi = skeptical

***********************************

Skywalker, I decided to respond to this post, as it seems to sum up your response to mine in more depth.

P = Perceiving function is extrovert, and Judging function is introvert = Se/Ne AND Ti/Fi.

J = Perceiving function is introvert, and Judging function is extrovert = Si/Ni AND Te/Fe.

So by your hypothesis, Ps are skeptical optimists, and Js are convinced pessmists.

Just my 2 cents.

When I say "static" I'm talking about people who take in everything superficially or "traditionally" and do not try to mentally change it so much. It's like everything is just there.

Sounds like an S.

Dynamic people see reality as something that is malleable and that their sensory input doesn't immediately get slammed by whatever connotations are already in their heads.

Sounds like a P.

Fundies would be static, but they comprise a low amount of the religious population. Most religious people accept that they can't fully understand spiritual things, and that vibe would extend (either consciously or unconsciously) to their perception of other things.

It all depends on what you call a "Fundie". The Amish use GM crops. Iran is one of the top places for cloning research in the world.

The nature of positivism is very static, but I'm quite sure that most scientists these days aren't rigid positivists.

I have noticed some observations of my own. I didn't see them in any scientific journal. I just observed them for myself, out of my experience. But I think they might help you to get a better understanding of the matter, probably more than I understand of it at the moment.

I've come across quite a few incredibly rigid scientific positivists on the forums. After a few years, I started noticing that they were almost always working or used to work in science, or scientifically-related fields, like: physicist, epidemiologist, science writer, doctor, worker in healthcare, forensic scientist, etc.

I've also found a strong correlation between Scientific Positivism and having strong anti-religious feelings.

Optimism and pessimism are pure philosophies, but in reality, they just aren't applicable (also, ignore my statement about ascertaining people's personality; I meant that optimism/pessimism can only be used as a basic way to study someone's temperament).

Maybe. But I think that you can choose to select your philosophy, or you can change your philosophy. Maybe that can mean that you can change your temperament. I don't know.

 

[SkyWalker]

Skywalker, I decided to respond to this post, as it seems to sum up your response to mine in more depth.

P = Perceiving function is extrovert, and Judging function is introvert = Se/Ne AND Ti/Fi.

J = Perceiving function is introvert, and Judging function is extrovert = Si/Ni AND Te/Fe.

So by your hypothesis, Ps are skeptical optimists, and Js are convinced pessmists.

Just my 2 cents.
.

yeah you are right, so that would mean there is no skeptical pessimist combo and no convinced optimist combo.... hmm i have to let this sink to say something about this