The Logic of Forgiveness

The Logic of Forgiveness By: Joshua Resnick 1 In memory of Dr. Sally Wade Acknowledgements Dr. Ronald Hall Dr. Susan Peppers-Bates Dr. Dixon Sutherland Rabbi Barry Altman David Nutting Alicja Duda James Erath Joe Beery Kitty Geoghan Kelly Jo Peller Kimberly Resnick Eddy Alonso Larry Resnick Thank you all for your support through my time here at Stetson and the advancement of my project. 2 Joseph’s Diary: January 21, 1933 I went to school today... though this time it was different than other days. Today at recess I was shunned away by my best friend, Hans. His mother told him that he was not allowed to interact with my kind. I did not understand what my best friend meant by that but whenever I tried to get his attention he would shun me away and the other children followed him. I went to tell my teacher that I was being an outcast and hearing whispers of foul names that the other children called me. My teacher looked at me and said, “That is what happens to a rotten Jew like you”. I ran to the bathroom in tears and waiting there till school was over. When I was walking home that day people who once knew me acted like they never knew who I was. The candy store that I used to go was on Potsdamer Platz, the owner Fredrick always welcomed me with a smile and inquired how my momma and papa were each day. Then he would give me a licorice stick and tell me to say hello to my parents for him. Though today when I went there, Mr. Fredrick looked at me as if I committed a horrendous crime and told me that I am no longer welcome in his store. February 27, 1933 Each day was getting rougher and rougher. My family and I were held hostage by society in our own home. We were gathered in the living room listening to the radio, I heard Hindenburg speak about the Reichstag catching fire. My parents at that time look like ghost when they heard the news. My father wanted my mother, sister, and I to leave the country and head for England. My mother argued with my father and told him that everything will be alright 3 and we need to stay. My sister however, she being 19, was packing her things and planned on traveling to France. I however just wanted all the fighting to stop. I just wanted to play catch with my papa again, or play our game of hide and seek. I just wanted our house to be happy again and not have this shadow of gloom cast over it. March 23, 1933 I was walking home from my new school that only served my kind of people. Suddenly I saw these tall men in brown uniforms looking at me. One of them told the other, in a whisper, “I wonder how that little Jewish boys head would be for a ball.” When I heard that I started running, thus I heard the two tall brown shirt men laughing. Suddenly there was this crowd of people and a man yelling, “The Government, being resolved to undertake the political and moral purification of our public life, is creating and securing the conditions necessary for a really profound revival of religious life!” (Hitler 1933). Suddenly everyone started to cheer and throw up their right hand and yell, “SIEG HEIL!” I followed suit so I could just fit in. September 15, 1935 Today was not a good day, my sister left us a year ago from this day, and we have not heard from her since. I hope she is ok. Nevertheless, I was listening to the radio, and a man named Göring was talking, I remember one thing he said, “Jews are forbidden to fly the Reich or national flag or display Reich colors. (Nuremberg 1935)” My parents were in fear and later that day we moved out of our home, and went far away from Berlin to our summer home in 4 Hamburg. At least I had a day where I was not hated for who I was because no one was around... I miss my sister... I miss her dearly... I hope she is ok... September 15, 1935 Today was a good day, though I had something happen to me today. I went to get a pail of water from the well just outside our home. There I saw another little boy; his name was Benji. Benji is like me, he too is a Jew. We played at the well all day and had fun. We played catch, threw water at each other, and played hide and seek. Though when we were playing hide and seek I thought it would be funny to put the pail of water behind him while he was the seeker. Though I came to learn it was not a good thing. Benji did trip over it and cried a lot after falling. But he looked at me after his tears cleared up and said, “I forgive you Joseph!” I did not even ask to be forgave but I look at it now and it in all it was a silly little accident. November 10, 1938 Everything is losted... My momma I found her half naked in our kitchen dead... My papa severely broken both physically and mentally. And our lovely summer house was destroyed... I went for a walk today and looked at what all these Nazi bastard did... stores broken, wounded and injured everywhere, piles upon piles of smoldering books littered every street corner. It is as if the cold hard ground turned into broken crystals overnight. People are calling last night Kristallnacht, the night of broken glass... I heard from my sister though... she is in a place called Dallas, Texas, working at an airplane factory. She is doing all right, but I can't tell her what happened to momma... the screaming, the blood curdling screaming kept me awake in the 5 cellar all night. Men laughing and feet shuffling. One man told some other person, “MOVE! My turn with this Jewish whore!” I just want to die.... As if all is lost.... What did I do to deserve this g-d! Why are you not helping me! Why g-d did you not protect us! January 20, 1942 My papa and I were at a train station, in Hamburg. Many people were in fact at this station. The air was thick of dense smoke from the trains, and everyone marched by the beat of the dog’s bark. I wore this yellow star on my shirt. I never understood why I had to but I did. All of us were in line at the station. Then an order was given to put us in these cattle cars. They started pushing us in, shoving us into this small car that was meant for cattle. There was at least 200 people in our car. No one could move. Suddenly they closed the car and I heard a faint locking sound. The whistle of the train went off three times, then a sudden jolt moved everyone in the car back and forth. Slowly the train chugged. My papa looked at me with a smile and told me, “Everything will be alright Joseph stick close to me.” I grasped my Papas hand and held on tight. I looked around and noticed a small window with thick barbed wire, and old straw laid beneath our feet covering the floor. I noticed a small bucket in the corner of the car, which was for us to do our business in. I was getting tired and wanted to lay down, but to only realize that we were packed in so tightly there was no room for me to lay down. The car smelt of putrefied death and to which seeped deep in my clothes. We were in this car for at least forty-three hours. Pitch dark, the angel of death watching over us, and the cries and sorrow filled the air till we got to the next station. 6 We finally stopped and the doors swung open. I was blinded by the light and only saw tall dark shadows yelling at us to move. Coming out of the car, I was overwhelmed with the bustling confusion, and tried to find my papa. I cried out for his name, multiple times, to only be pulled out of the horde by a soldier. While being pulled away, I turned my head to my left shoulder, and notice the lifeless body that was my father being dragged out of the car and being put on a cart with the dead. The soldier threw me in line with a bunch of people. I looked around and all I saw was large barbed wire fences, and a sign that read, “Arbeit Macht Frei” in black cold metal. I noticed this grey snow falling on me as well and a smell of burning pig fat. I looked around a bit more and noticed these large chimneys bellowing out thick dark smoke. But I could not help to notice the stench of rancid meat burning that burned my nostrils. Soon I saw a doctor in a white coat, he smiled at me and asked how old I was. I told him I was 14, then he raised his hand and flicked his finger to the left. I was in the left of the line, but I had this sudden urge that made me move over to the right while the guards were not paying attention. I looked behind me and I saw a family approaching the same doctor. They had a small child, and both parents seemed as if they did not to want to let go of their baby. So the doctor ordered two soldiers to grab the small innocent baby by the legs, and gave the order to pull. Suddenly an older man who was next to me made me turn my head admittedly and said, “You must live on and never forget.” We came to a building where we were stripped of our clothing and belongings, I managed to sneak my journal in through means to which I shall not disclose. We were given a black and white striped uniform and ordered to put them on. Than we were sent to another 7 section of the building, to which our heads were shaved and our arms branded. It hurt... It hurt so much for five numbers, mine was 43329. I was not longer Joseph, I was 43329. July 27, 1942 I finally found a working pencil... Finally, I can write and escape to a place that is not like this. We are crammed in like sardines in our bunks, there is a pail to defecate in but if you get out of your bed you are beaten... so each night we do not sleep in cotton beds... we sleep on cold, hard wooden soaked excrement beds. It is something I have accepted. There was a large population of mice when I go here but now they are gone, as well many souls’ hopes and dreams. Hunger is replaced by pain. Sorrow is replaced with hopelessness, and failure is replaced with death. Death is what I have grown accustom here at Auschwitz. Hundreds of thousands die each day. They starve us, give us dieses, they make us worthless. Each day the work detail is sent out but when they return it is only with a large number missing. The ground here is stained in blood... It is not mud that the ground is made of, it is made out of the blood and tears of all of us here. I am the lucky few though. I work in a place called Canada, where we sort out the items of former people’s belongings. You are treated better in Canada because you can eat there and eat the food that the unfortunate souls bring with them. That is what I keep telling myself though.... I was lucky....... I am the lucky ones...... though that is not true... it is not luck that has gotten me through the few painful months here, it is the will to live, the will to never give up, the hope that one day I will see my sister again and be liberated from the chains of my oppressor. Though I can only hope.... 8 I found out today what left meant when I first arrived... you were sent to your death... Certain death... the soldiers called it taking a shower... They tried to noise dampen the chamber but you can still hear the screams of pain and mercy every hour on the hour... it is a faint whisper in the wind that you hear that... I do not want to die... I don't want to die! I want my mother. I want my father! I want to not be hungry! I want to not be a Jew! January 19, 1945 Three years since I last wrote... it is only now I have the strength just to write a bit... My clothes are just pieces of rags... My body is just skin and bones... But I had something interesting happen to me today that I must write... I was working in the garden of one of the homes of the officers here at the camp, suddenly a SS soldier grabbed me by the neck and said, “with me vermin” I thought my days were numbered so I did not fight back since I no longer have that will... He dragged me into the house and upstairs to the master's bedroom. Than the soldier threw me on the ground and the officer, who once was my best friend looked at me and said, “It’s been some time Joseph.” I looked at him and said, “Hans?” to which he replied, “*cough* Yes it’s me... I am dying Joseph and I learned through the camp archives you are here, so I asked for you to be brought to Me.”, Filled with rage I said, “I hate you.... Look at what you have done to me!!!!!!” Hans, while coughing said, “I know... but please I need you to listen to me, first please eat.” I looked over to where he was pointing his finger and saw, fresh grapes, sliced meat, and some water that was set for me. I was overcome with joy for that moment I could not remember the last time when I tasted fresh water. Hans said, “Eat, eat up, you will need it.” I replied with my mouth stuffed, “Why am I here Hans? Why me? Why?” Hans replied, 9 “Joseph, I am dying and my soul is haunted with the atrocities that I did. I was in command of a battalion in a small town near Kiev. We had orders to round up all the Jews and place them into a church. We collected 300 women, children, and men. When the church was filled I ordered for chains to be placed on all the doors and to which followed the order to light the church a blaze. The church caught on fire and all you can hear was the screams of the children, women, and men fill the air. Some tried to jump out the window which my men at the time were ordered to kill anyone trying to escape.” I stopped eating, my heart was filled with rage, and I said, “WHY HANS!” Hans replied, “I was an irresponsible leader... I regret what I have done, I sentenced women, children, and men to their deaths and I need to atone for what I have done.... Joseph please forgive me...” (Wiesenthal, 1976, p.65) Introduction My thesis is that the usual claim that forgiving requires forgetting needs to be clarified. I will explore the relation between forgiving and forgetting. Can a person forgive and not forget? Or can a person forgive only if that person forgets? Or more generally, I want to explore the conditions that are necessary for performing a successful act of forgiving. Surely, just saying “I forgive you” is not sufficient. I must be sincere, and you must accept apology. We need to be clear about what the act of forgiveness involves. The story of Joseph I have recounted is a test case in my effort to get clear about the relation between forgiving and forgetting. This approach is going to resist the pressure of two dominant approaches to forgiveness. They are: forgive and forget, commonly known as “wiping the slate clean”, and forgive and remember, commonly known as forgiving someone and still holding onto a memory. 10 Starting out with cases in which forgive and forget is appropriate, which will be conceived more in depth later in the paper, is to look at pardons. In Strawson’s Freedom and Resentment Strawson lays out what is considered a pardon. In cases such as, a person walking by and accidentally spilling coffee on you, or does an action with no intent to warrant resentment, forgiving them is considered forgive and forget; Take the case of Joseph playing a joke with his new friend. Clearly Joseph did not intent to harm his new friend rather just to have a good time. Though putting the bucket behind his friend caused his friend to fall, did warrant resentment, but it was not the case because the intent was not to cause harm, rather to have fun, which his friend did say, in short, “forget about it”. In cases like this, pardons allow resentment to not have a foothold in forgiveness. Glen Pettigrove is to be noted in this case, by pardons taking forum as performative utterance such as “don't worry about it,” “I forgive you,” and/or “Oh! Forget about it.” this speech act does the work involved for forgiving or pardoning someone in cases of minor offences/wrongs (Pettigrove, 2004, p. 381). Now looking at cases when it would be appropriate to forgive and remember is a difficult task, but nevertheless we do it all the time. Remembering has two approaches, according to Charles Griswold, one approach to remembering is to hold onto retributive feelings towards the wrongdoer. Such as in the case of Joseph; Joseph without a doubt holds onto retributive feelings towards his oppressor in which he wants to cause harm to his wrongdoer and punish them for their injustice (Griswold, 2007, p. 38). Another approach to remembering is to let the memory consume you and be a part of who you are. In such as having a car accident, in which you go through having the said accident but you forgive the person(s) responsible for it yet still remember it (Griswold, 2007, p. 38). The second part of remembering 11 is considered to be more on the lines of forgiveness because the victim in this case has forsworn the resentment out of the goodwill for the other agent, yet still remembers what happens (Strawson, 2011, p. 6). My defense maybe more attuned to forgive and remember by dissing resentment and hold to the memory, which I can assure you is not the case. My approach to this manner is looking at the story of Joseph and other cases in this paper, by claiming that there are cases that one cannot give up their retributive feelings as well their memories, but in order to remain authentic, in an existentialist view, is to ritualize the memory, in such that one way is to bury the memory in a shallow grave so that the victim/wrongdoer is not consumed with retributive feelings to the point that it degrades their individualism. With this view I approach it through the lens of ordinary language by primarily looking at how J.L Austin, and Strawson use forgiveness and making a crucial distinction that both forgive and forget, and forgive and remember are: 1) being missed used in our ordinary language; 2) Cannot be held as a universal truth to approach forgiveness; 3) Forgiveness has to be looked at a case to case view in order to understand what kind of forgiveness is needed. The story which my paper opens with is a fictional character with nonfiction events. The story is inspired by Simon Wiesthals’ The Sunflower, as well my understanding, from childhood until now, what events took place during the Shoah. The story does seem to have an aim by provoking whether or not forgiveness is warranted when your oppressor asks for it, though I urge you not to think of whether or not Joseph ought to forgive Hans rather look at the ways that Joseph could forgive Hans, which this paper will reflect heavily on. 12 Response I In the realm of forgiveness, two dominating themes seem to occur in our ordinary language. Forgive and remember, and forgive and forget. Forgive and remember is by which the victim remembers the wrong doer’s action and harbors retributive feelings. Forgive and forget is where the victim “wipes the slate clean.” For instance, if someone bumped into you by accident, you forgive them and carry on with your day; or someone hurts you, in a manner that warrants resentment and you don't forget about the individual, but still utter, “I forgive you.” Both have issues just by themselves though we, as individuals, still direct our use of “I forgive you” to such manner. However, there is something off with this and very strange that warrants an investigation. How does one forgive, in the story particular, a Nazi? Or in another way how can someone forgive an act that leaves a mark on them? I argue that there are times in certain cases that it is better to bury it in a shallow grave. Though to understand what I mean by that, we have to look at different philosopher’s approach to language. Freedom and Resentment by, P.F. Strawson contains a small section on forgiveness. Though this not being Strawson’s main thesis, this has warranted an investigation to understand the role that resentment and memory share. For Strawson, “...to forgive is to accept the repudiation and to forswear the resentment” (Strawson, 2011, p. 6). Thus this establishes what this paper will be aiming against, in such that it is a fact that in order to forgive one ought to forget. Thus poses the dilemma in which my aim is to show that one ought to, in a crude sense, bury it in a shallow grave. For starters the air must be cleared about the aim for Strawson. In this excerpt: To ask to be forgiven is in part to acknowledge that the attitude displayed in our actions was such as a might properly be resented and in part to repudiate that attitude for the 13 future (or at least for the immediate future); and to forgive is to accept the repudiation and to forswear the resentment (Strawson, 2011, p. 6). You can see that (1) the individual must acknowledge the attitude shown in the action, and (2) in order for the individual to complete the act of forgiveness they have to let go of the resentment. The action warranted resentment, the wrongdoer apologized for their actions, and out of goodwill, the victim forgave the wrongdoer. Let’s take this a step further in such what if the individual forgave a person out of resentment? There are a few issues with this, especially the way “plea” is being used in this case which Strawson addressed. First and foremost, pleas do not invite the individual to suspend the reactive attitudes towards the other individual (Strawson, 2011, p. 9). Instead they invite us to view the agent in a different light from the light which should normally view one who has acted as they acted (Strawson, 2011, p. 9). In the case of Joseph, we can establish that Han’s is making a plea for forgiveness, which does require a suspension of Joseph’s retributive feelings in order to fulfill Strawson’s requirements of forgiving someone out of goodwill. With forgiving someone out of gratitude it is most applicable to say that the type of forgiveness is considered to be “forgive and forget.” Forgiving someone out of resentment is considered to be “Forgive and remember.” Both are valid ways of forgiveness but require a deeper investigation to really see what can be said about forgiveness in particular cases. I want to make something extremely clear at this point in the paper, this is not Strawson’s main thesis in Freedom and Resentment. Rather I am exposing something quite dark and quite sinister that has plagued the conversations surrounding forgiveness. The two dominating doctrines in forgiveness is, forgive and forget, and forgive and remember. Strawson is using forgiveness as an example to show how determinism falters, but Strawson is also 14 showing a view on forgiveness that is only applicable to certain cases. For instance, let’s take the story of Joseph. Joseph is left with two options either to forgive Hans or not to forgive Hans. Though let’s say, for the sake of arguing, that Joseph forgives Hans. Alright, two options in this case is to forgive out of gratitude or forgive out of resentment. If it was the case that Joseph forgives out of gratitude, and we follow through with Strawson’s conditions, in order to do so Joseph must forswear his resentment. This poses an issue of memory in relation to resentment it can be the case that, in order to let go of resentment, one has to give up the memory of the event that is tied with resentment. In the case of Joseph, it maybe a little hard to do so since he has been through a bit. Though I will not deny that it can be the case that you do not need to let go of the memory that is tide to resentment, however I do believe it is highly unlikely that you can, due to the severity of the case. If Joseph forgave Hans out of resentment this poses an issue since it violates Strawson’s condition of what forgiveness is, though I agree with Strawson that if it was the case that someone said, “He said he was sorry but he did not mean it” and for the sake of arguing we say the person whom ever said that did out of resentment but tries to pass it on for the goodwill of both. I will state that no act of forgiveness was committed. In that case the language is doing nothing at all, in such that when someone is saying, “they said X but did not mean X” they effectively did not say anything at all due to the relationship with words and meanings. So, if it was the case that Joseph forgave Hans out of resentment: 1) He would be doing it out of forgive and remember, and 2) The act of forgiveness was not carried out. Though this poses a dilemma for our dear Joseph, is there some salvation at the end of this dark abyss? 15 Let's be honest here, life changing events are impossible to forget, you would not forget your child’s birth, or the time you got that acceptance letter to whichever institute, unless something happened to your memory (e.g. stroke), you would not forget who raped you, you would try but it will always be a part of you. So what is the issue here? Well first I am not advocating for a universal term on what forgiveness ought to be, rather it must be a case by case examination. Though for cases as such you see universal ideas such as forgive and forget or forgive and remember being applied to such cases which poses an issue for how we say “I forgive you.” There are such cases that warrant different approaches to forgiveness. In minor cases such as bumping into someone or breaking something on accident does warrants respect to what Strawson’s concept of forgiveness considerers. There are other cases as shown that if we stuck to the common practices that plague the logic of forgiveness, and by applying Strawson's idea, we run into multiple issues. But for those issue there is something to say, that can save Strawson’s claim. Rather applying the notions of forgive and forget and forgive and remember, it seems only proper to approach such extreme cases as forgive and memorialize. Thus allowing to give up resentment as well remembering what has happened in order to better one’s self. I am not making this as a universal claim rather this seems like a way out for Strawson in such extreme cases as a rape case, or a Shoah case. Maybe it would be appropriate to say that cases like Joseph’s, that at times in order to forgive you must recognize that the wrongdoer who is asking forgiveness, is showing their resentment of their actions. Thus at times, such with Joseph, one might harbor resentment it would seem appropriate to recognize that the wrongdoer is showing resentment for their 16 actions and forgiveness is warranted. Though this being the case in which Joseph still harbors resentment, Joseph must create this into a ritual in which he can surrender his resentment and yet keep his in memory so that, (1) he can better his actions towards the future, and (2) the people who were murdered were not forgotten, thus allowing Strawson to keep the view of letting go of resentment as well not posing the issue of completely forgetting a tragic event that shapes one’s life. Response II In forgiveness someone bears responsibility for their actions, and usually atone for their sins. Though at times individuals will try to weasel out of their responsibility and either give a justification or an excuse. Austin looks into this by coming from an ordinary language approach to moral philosophy and claims that when someone uses a justification or an excuse, they are in a situation where they are being accused of doing something. Thus the individual will try to defend their conduct or try to get themselves out of it (Austin, 1962, p. 176). By this, Austin is setting the premise of what to expect from the individual, which the individual will either admit the wrong but argue that it was a good thing or sensible thing to do (Austin, 1962, p. 176). Austin provides another example in which the individual admits the action was not good at all but argues that it was not his fault rather he was under the influence of someone else to cause him to do said action (Austin, 1962, p. 176). Thus Austin establishes that in one case “we accept 17 responsibility but deny that it was bad: in the other, we admit that it was bad but don’t accept full, or even any, responsibility” (Austin, 1962, p. 176). Austin claims we confuse both justification and excuse and do not use the terms carefully enough (Austin, 1962, p. 176). Austin looks into justification and excuse by tracking responsibility. For instance, an excuse for Austin allows the individual to evade responsibility and in short, by doing such, “the average excuse, in a poor situation, gets us only out of the fire into the frying pan” (Austin, 1962, p. 177). To give an example of an excuse, I was in an accident in which someone was trying to pull me out of a ditch, I thought I heard someone say “go,” so I backed up into the person who was trying to pull me out. In this little example I used an excuse and try to “justify” my action of why I backed up into the person pulling me out, so that I could avoid the responsibility. If I was going to approach it from a justification standpoint, I would have needed someone to say “GO!” and have solid evidence that it was the case that someone said “go” and I am not at fault. Thus allowing myself to say I was justified by backing up and it was the person who was pulling me out who is at fault. Though this was not the case at all since for starters there was no clear evidence that showed no one said the word “go.” By saying I heard someone saying the word “go,” and no one to support my claim, the assertion of saying someone said “go,” was an excuse. Here is another application of someone misusing justification. During the Eichmann trials, Adolf Eichmann claimed that he had no choice but to follow orders and that he was 18 bound by an oath of loyalty. The Israeli court challenged Eichmann’s claim by saying that Eichmann was still in charge of the deportation of Jews and non-Jewish individuals, as well as the transportation from ghettos to concentration camps, and in charge of Operation Reinhardt. In such that, at any point of his position, he could've stopped any of the actions and prevented the death of millions. In fact, in Eichmann’s pardon plea, that was just released this year, stated, “There is a need to draw a line between the leaders responsible and the people like me forced to serve as a mere instruments in the hands of the leaders... I was not a responsible leader, and as such do not feel myself guilty” (Kershner, 2016). With a distinction of what an excuse looks like, it is easier to establish what a case of the use of a justification is. A student is asked to write a paper, and the teacher gives the requirements of what this paper shall consist. Oddly enough one of the requirements is to explain why Hitler had a just cause in murdering millions of individuals. A student opposes this and gives the case that this paper does not align with their beliefs and promotes harmful, racist views. The student is not making an excuse by no means in fact he is providing a justification on why he is not doing the writing assignment. Justification, in relationship with this example, shows that of the word to show an act of something right or reasonable. I want to understand more closely the distinction that Austin has made between justification and excuse. Looking back at Austin, excuses, seems to only get you out of the fire and into the frying pan, as previously stated by him. At first it seems odd to ask for forgiveness 19 and give a reason why you did your action while still making it your fault. It is not out of the norm to do so, in such by provoking the act of forgiveness and giving an explanation that ‘justifies’ or defends the wrongdoers action. An example of this is a person who says, “Please forgive me for shooting your daughter, it was either her or both of us and I was forced to choose.” Looking at this more closely, it is hard to come up with a sentence with some kind of justification in the realm of forgiveness, saying such as, “Please forgive me for killing your daughter, I had no other choice, because someone held a gun to my head.” This does give a reason to allow a justification to hold a place in forgiveness. Since the way forgiveness is being used it not considered just forgiveness but also reconciliation, in which the individual is trying to restore a relation with someone, and to stop having retributive feelings towards the wrongdoer. This leads to be said that without forgiveness you cannot have reconciliation, and it seems more prevalent in this case when applying a justification to forgiveness. Now pulling away from justification and moving onto excuse in forgiveness, when someone says, “please ‘pardon’ my behavior last night for I was tired”. You can see the distinction being made from the previous way a justification was being used in forgiveness. Harking back to Austin, the individual is using this plea as an excuse, which again, giving away their responsibility in hopes they are not held fully responsible. Pulling from a recent experience, I recently met someone who fell victim of being raped. She told me she and this 20 ‘friend’ were drinking, and she got too drunk. He, being not heavily intoxicated (according to people around her), made sexual advances to her and raped her. The next day her wrongdoer texted her saying that he was sorry that he raped her and he was drunk and did not know what he was doing. In short the dude is saying, “forgive me for raping you I was drunk.” Using the distinctions mentioned earlier, in regards with justifications and excuses the question in mind of did Hans create a justification or an excuse. Looking back at the story it seems to me that it is the case that Hans made a justification on why he is asking for forgiveness. Which looking at how he is asking Joseph, Hans is asking for forgiveness on the bases to have a clear continuous and to do what is right. It crucial that when looking at this story, do not focus on how Joseph should act, rather what is happening when the act of forgiveness is being provoked. Response III What are we doing when I say, “I forgive you” never the less when I say “I promise,” Austin thinks those are performative utterances. The ones that I just mentioned are examples of explicit performative utterances but that will be explained later in this section. Why is this important, even so why does it matter in the realm of forgiveness? Well there is something peculiar when someone says “I do,” “I apologize,” and “I name this ship the XYZ.” Austin points that out by saying such words, the individual is not merely saying something, rather the 21 individual is doing something (Austin, 1961, p. 235). To which he calls theses Performative Utterances, and lays out the conditions for what Austin defines as “performatives”: (1) Performative Utterances are neither true or false statements and are not truth-evaluable (Austin, 1961, p. 235), (2) Uttering a performative is doing a certain kind of action to which the performance of said utterance would not “normally” be described by “saying” or “describing” something (Austin, 1961, p. 235-6). This also brings up illocutionary acts for Austin in which: “(1) the performance of which I must make it clear to some other person that the act is performed and (2) the performance of which involves the production of conventional consequences.” (Austin, 1962, pp. 121-23) The importance of this particular placement is to show that promise making is very similar to forgiveness, in such when making a promise is to be considered an illocutionary act and that the individual is being a part or is part of an act of promise making. The same goes with forgiveness, when someone is saying, “I am sorry” or “Please forgive me.” Though it is worthy to note that in relation to promise making, if a promise is not carried out the end result is to lead to unhappiness. Same thing with forgiveness; if forgiveness fails to be carried out, it ends with unhappiness. This is the crux of my argument that if the conditions of either forgive and forget, or forgive and remember are not fulfilled then what does the victim/wrongdoer do? I propose in certain cases that the victim/wrongdoer has to, in a crude sense, bury it in a shallow grave, in order to achieve a form of forgiveness. 22 Looking at Joseph’s story, it would be hard for one to forget the memory and the retributive feelings towards the wrongdoer in order to forgive, as well to remember the memories and the resentment. In cases of higher degree such as the one in the story, it seems the appropriate response would be to bury it in a shallow grave. Because many factors are playing in that hinder the individual to complete the act of forgiveness, such as the question does the wrongdoer really mean that they are sorry, or just uttering meaningless words? It seems to be an issue with forgiveness that there is this need for conditions to be fulfilled to which to be treated as truth/false valued knowledge. It is not the case since in comparing both promise making and forgiveness there is no need for truth/false value rather unhappy/happy. Conclusion I have approached forgiveness in two ways: One way is philosophy of language, which is part of the backbone of my paper, and the other way is through Existentialism. It is important for an individual to be authentic with themselves and others, otherwise one will live a life in despair and torment. The Shoah story does not end with how Joseph handles the holocaust after liberation. Matter of fact it provokes whether or not he should forgive Hans. But there is a point that I am making, if Joseph forgave Hans there must be a way for Joseph to remain authentic to himself in respect to the act of forgiveness. Joseph, and anyone in his position, cannot, unless something happens to alter it, forget the horrors he went through. Something 23 like that is life changing, and calls for a different use of forgiveness where one buries the past in a shallow grave in order not to be consumed by it. Even today the Jewish community is still affected by the Shoah yet we have a holiday which once a year we come together as a community and remember the 11 million individuals who were murdered by the Nazi regime. I do not think burying your memory in a shallow grave is the absolute for something like this. Rather I think that it is one approach to take when looking at particular cases in forgiveness. Because depending how we use forgiveness in the contexts that I have laid out, it does allow the individual to seek happiness and satisfaction even if forgiveness is not “completed”. This gives the victim, and probably the wrongdoer, another way to retain being authentic and “completing” the act of forgiveness, with relating it to promise making, the result is ‘happy’. I end with this in response to Simon Wiesenthal The Sunflower: You have to do what is best for you, you live with the demons no matter what you do, though I urge one thing out of the most of all: be true to yourself. 24 Citation Austin, J. L. Philosophical Papers. A Plea for Excuses, 1st ed. Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon, 1961. Print. Austin, J. L. Philosophical Papers. Performative Utterances, 1st ed. Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon, 1961. Print. Austin, J. L. How to Do Things with Words. 2nd ed. Vol. 1. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1962. Print. Griswold, Charles L., 2007, Forgiveness: A Philosophical Exploration, New York: Cambridge University Press. Hitler, Adlof. “Speech of March 23,1933.”, 23 March 1933, Reichstag, Berlin, Germany. "Translation: Nuremberg Race Laws". Holocaust Encyclopedia. United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Retrieved 6 March 2015. Kershner, Isabel (27 January 2016). "Pardon Plea by Adolf Eichmann, Nazi War Criminal, Is Made Public". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 28 January 2016 Pettigrove, Glen, 2004, “The Forgiveness We Speak: The Illocutionary Force of Forgiving,” The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 42(3): 381. Strawson, P. F., Galen Strawson, and Michelle Montague. Philosophical Writings. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2011. Print. Wiesenthal, Simon. The Sunflower. New York: Schocken, 1976. Print.