The case against the Twitter apology and our culture of performed remorse

>> but my point is that I viewed her apology as selfish and would have preferred she never got that closure.

I have never believed one could receive forgiveness from another. Forgiveness comes from the self. In order to move on - from guilt or harm - we must forgive ourselves. Forgive our guilt, our shame, our self-blame; whatever we blame ourselves for our part in it - even if that part was being in the wrong place at the wrong time or trusting the wrong person. Forgiving only the other person doesn't solve the real harm we do to ourselves. I think it's an overlooked part of healing.

I understand the desire to want her to suffer for the hurt she caused your brother. However, in this context, I see it as her giving herself closure from the guilt by sending the apology. Acknowledgment from the other is not necessary (but maybe would have been nice); she had done all that was in her control.

Instead of giving the power to another or waiting for them to maybe provide closure, giving it to ourselves is the most healing thing we can do - no matter which side of the offense we are on.

Weird, it seems the authors don't even know what an apology is or an i'm sorry is. Everyone can say "I'm Sorry" it means so many things that in reality it means nothing. Regret and admittance of wrongdoing is the point of an apology, it means the individual knows their actions were wrong, and they would take them back. That's much better than an "I'm Sorry", which usually means, "really wish you wouldn't feel so bad" or "lets move past this".

Forgiveness in the Bible is formalized as a cancelled debt: the act of forgiveness is when you decide to eat the cost of a debt owed (Matthew 18:21-35). I think forgiveness is mostly misunderstood by our society. It has several implications:

1. Forgiveness does not equate to trust or even reconciliation. If I lent you $1000 and you never paid me back, I might forgive your debt but will be much less inclined to trust you with my money in the future.

2. Forgiveness absolutely does not necessitate repentance of the perpetrator. In the Bible forgiveness is a necessity regardless of the situation because the Bible treats the inability of a Christian to forgive the ultimate hypocrisy (Matthew 6:14-15).

3. Wronging another person (or yourself - this might be far more common) does tangible harm to them. This harm is analogous to a financial debt owed. This debt is on the cosmic books so to speak: it's very real and must be dealt with either by forgiveness or retributive justice (or a combination of the two). Restorative justice is important but can't fix the original debt.

4. An apology no matter how sincere can't undo the debt either, it is usually impossible to make it right (unlike a financial debt which can be repaid). Society misses this at its own peril: forgiveness trumps apologies every time, this is the nature of wrongdoing. If anything we downplay how hard it is to make things right! As if a few well chosen words and humiliation could undo Will Smith's Slap? It can't work because it doesn't go back in time and change history to make the thing not happen!

5. Repentance makes it easier to forgive (it enables the victim and the perpetrator to meet in the middle), but it's always going to be hard to tell if repentance is genuine. See point 2.

Good point, this may be the case.

Yes, I think so. Half of my point may be that as, eg., jealous (defensive) has been conflated with envy (offensive); and as social-emotional language appears to have somewhat degraded (where is, today, 'guilt' ?)... likewise, we have conflated forgiveness with reconsiliation.

Where perhaps, in a recent past, to be forgiven was more obviously "to be released from the burden of mattering, one way or another".

A few might, then, genuinely want forgiveness because they feel guilt that you still hate them. But many moreso feel no guilt, what they want is to be reconsiled. To be judged positive and worthwhile.

If this transition has occured, it would line up with the guilt->shame, envy-jealousy, etc. transitions. It would be a co-opting of noble language (genuinely wishing forgiveness) for ignoble selfish reasons (wishing reconsiliation).

I find this thesis prima fascie plausible, in that I feel under-educated in the nobility of guilt, the dangers of envy, and the purpose of forgiveness. An education, i'd say, my great-grandparents certainly had.