Do You Have These Common Misunderstandings of Forgiveness, Honesty and Judgement?

Today, I'm going to take a little detour into an area i usually don't talk about. Philosophy which borders on religion.
I do this for one reason. I believe there is a lot of misunderstanding about certain terms that leads to a lot of Madness. Here's how:

In the West - especially in the US, with its Judeo-Christian cultural foundation - there is often a skewed understanding of  Honesty, Forgiveness and Judgement. Ideas which are very counterproductive, even destructive.

Let's start with Honesty since it's the easiest one to deal with.
Everyone knows that every major religion on earth has prohibitions against dishonesty. It is universal. Of course the most famous being the 10 Commandments in the Jewish Torah (the Old Testament for Christians).

Then of course, in America, Honesty has been enshrined in law and made famous by the court-room dramas where the witness takes the oath to: "Tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth..."

And it is not just the classics. There have been a number of blockbuster movies in the last 10 years whose subject has been honesty. I can think of a couple of comedies in particular. And in each case, the MORAL of the story is that we should bear-it-all. Tell all. Keep nothing inside. Have Naked souls.

Nothing could be further from the truth.
First of all, Honesty is not an absolute. And Honesty DOES not mean sharing all.
Not an absolute?
Yep.
This is a classic example, but it illustrates well the point. Imagine you are living in a country that is Not free. (Or if you are, this will instantly ring a bell as you read...)  Also, let's imagine you belong to a minority group which is being persecuted.

And - please - I don't want to hear anyone tell me this is an unreasonable example. There are too many such groups in different places --now and historically-- to count.
You really don't have look far to find racial, ethnic, religious and political persecution -- even genocide.

But just to keep our example straightforward, imagine you are a member of that persecuted group. Imagine also that the ruling group has decided your group needs to be exterminated and that now they are conducting house-to-house searches.

Further, imagine, that due to some genetic anomaly, you don't look like the persecuted group. A soldier knocks at the door and asks if there are any your people in the house or who live there?

What do you say?
Do you tell all? Spill your guts? Tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God, knowing it will mean the certain death and dismemberment of you and your extended family?

Of course not. And if you are religious will that lie send you to dark and firey place?

In most ethical systems, there is something known as a Hierarchy of Values. That is a fancy way of saying some values trump others. Or to put it another way, whenever two values come into conflict, you can AND MUST break the one lower on the totem pole and keep the one higher up.

In the case above, you are not telling a lie for personal gain, convenience or fraud. You are not trying to get something that is not yours or keep something you've stolen. No.

You're trying to preserve life. And that value stands at the very top of the heap.
The exhortation to tell the truth is to keep us from gaining unfair advantage. The requirement is null and void when someone is trying to take your life or property.

Consider this very common practice: You leave home. But you leave some of the lights on or ask a neighbor to take your mail inside for you. You may even invest in a system that will turn the lights on at a certain hour every day and off in the daytime. WHY?

You want any would be thief to THINK someone is home. In essence, your intent is to deceive him. Are you wrong? Should you announce to the world that no one is home?

Or, if at work there is a certain someone, [you know who i'm talking about] who is just a little too interested, a tad too friendly, just a smidgin too concerned about you, you can be almost assured they are up to no good.

Do you owe it to them to let it all hang out?

OK... Nuff said.


Then there is Forgiveness. A sticky mess of matted honey it is... Again - because of the influence of religion, it is generally accepted that if someone wrongs you, the high-minded, the noble, the right thing to do is to 'Forgive' him or her. Let it go. Wash it away. Don't dwell on it. Accept that person fully, and forget. 'Forgive and Forget.'

Like Honesty, Forgiveness has its cultural roots in a misguided and erroneous interpretation of the term.

It is said, and I believe it is true based on my own research into the 3 desert religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam), that Christianity and Islam each got part of the equation. But each is unbalanced.

Here's what I mean: Judaism puts great emphasis on the BALANCE of Justice and Mercy. They believe you cannot have One without the other.
That is Justice without mercy is not justice.
(Think of the a system where the criminal regularly escapes because the system is lenient and forgiving...)
And that
There is no Mercy (or Love) without Justice.
I'll let you think of your own examples...

Islam has taken and emphasises Justice at all costs. That is why we hear of Muslim countries sometimes cutting off the hands of a thief. Or someone being stoned in a public square. There are still public hangings in a place in Riyadh affectionately called 'Chop-Chop-Square'.

Christianity on the other hand --- has gone the other way --- emphasising Mercy to the exclusion of Justice.
(Again - just look at certain legal systems...)

Unfortunately, this is the root of the cultural bias and unbalanced idea about Forgiveness...


Because while all of that advice is good and sound, it masks a deeper cultural expectation. Down the rabbit hole we go....

Let's imagine someone wrongs me. Forgive. OK. Done. I'm not expecting anything in return. Not even an apology, certainly not any form of restitution. So - I've forgiven. Or have I?

Because the unwritten, unspoken, but universally understood implication of the infamous "Forgive and Forget" is that now I should PRETEND the incident never happened.
According to the cultural misconception, I should now roll back the clock in my mind and act like nothing ever happened.

OK. Hmmmm.
Let's say I lent someone my car. They get into an accident.
Wanting to be a good citizen and friend (or relative or whatever) I say --- "No sweat. I forgive you. I'll take care of everything."
So far so good - right?

But what do I do when that same person wants to borrow my car again?

This is where this cultural rubber of this lunacy meets the road of reality and light.

So what to do?

If I've forgiven and forgotten, am I now obliged to AGAIN loan my car? Because that is the logical fallacy many people struggle with. And...

What if it's much more dire? What if it could put you or your family's life in danger?

This is where I depart from the teachings or interpretations of some cultures and religions. I say. I can forgive, but
if I loan my car to that person again, I am a fool. If I put myself or my family in that same car with him, I deserve whatever happens and more.

Just like telling the truth doesn't not mean telling all to anybody who asks irrespective of their
motives or intent, I have no obligation to allow someone to repeat the same vile, irresponsible, destructive act again and again. That is madness and irresponsibility to myself and those I love.

Even if I believe the offender has materially changed and matured since that first unfortunate incident, it is still my judgement whether I want to take that risk again.


And if there is NO evidence at all indicating any change on the part of the offender, and IF I choose to loan him the car, again, I am the fool.

And that brings us to thorny ole Judgement. Oh what a nasty, four letter word it has become. 'How dare you judge me'! and its derivitives are so commonly heard, you have to ask yourself what they mean? And do they even make sense?

This one is simple and easy. This is really a cry for open-mindedness. A grand, noble and wonderful thing.

But ---and this is the problem--- like so many good things it has been taken to an extreme which makes it ridiculous. To judge is simply to evaluate. Something we do every hour of every day. It is the act of weighing options, assessing dangers and opportunities, and then making decisions. It is the basis of thinking and it is necessary for survival.

So - for someone to say we shouldn't judge is a little silly. What they should say is - we shouldn't PRE-judge. But all judgement is not bad.
Witness the incident above.
If someone else damages your car, you are now making a judgement based on experience. Or to make this just a bit juicier: (And unfortunately this happens everyday - somewhere...)

What if a family member comes to pick you up in the car, but you realise they've been drinking. Do you get in? Do you tell your kids to get in...??
That is judgement. Sweet and wonderful.

In essence we could say you are POST-judging, basing your decision on sound past experience and present evidence (or lack there of) of any change.... And that is an EXCELLENT and essential thing to do if we are to survive another day to live and love. 

So - I encourage anyone out there: Don't be cowered or intimidated by these cultural blind spots and bits of lunacy. Well meaning or not, they are destructive if followed. I hope you will trust and stand up for yourself.

I don't owe anyone my life story, or the insanity of being a fool in order to appear agreeable. You don't either.