Constructive Skepticism

One of the things I'll be working on this year is development of a good thought process. A good approach during a game might be to assume that your opponent has just made the worst move possible after every move. Then, it is your task to prove the correctness or incorrectness of this conclusion. First, see what threats are generated by the move, both tactical and positional (which I would describe as pre-tactical). Then, check the soundness of the move in terms of the best way to counter it or prove it wrong. You may not be able to prove it wrong. In that case, you can conclude that your hypothesis was incorrect and that your opponent has made a good move. Then, you must make a pre-tactical move that improves your position or at least maintains equilibrium. If you do find that your hypothesis was correct, you must find the best way in which to capitalize on the situation. I think that this approach does a couple of things. First, it helps mitigate any irrational fear one may have when facing a higher or much higher rated opponent. Second, it forms a loosely scientific way to look at the game by requiring the player to routinely prove or disprove the correctness of his opponents' moves.