An expression for what "worriers" do, as scoffing as German "Bedenkenträgerei"

In German there is a nice expression "Bedenkenträgerei" which is used for what people do who rather express their worries about something being difficult, than open-mindedly contributing to finding a solution. These people try to clad themselves in seriousness, which however is based on fear and lack of imagination.

I try to find a good expression for this type of behaviour in English.

The relevant dictionaries do not help. In one dictionary I found "worrier" for "Bedenkenträger", that's for the person who acts like that. However, "Bedenkenträgerei", as a noun for this type of behaviour, has a quite more ironic or scoffing tone to it. My feeling is that "worrier" is not really scoffing.

So, what ways do you see to express something like that? May be a word, may be sentence - something that would be just spot on in English?

I thought of worriership. But does this sound well?

Here is the context: I was reading an article in The Guardian on a physical experiment with strong light being cast on water vapour to directly extract hydrogen from it. The comments area underneath was dominated by people who communicated truisms like that it is difficult to store hydrogen, and that liquid hydrogen has less energy per kilogram than, say, ordinary hydrocarbon fuel today. Bla-bla. I found this an idiotic 'Bedenkenträgerei', as, yes, these facts are well-known but are not relevant here, and I wanted to blame the contributors for... right... Bedenkenträgerei.

Solution 1:

You could accuse those contributors of being naysayers (Merriam-Webster):

: one who denies, refuses, opposes, or is skeptical or cynical about something ▪ There are always naysayers who say it can't be done.

The part relevant to your intended use is ‘skeptical or cynical about something.’

Solution 2:

I've always heard worrywart used for this.

: a person who is inclined to worry unduly

Solution 3:

There's a boatload of ways to refer to this in a (slightly-)derisive way in English, depending on people's motivations and what aspects of a proposal are being used as reasons to dismiss the idea.

Obviously, I think, we're talking about the general concept of pessimism, and general resistance to change (which may or may not be intentional).

Words to describe people:

Calling someone a skeptic is a neutral way to refer to a person who has a lot of doubt or questions either generally or in a specific context. In science or academics, calling someone (a) skeptic is rarely an insult.

'Naysayer' annotates a person who is saying 'no' currently or who often says 'no;' it can imply a personality type or can simply refer to a person/group (naysayers) who opposes a specific idea in a specific context. Naysayers may merely express doubt or may attempt to veto an action/idea. If a person has formally or publicly rejected or repudiated an idea, calling them a naysayer isn't strictly an insult.

Relatedly, a doomsayer is someone who foretells doom, catastrophe, or other unpleasant things. It carries the implication that these forecasts won't actually come true. Chicken Little is a synonym.

You might try negative Nancy, which refers to a person who almost always finds a way to be pessimistic, no matter what's happening. Per the below comment, Debbie Downer is a synonym (from a 2004 SNL comedy sketch).

A similar phrase is party-pooper, who — similarly — will always find a reason to disengage or naysay when others are having fun or otherwise getting excited about something.

If someone is generally resistant to any form of change simply because it's different from the status quo, they are a stick in the mud or (especially if they're older:) a fogey.

Words to describe tendencies:

Especially if people are (partly) motivated by a desire to appear intelligent or feel that they have some kind of intellectual high ground, you could call this pedantry (or simply tell someone they're "being pedantic"). Pedantry is the general tendency of individuals making a big deal out of small issues because some consider their own ideas/objections to be the most important and won't stop nitpicking.

Similarly, there's bikeshedding, which describes how a group of people sometimes ignores important things since it's easier to argue over small, mostly-irrelevant points than to address the entire big-picture issue. People with little domain-knowledge often fall into this because they wish to contribute feedback, but they don't have the breadth of knowledge to look at things from a high level and balance various tradeoffs. Any experts present can be derailed or drowned out due to this.

Arguments which are highly deceptive or distorting can be described as sophistry. Sohpistic arguments often focus on truisms, little technicalities, or philosophical ideas while sidestepping the main subject.

Finally, an argument that simply finds a single (usually weak) reason for/against something, then stops short of examining the full consequences of a given action or stance is called a cop-out.

_{Though they apply somewhat less here since the article has a scientific focus, I'll also note that there are a few more words which are used in context of institutional/social/governmental policies such as "reactionary", "ideologue", "nimby", and "regressive". These are used frequently in politics to describe people or policies which are unrealistic or 'stuck in the past.'}

Solution 4:

I've always tended to use 'armchair critic' or a variation of it (armchair analyst, armchair philosopher, etc...). It isn't really a literal translation of 'Bedenkenträger', but I think it conveys a very similar meaning.

Also, I've seen this used (and I personally use it) usually as a form of self-deprecation.