We need some controversy

I’m sure everyone wants to believe in the good side of people and things. Saying “everyone” will most likely bring criticism upon this generalized statement. However, the fact that this statement could be criticized as a generalization already gets my point across: we, as humans, are afraid of the cruelty of reality—the unknown, the unexpected, the corrupted, the crippled, the unwanted.
It’s very interesting; criticism about generalizations on positive regards is a way of bringing reminder, almost like an instinct of ours, of the imperfection to everything and identifying the naivety in those who make such generalizations. On the other hand, criticism about generalizations on negative regards, simultaneously, seems like our way of self-persuasion that there is goodness somewhere among this imperfect world. So after all...or fundamentally, are we good or evil? Is chaos bound to be a part of life? Well, we are afraid to identify the general as “evil”, yet we are unsure to say that the general is “good”.
Why does it matter anyway? Might as well decide that some are great and some can be better, or one can be good and evil at different times; might as well call these extreme measurements of values like good and evil generalizations, and accept the grand variety and variability.
I like variety and variability, but what should I believe in now? What is to be trusted and what’s not? What about boundaries and limits? Do they still exist? Are they still around? Can’t really see them no more.
For example, when I’m told that I’m a different, special girl, am I supposed to take these compliments as a form of sweet talk? Because guys say them so much that, ironically, such special and genuine-sounding comments have lost their worthiness to be thought of as sincere. I’d love to believe them, the pretty side to sweet talk, in which there is a chance that they may be truthful. At the same time, I’m scared of getting hurt from them because I’m aware of the bad side to sweet talk—the cruelty of reality—that there are people who are capable of saying all sorts of things that they do not mean, despite my uncertainty on that and my desire to believe in the wonder of sweet talk.

This is open-brain surgery for you all, displaying the process to girls’ habit of over-thinking.

Same concept, different level: what about hope? People always say, “have hope”, “never lose hope”. I think that is almost equivalent to identifying the wrong in generalizations about negative matter; we want to believe in the good side to everything, and to ultimately make ourselves feel better about ourselves, about what’s going on around us. The notion of hope is self-explanatory of this concept, and it is also a very psychological trick.
The problem now comes to the fact that reality does not allow us to never lose hope. Then to what extent should we, could we, hold hope up to before the threshold of getting hit by pure unfortunateness, bad timing, or the unknown and the unwanted—the regularity of reality? Or is that the lesson we are supposed to be learning: having hope, lose hope, and being able to pick it back up again? The whole cycle, as we often call it “learning from experience”, then is essentially a form of self-comfort. We want to believe in the good side of things, and probably ourselves.
Then, is it physically possible to see past our own psychology, delusions, hopes, and the ups and downs of reality? I believe that because we enjoy the excitement of hope, the mockery in sweet talks, the ecstasy in believing in the good side to things that we would even call it as a process of “learning” when prediction fails...because we like controversy and variability, I don’t see the motivation for one to reach that state of mind without such comforting thoughts among chaos.