Forced Forgiveness Theory

Video: Forced Forgiveness Theory

Video: Forced Forgiveness Theory
Video: The Real Risk of Forgiveness–And Why It’s Worth It | Sarah Montana | TEDxLincolnSquare 2024, May
Forced Forgiveness Theory
Forced Forgiveness Theory
Anonim

I am not a supporter of the theory that it is necessary to forgive everyone globally and without exception, and without it anywhere. This process is very complex and individual. In my practice, I have come across the fact that the willingness to reconsider their grievances and really forgive are more often those clients who have realized their grievance in some actions. Well, let's say they interrupted communication with the offender, reduced it to a minimum, or in general somehow avenged the offense. Well, at least they regularly inform the offender about their feelings and do not allow this process (accumulation of grievances) to continue. If the offense is experienced only internally, then any attempt to “work through” it causes resistance. This resistance is based on the principle "my hurt is my strength" or "my hurt is a part of me." And the main argument is the lack of desire to do something about this offense. It seems unfair and wrong. Why? Yes, because the inner experience of resentment, in fact, is the only thing that signals its presence. And about their own righteousness.

There are two important points here. First, a person subconsciously perceives his resentment as some kind of action in relation to the offender. Forgiving is like changing your attitude. It seems like - to allow the offender his actions. Recognize their right to exist. But, in fact, this is not the case. To forgive is not to forget. And it does not mean to change the attitude towards a person or his actions. To forgive is to change your own emotions.

And, accordingly, the second - the offense seems to be fair, because it is subconsciously perceived as a form of response (the same revenge) to the offender. After all, there is no other form. Therefore, the possibility of losing (forgiving) her seems unfair. BUT! The catch is that a person takes revenge not on the offender, but on himself. It is he who eats himself with negative emotions, it is he who continues to react to offensive situations and words. It is his life that he subdues dependence on resentment. The one who causes the offense does not suffer in any way in this situation. He may well not even know about anything and not guess. And if you even guess - then perceive it in a completely different way. Resentment is revenge on yourself. And only to myself.

An essential role of negative emotions is to keep a person from repeating the situation. That is, the scheme is as follows: an event - an unpleasant emotion - an action (deciding what to do in this or another similar situation). Dot. Emotion is needed for this decision and action. Not INSTEAD. When it becomes “instead of”, a person forever hangs in a state of permanent negative emotion, without moving on to the third stage. It's like a physical signal from the body: disease - pain - treatment. Resentment is itself just “pain”. She is not a "magic pill" of justice.

If you feel resentment, while continuing (for example) to communicate with the offender and accumulate negative experiences, then this is a scheme: illness - pain - more pain.

Imagine a situation where a child reaches for a hot oven door, burns his finger, continues to hold it in the same place and gets angry at the hot oven. And the finger hurts more and more. And the anger at the oven more and more. Strange, isn't it? After all, it is enough to simply perform an action - pull your hand back and do not touch the oven anymore.

So this is why I am not a supporter of the theory that everyone should be forgiven globally and without exception. Because:

1. Resentment is also a resource. It is needed for change, for decision, for action. Sometimes resentment is the driving force behind sublimation in other realms. Before breaking the supporting structure, you need to build a new one.

2. You cannot force forgiveness by the "so right" method. Because there are no objective truths. There is a subjective perception by this particular person.

If we assume that someone in childhood, for example, experienced physical or sexual abuse - how realistic is it at all to forgive such a thing? Or even WANT to forgive such a thing?

In the form in which we unconsciously understand forgiveness - nothing.

And therefore:

3. The question is not how to get rid of the resentment. And in how - how to revise the interpretation of this concept itself.

And taking into account those two points that I wrote about at the beginning - to forgive it to work with YOUR emotions, regaining the right to them. And at the same time, have the right to a personal choice of actions: to communicate or not to communicate with the one who caused the offense; whether or not to tell him about your feelings / emotions; in certain cases, it is even possible to take some action to punish, and maybe even not only personal, but also at the level of the law (if, for example, it was violence).

Forgiveness is not about removing responsibility from someone for their actions. No. It is allowing yourself to take responsibility for your emotions and your decisions.

Recommended: