Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Karl Straub's avatar

I’ve long been skeptical about the value of words like “evil” and “monster,” because I think that (like virtually every word or concept, these days) they are regularly used not to pin down something profound, but instead to avoid responsibility. We give words and concepts power, so we can say we are not that thing. To glibly summarize the avoidance: “that person is an evil monster, and I am not them, so I am good.” And we often demonize others in order to feel good about ourselves. To a large degree, this is what social media is for. I can feel social media pulling me into that behavior, and I don’t want it.

I remain suspicious of these words and concepts.

But this essay is a helpful reminder that it is possible to think correctly about these things. Your essay is overwhelming, because it is so far afield from what I expect and regularly encounter here and elsewhere. The writing is good. The logic is sound. The position is pitiless without being self-righteous.

I’ll continue to be a person not saying the things you’ve said here. But I will also archive this piece as reference material. I will continue to avoid saying them, and continue to be suspicious of them, but now I find I can breathe more easily about my internal conflict between suspicion about the self-indulgent use of them and acceptance of the terrible reality that they are needed nonetheless.

A thing exists. It needs a name, even though naming it will sometimes aid people who are inclined to the sort of self-indulgence that helps keep the thing alive.

I can continue to wrestle with these conflicting ideas, but I can now say that there is another reason for me not to say them: Rachel has said them, better than I can. If I find they need saying, at some point, I can refer to Rachel’s piece.

You’ve given me a great gift. I hope it doesn’t cheapen or degrade the greater loads of others when I say you’ve lightened mine.

Expand full comment
Alice Evans's avatar

Thank you, Rachael. This is a lovely and thoughtful essay.

'Forgiveness', as I understand it, is a way of rebuilding social harmony and cohesion, implicitly saying we can rebuild and restore our previous connections.

Yes, I think the question is a utilitarian calculation as to whether I want to maintain that same bond with that person.

Like you say, looking at the person's conduct, I either think they made a one-off mistake, which we can discuss, address and movement forward. (Actually, I think I saw you do this yesterday, very kindly and cordially, showing forgiveness).

OR

In a Bayesian way (wink wink), I just update my priors about what I can expect of them and adjust. If people consistently demonstrate that they are some combination of aggressive/ unkind/ narcissistic, then I just limit contact.

That said, when I was very young, I said to my newly divorced mother, "I hate my father". And she said "no no, don't let it occupy your mind, just move on". And for me personally, I think that kind of pragmatic disregard has been helpful.

So - for me personally - it's not that I do or don't forgive, I just don't think about such people :-)

Expand full comment
12 more comments...

No posts