Why do we forgive some people for committing horrible acts but hold others to a higher standard? This blog post analyzes hypothetical, but very possible, situations where forgiveness and responsibility are applied. Using Robert Soloman’s philosophy present in his book, True to our Feelings, I posit that emotions are the driving force on whether we determine if someone is guilty or responsible for their actions.
Take this example: a person is arrested. He was caught stealing expensive technology from a computer store. It was estimated that he stole about $10000 worth of product, and investigators found that he showed a clear and undeniable motive to sell the stolen goods. The video camera and fingerprints show that he was the culprit and committed the crime. Say that you were on the jury for finding the defendant guilty or not guilty; what would you say? Guilty, right? Guilty, without further consideration, this answer seems logical; however, let me expand on some background. The defendant is a fourteen-year-old kid who has grown up in harsh home life. He lives below the poverty line, and his single mother struggles to pay the bills and put food on the table. During the trial, the kid says he would use the money from stealing the products to help his mother pay the bills for a couple of months. He also apologizes for stealing and promises the judge and jury that he will never do it again. How do you feel about the defendant now? Is he guilty or not guilty? The crime did not change, and the kid 100% committed the crime and caused the business owner harm, but why do we feel differently about the situation than we did before?
Take another example with less severe stakes. A child was raised in a home life that was not very secure. Their parents were not physically abusive, but their mother often was cold and did not show loving emotions very well. The child felt that he was emotionally neglected by their mother and did not ever really feel the notion of “a mother’s love.” Is the mother to blame for not being nurturing enough to her child? When the child got older, they expressed these grievances to their mother. The mother acknowledged her shortcomings and felt awful. She admitted that her mother never showed her love, which could explain why she never knew how to show love. The mom starts to go to therapy and makes a real effort to care more for her child. In this scenario, is the mother to blame, and should the child forgive her for her shortcomings? Having a neglectful mother has already done damage to the child that may not be able to be fixed, but there is still the feeling that the child should forgive the mother. Like the juvenile case, once the context is brought to light, the judgment of how we feel about the people most likely changed, but why?
Robert Soloman proffers that emotions, more specifically embarrassment, shame, and guilt, dictate when we believe people should be blamed or held responsible for their actions. The overarching theme between both scenarios is whether those accused of their actions are genuinely responsible for those actions. Was the child accountable for stealing, and was the mother responsible for being a more nurturing parent? In his book True to our Feelings, Robert Soloman posits that the judges and those being judged emotions determine whether we place responsibility on those accused.
“These emotions (embarrassment, shame, and guilt) also highlight the centrality of judgment in emotions, especially judgments of responsibility. This is one of the most profound ways in which emotions display intelligence: They acknowledge fault and responsibility, or the absence of it” (Soloman 94).
Once it was revealed that there were reasons why the accused acted in the way they did and felt shameful and guilty for those actions, our emotions of how we judged them also changed. Take, for example, a sociopath. A sociopath does not feel any emotion like shame or regret and can commit actions without feeling any emotion tied to those actions. If the child and mother were a sociopath and did not show any concern or emotion tied to their shameful actions, we would feel differently about the level of responsibility that they should take. If the child told the jury he wanted to steal the products because it was fun and he felt like it, it would most likely result in a different verdict than if he was remorseful and trying to help his mother pay the bills. Similarly, in the case of the mother, if she were to have told her child that she did not care that they felt neglected, we would feel differently about the child, perhaps not forgiving her for how she acted. Feeling guilty and conveying that one is regretful for committing questionable acts, according to Soloman, tends to alleviate judgment or responsibility because it shows an effort that the person is willing to make a change for the better.
Another thing to consider in terms of when and how we assign responsibility is when it seems like the person has no control over their actions. Solomon says,
“One can take responsibility even where one can be argued not to be responsible at all, for instance, for the bad behavior of an underling over whom one in fact had no control.” (Soloman 95).
In both scenarios, the mother and juvenile had backgrounds where it seemed they had no control over their actions. The juvenile kid was desperate and felt trapped in stealing because he needed the money for his and his mother’s survival. The mother never had any emotional connection from her mother; therefore, she was clueless about how to show this love to her child. In both scenarios, it seems that those accused reasonably did not have much control over committing the actions they did. However, as Soloman points out, one can still take responsibility and feel sorry, regrettable, or shameful for the actions that did take place. Similarly, if your drink spills on another person and ruins their shirt, you most likely will feel sorry and take responsibility for the drink falling, even though you could not have done much to prevent the action from happening. Once again, it seems clear that our emotions are the center of how we place responsibility and judgment on others, and this is clear in many things, from our everyday actions to the justice system. People often take circumstances or apologies into account when assigning responsibility, and this is because our emotions make the final call on whether someone is guilty or not.
Shared by: Kneshia Barlow