Can anything be reviewed?

As human beings, no matter how subjective something is, we have an inbuilt desire to want to manage our expectations. Gathering opinions and experiences from our communities is our way of gathering data to help us make our decisions. I would say that yes, every experience and product should be able to be reviewed, but without personal experience, no matter how much data you gather, your expectations can always be disappointed.

Well stated. Those who expect perfection will be disappointed the most. As a supervisor of people, one understands that the performance of each individual is different.

Is the answer to not expect?

It could be, are humankind capable of such a feat?
if we do not expect, how do we prepare?
if we do not review, how do we learn?
If we do not review, and we do not expect, must we live every day as if for the first time?

It's not as simple as that. That's because everybody has their own perspective from their own environment and experience.
We are capable of such a feat based on our own choices.

thats just it CI, we review data by way of memory, we assess danger based on previous perceptions and assessments. We review our experiences to learn from them, we share our experiences so that others may learn from them, no matter how valid or invalid.

We know not to play with fire because someone somewhere had an experience, and his review of his experience, or a collated review of many peoples similar experience is now passed on that our child too knows not to play with fire, without having to experience it for themselves.

I think fire is not a good example, because we see too many fires started, many by people who shouldn't be playing with fire(works).

You raise valid points. The past is the means to the future.
What happens though when the future becomes the past?
The use of criticism can't be infinite, but because of relativity does this suggest that criticism was never right?

Funny you should ask this question (Though I doubt you are serious). This month Dr Leo Smolin addresses the Peirce Society with an epochal question to people like you:

A-5. Invited Session: Lee Smolin (Lower Lock 1)
Session Chair: Shannon Dea (University of Waterloo)
Speakers:
Lee Smolin (Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics)
“Laws Must Evolve to be Explained: A Physicist’s Perspective on a Proposal
of Peirce”

Smolin is an Evolutionist and he is also a Doctorate in Physics and an admirer of the thought of Peirce. He asks that most natural of questions, If Evolution exists why would natural laws not evolve? Are they spiritual, are they things outside time, like spirits, etc.

NOTE: He is for Evolution and the evolution of laws of nature.

Life is so busy I doubt many will see how important his speech is.

So then there are two kinds of reason, two kinds of truth, two kinds of logic. You nutcase.

Nutcase? You are calling CI a nutcase? That sort of irony is so dense it would cause its own black hole in some universes. I don't think there's even a word for it.

Most things , ideas , concepts , theories at some point must be reviewed .

New knowledge is gained everyday .