disheartening as it might be, pessiments are wiser people. Perhaps with a proper defense mechanism against depression, an individual is likely to grow out more mature and learned after undergoing periods of emotional perturbations. Severely adverse situations may of course cause temporary or prolonged depressions. optimists on the other hand are less prone to depression and whims of reality; they have a strong defense mechanism against adversities. They perform well at work, keep good health and are happier in general.

The difference lies essentially in how one explains things to oneself and how one gauges the probability of success . A failed project might lead to "I am not good enough" or "There were various factors" conjectures.
"This will take a lot of time, it'll be impossible to meet this deadline": a pessimist is a realist. "I can do it, let me put in what I can", says an optimist to himself. Gauging the probability of suceess of the event at the time these conjectures were made, may be the realist was right. The optimist, however, starting from the situation where instantaneous probability of sucess might have been low, gradually increased the probability of sucess by investing effort!

Sadly perhaps thats not the end of the story. Humans learn "helplessness" too. Setting too lofty goals and failing to achieve them introduces intinctive reluctance to future endeavors. It becomes a vicious circle, especially for high achievers who set stringest and ambitious targets, fail to achieve them, and then work hard all the more, and learn "helplessness" that way.

So,
Is being an optimist deluding oneself of the reality? That perhaps is disheartening for a person who wants to be morally right in not distorting reality and knowing the facts. So then be a pessimist? You'll be wiser that way, you'll gauge the reality well, and you can't accuse yourself of distorting reality. You won't perhaps set lofty goals for yourself and hence won't learn "helplessness". But you won't achieve as well as an optimist can and you may not perhaps be as happy.

There are payoffs either way. I won't really seem like meaning insult here; seeking optimality in emotions is a sinful endeavor to me.
Anyway, we are just seeking a way out.
I remember proposing to my mentor and supervisor once that we target a publication in a top of the line conference. They were not too sure of the feasibility, since the work progress at that stage wasn't substantial. I understood their point, but was convinced that I can do it. To an extent, I convinced them too and went ahead with working towards it. At the back of my mind, however, I had all the practical constraints, and was open to the possiility that I might not be able to meet the goal.
It turned out that I couldn't achieve the goal. I wasn't disheartened, because I knew at the very outset, that unless I try I can't really figure out the feasibility of the goal. As I worked I increased the probability of success. Towards the end it wasn't sufficiently high. However, I ended up putting in effort and I was satisfied.
In retrospect, I didn't perhaps distort reality : the chances of success might have been low at the outset, as my supervisors saw it, and as I kwew that, but I wasn't sure of those chances in future. Hence I worked towards seeing where the chances took me.

I think, thats not a bad way of dealing with things. I don't learn helplessness that way, I don't accuse myself of distorting reality, but I still am an optimist.

----