Foundation for the Readmission of Negative Thinking

Full name: Foundation for the Readmission of Negative Thinking as a Contributor to Positive Outcomes

Why? Sick of pom-pom-waving cheer-leaders trying to banish one half of human emotional experience; concern that the real negative aspects of certain actions are not considered resulting in disasterous outcomes (see Groupthink - Irving Janis); concern that pom-pom-waving may be used by the power elites in society to stifle opposition.

Why use the word "Negative"? Why not? - this is anti-PR; "Critical" might have worked, but Critical Thinking is an established body of work and I don't want to hand anyone who opposes this a handy shovel of shite to throw.

Proponents of a "Positive" thinking-only world often have an outcome in mind that gives genuine reason for concern and opposition. Cutting that opposition down at the knees by labelling it "Negative" is too big an advantage for those with power to hold. We need to rehabilitate the term.

Readmit Negative Thinking into the dialogue. Without it there is no dialogue.