Fallacies of Forgiveness
In response to the podcast “A bit of optimism” by Simon Sinek
For those of you who don’t know Simon Sinek; his fame began with the TED talk (I am a big fan), I read Start with Why which made me see better what I already knew and the Infinite Game just solidified my appreciation of his work. Now he has been producing a podcast “A bit of optimism” which I’ve followed with excitement. All highly recommended.
In the podcast, a theme which has been mentioned frequently in several episodes, but which has not been articulated in depth is forgiveness. Many guests use forgiveness casually as an-obviously-good-thing-to-do, so obvious that they never stop to think about it. I have an issue with that. In my observation, this attitude is not restricted to Simon’s guests, but a much more widely held.
I guess my issue is a semantic one, in the sense that forgiving and forgiveness can be interpreted in so many ways. Perhaps people interpret it differently. My intuitive interpretation however follows the idiom “Let bygones be bygones”, which I really have trouble accepting. To me it sounds like “forget the past”. Excuse me, but how do I choose to forget something? It is like trying to not think about a pink elephant. Once you have the pink elephant in your head, it is near-impossible to get it out of your head. In fact, the more you try, the harder it is. So how could I forget? Consequently, how could I forgive?
Moreover, even if I could forget, I do not see it as a sensible thing to do. For example, say Greg steals 10 bucks from my pocket, but I’d say, “I forgive you.” implying that I’ve already forgotten it. Tomorrow Greg can steal a further 10 bucks from my pocket because I have forgotten all about it. In fact, Greg could take 10 bucks from my pocket every day because there’s no reason not to do that. I cannot see how this would be the correct interpretation of forgiveness.
There are however underlying virtues in forgiveness which I do appreciate. First, many times I can see people, myself included, getting offended by well-intended comments. Often this is an indication of emotional baggage. For example, suppose Greg comments “I like your new hat”, which I’d interpret as an offensive “You’re hair looks like a mess”, since I’ve lately had an issue with my hairstyle. Taking a step back and interpreting the comment without loaded assumptions would relive me of the hurt pride. In other words, solving my emotional knots and understanding my own emotional responses is a central virtue implied by forgiveness.
Second, suppose Greg steals 10 bucks from my pocket; I could get angry. However, if I get to know that Greg has lost his job and has 5 mouths to feed at home, then I could easily understand his reasons. Perhaps I could overlook his indiscretion, this one time, since I know his motivations. I do not necessarily have to agree with his actions, but at least I can understand and empathize. Mind you, next time I would keep a better eye on my pocket, but perhaps look for an opportunity to help Greg find a new job.
Third, similarly as above, often we get offended because we misinterpret people. If Greg’s mum offers to come and clean the windows of his apartment, it is likely not because she’d want to inspect the household, but because she wants to take some load off Greg’s shoulder in the difficult times. Still I can easily see how Greg could get offended by his mom’s offer, and how he could tell her to mind her own business. Misinterpretation thus goes often hand in hand with emotional baggage. It is almost as if we’d look for opportunities to validate our emotional baggage by misinterpreting others.
Fourth, perhaps closest to forgiveness, is when someone truly understands how they’ve hurt somebody, and changes their behavior. For example, suppose Alice is offended by the fact the her partner Bob does not show his love for Alice enough. Stereotypical male partners might not express their affection in the same way as ladies expect. The stereotypical male only hears her complaints “Why don’t X and why don’t you Y”? Obviously, it is not sufficient to do X and Y. Once Bob understands that Alice is complaining because she feels lonely, as a step forward, Bob can forgive her. More importantly, however, is that once Bob regularly demonstrates that he has understood Alice’s feelings, by say, buying her flowers spontaneously, only then can Alice forgive Bob. I find this point particularly important. It is not sufficient to say in words, you have to demonstrate through consistent actions that you understand your discretion. Personally, I have been in a situation where I had trouble remembering particular dates of the year which were important for my partner, causing great offense. Again a stereotypical scenario where the male neglects the female by forgetting a birthday or similar. I however made the decision that this relationship is important to me, therefore those dates are important to me, even if they, in my previous attitude, would have been meaningless.
Fifth, sometimes you just have to see beyond the offense and say “I still love you.” Some relationships are too good to be lost over a minor quarrel. This would perhaps be the typical family setting. Your parent or partner offends you somehow, perhaps even repeatedly, but you can choose that the relationship is more important. Often it would be worthwhile to talk through the problem, to make the other understand your point of view. The difficulty is that doing that is often emotionally exhausting. For example, suppose Greg’s mum has a history of snooping over Greg’s things, even if he’s already in his 40ies. There’s clearly decades of emotional baggage on both sides to come over. That discussion itself could take years or decades. In some cases, I would argue that it is just not worth the trouble. At the extreme, on someone’s deathbed, it is probably not meaningful to pick up old quarrels, but leave them in happy ignorance with an “I always love you”. That last happy moment is surely more important than opening the wounds.
Which brings me to the final point; some people are not worth your trouble. Personally, I certainly don’t take any pride in it, but can openly admit that I’ve consciously cut ties with a handful of people as I deemed them to be lost causes. Some offended me and others I have offended. Here, forgiveness is not about forgetting. It is about choosing to walk away from a fight. It is about dropping away all the grief and pain, and leaving it behind you. It is about focusing on things where I can best spread wellness and joy to the world.
I do strongly believe that everyone should surround themselves with people who make them a better person. This is in no conflict with the desire to bring happiness indiscriminately to everyone. Contrarily, it should be obvious that one cannot bring happiness to every single individual, but only to a select few and hopefully, to improve the average happiness in the world. We thus necessarily must ignore a majority of individuals. Choosing the people to associate with those who best support the cause I am striving makes my efforts more productive. Choosing to focus my efforts on where I have the biggest impact, also make me more productive. Ignoring lost causes is thus not only necessary, but also beneficial.
Concluding, I think the common theme here is clear. Forgiveness is virtue when it is about improving and generating understanding, empathy and love. However, if forgiveness is about forgetting and ignorance, then it is short sighted and counterproductive. In a narrow sense, I have come to think of forgiveness as something that I can do, in the rare but valuable occasion, when someone repeatedly demonstrates that they have understood how their past actions offended me and through their actions show they want to be better. When I have faith and trust they have that understanding and the repeatedly demonstrated will to improve, only then can I say that I honestly forgive them. All other forms of “forgiveness” are empty words to me.
