WHY WE SHOULDN'T FORGIVE (and why we might be wrong).

The three confusion-causing conflations contorting clarity concerning forgiveness.

Ever hear of a jingle-jangle?

No, not the 2020 Netflix Christmas musical (which rated very well¹). Not the Trader Joe’s holiday snack either (which is delicious²). And, although I am a Bob Dylan fan, I am not referring to the time of day when we will follow Mr. Tambourine Man (“in the jingle-jangle morning,” that is³).

A jingle-jangle is a mix-up of words, a mistake in meaning, a confusion of language—it’s a fallacy. And forgiveness has fallen prey to pervasive (and pernicious) jingle-jangle fallacies.

Here, I describe three such fallacies that have confused our understanding of forgiveness.

Skeptics proclaim, these are good reasons why we shouldn’t forgive! But, it’s just a jingle-jangle.

(Oh, and a big “hey there!” to my new subscribers from this weekend! So glad you found me—let’s journey.)

Jingle-Jangle Fallacies

In developmental science, we use the term jingle-jangle fallacy to describe errors that occur when one single word is used to describe what are actually two different things (a jingle fallacy), or when two different words are used to describe what is actually one thing (a jangle fallacy). The term first arose in scientific literature regarding empirical measurement issues in assessing latent constructs⁴. Two concepts are not necessarily the same just because they have the same label; nor are two concepts necessarily different just because they bear different labels.

When describing or measuring concepts in developmental science, precision of language is important. Ever read Lois Lowry’s The Giver⁵ (or seen the excellent film adaptation with Jeff Bridges)? In a future society that learned from its conflicted past, “precision of language!” was emphasized to avoid confusion when communicating. So, like that—but, well, with less dystopian, control-of-language, control-of-people type vibes (lots to say there).

So what concepts do you associate with forgiveness? What does forgiving make you think of?

Three reasons presented for “not forgiving,” I argue, actually have nothing to do with forgiveness at all—they are jingle fallacies:

1. “I will not forgive! I can never forget what was done to me!”

   Forgiving does not mean forgetting.

2. “I will not forgive! I can never be with that person again!”

   Forgiving does not mean reconciling or restoring the relationship.

3. “I will not forgive! What they did was wrong!”

   Forgiving does not mean pardoning, excusing, condoning, or justifying what happened.

Confusing forgiveness with forgetting the harm or offense, with reconciling with the one responsible for the harm, or with pardoning, excusing, condoning, or justifying the harm, are all jingle fallacies. Nonetheless, these conflations have muddied the waters in trying to understand forgiveness.

They are pervasive, and pernicious.

They are pervasive because they are everywhere. They are pernicious because they pervert understanding which, in turn, prevents progress—both for individuals that might benefit from forgiving, as well as for science seeking to describe and explain forgiveness and its potential links to human flourishing.

How Pervasive!

Ask any child what “forgiveness” means. What do you hear in response? Probably something like “to say sorry,” “to make up,” or “to act like nothing happened”—to forgive and forget.

Scholars in Turkey⁶ asked “What is forgiveness?” to 367 school-aged children and adolescents. Most responded with “apologizing” (42.2%) and “acting like nothing happened” (29.2%).

Scholars in the Midwest U.S.⁷ asked the same of 100 youth, ages 7, 11, and 16 years. Most 7-year-olds described forgiveness as restoring the relationship; most 16-year-olds described it as learning from and moving beyond the problem; 11-year-olds were relatively undecided.

Perhaps these age-related differences reflect developmental differences in understanding? Other scholars⁸ have presented cognitive-developmental models of forgiveness, aligning it with Kohlberg’s stages of justice reasoning (I will likely make another post about these models, if you think it sounds interesting). However, data exist to suggest otherwise.

A large-scale opinion study in the U.S.⁹ surveying 1,002 adults revealed that most American adults believed forgiveness implied forgetting, reconciling, or releasing from consequences (punishment, justice, etc.). Participants were asked to rate the accuracy of the following statements:

• “If you have really forgiven someone, you should be able to forget what they have done to you.”

  66% agreed, rating it as very accurate (32%) or somewhat accurate (34%).

• “If you genuinely forgive someone, you should rebuild your relationship with that person.”

  73% agreed, rating it as very accurate (35%) or somewhat accurate (38%).

• “If you really forgive someone, you would want that person to be released from the consequences of their actions.”

  60% agreed, rating it as very accurate (28%) or somewhat accurate (32%).

Although these studies need to be replicated (they were conducted between 5 and 20 years ago, and their findings are specific to their respective samples), my suspicion is that such skepticism indeed remains, for the very same reasons.

How Pernicious!

Conflating forgiveness with forgetting, reconciling, or pardoning the wrong that was done, is problematic. These jingle fallacies risk associating forgiveness (and have associated it) with weakness and defeat, with forswearing justice, and even with encouraging repeat offenses (recidivism), perpetuating the injustice. All that jinglin’ has certainly equipped the skeptics with reasons to not forgive.

As Shakespeare wrote in Timon of Athens¹⁰ (emphasis mine), “My lord, you have my voice to ‘t; the fault’s Bloody; ‘tis necessary he should die: Nothing emboldens sin so much as mercy.”

Nietzsche¹¹ even found forgiveness to be a weakness and for the weak, practiced by those unable to assert or achieve justice. On the other hand, Mahatma Ghandi claimed, “The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is an attribute of the strong.”

So which one is it?

Of course, if forgiving only serves to perpetuate the problems, leading to more harm and injustice, the skeptics would be right.

In 2022, I published an article¹² in the Journal of Moral Education, titled “Forgiveness as a character strength: Toward a developmental model and research agenda” where I reviewed literature to assess that very question—does forgiving increase recidivism? Does anyone beyond the forgiver benefit? I will summarize those findings in a forthcoming post—but as a teaser, I will say there are more benefits to forgiving than you might think.

A Cause for Pause, and Onward

Yes, I recognize that I have not even described what forgiveness is yet here, only what is isn’t.

And yes, I recognize that my above reference to the Shakespeare quote might be committing another jingle fallacy: is forgiveness in fact a mercy? And if so, a mercy for whom?

That sounds like a good path to explore next—a developmental science description of what forgiveness is. Keep following along. Thanks for being a part of my journey.

What do you think. Are you a skeptic?

1. Jingle Jangle: A Christmas Story scored 90% on Rotten Tomatoes (70% audience score). My 4-year-old daughter said it was “good”. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/jingle_jangle_a_christmas_journey

2. As the website describes: “Inside each generously sized tin you’ll find mini pretzels covered with milk and dark chocolate and drizzled with white chocolate; dark chocolate-covered caramel popcorn; dark chocolate-covered broken Joe-Joe’s cookies; milk chocolate gems with a red candy coating; and milk and dark chocolate mini peanut butter cups. Don’t you feel all jingly and jangly just thinking about it? Imagine how good you’ll feel once you grab a handful and toss it into your mouth.”

https://www.traderjoes.com/home/products/pdp/jingle-jangle-051324

3. Bob Dylan, “Mr. Tambourine Man,” from his 1965 album, Bringing It All Back Home.

4. Kelley, E. L. (1927). Interpretation of educational measurements. Yonkers, NY: World.

Thorndike, E. L. (1904). An introduction to the theory of mental and social measurements. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University.

5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Giver

6. Taysi, E., & Orcan, F. (2017). The conceptualisation of forgiveness among Turkish children and adolescents. International Journal of Psychology, 52(6), 473-481. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12237

7. Wainryb, C., Recchia, H., Faulconbridge, O., & Pasupathi, M. (2019). To err is human: Forgiveness across childhood and adolescence. Social Development, 29, 509-525. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12413

8. Enright, R. D., & Fitzgibbons, R. P. (2000). Helping clients forgive: An empirical guide for resolving anger and restoring hope. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10381-000

Enright, R. D., Freedman, S. R., & Rique, J. (1998). The psychology of interpersonal forgiveness. In R. D. Enright & J. North (Eds.), Exploring forgiveness (pp. 46-62). Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.

Enright, R. D., & Gassin, E. A. (1992). Forgiveness: A developmental view. Journal of Moral Education, 21(2), 99-114. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724920210202

9. Jeffress, R. (2000). When forgiveness doesn't make sense. Colorado Springs, CO: Waterbrook.

10. Nietzsche, F. W. (1996). The genealogy of morals (D. Smith, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1887)

11. Shakespeare, W. (1623). Timon of Athens. In W. Shakespeare (Ed.), Shakespeare: The first folio (pp. 80-98). New York: Funk & Wagnalls.

12. Tirrell, J. M. (2022). Forgiveness as a character strength: Toward a developmental model and research agenda. Journal of Moral Education, 51(3), 312-335. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2021.1873754