pathos and optimism

so recently i came across the proclamation, 'things will be alright in the end. if things are not alright, it isn't the end'.

it is a sentiment we all want to be true/correct/accurate. but it is a dogmatic assertion, followed by a tautology.

unfortunately while it gives peace of mind by presenting a delusional model of reality. what is the reasonable value of that model?

it lacks utility, accuracy, simplicity/elegance,

but it grants hope and personal presentations of acceptance and sharing/granting of esteem; you matter. it also may grant an objectively invalid placebo and help wills the 'heart' to bear the burden. so maybe it grants an economic return for both parties.

i wonder if it is more ethical to grant an optimistic/dishonest view of the world and rob the other of grasping the dire difficulty of their circumstance, or to rob them of hope by expressing normalized figures.

does optimism belong along side teaching people to feel what others feel, and to try to grasp the circumstance of those suffering ailments beyond wildest experiences?

...
what do people deserve:

• the unambiguous truth, for improvement of their station relative to their past
• a noble lie
• a grand ambition/ideal
• a poetic and accessible beauty/sooth
• a validating emotion
• respect and treatment as equals; no disagreement.
• inclusion to the degree of someone feeling alienation when values collide.