Forgiving Others

When actions are beyond one's control, punishment is illogical.

The Fallacy of Deserved Suffering

Throughout your life, you've likely carried resentments, grudges, and judgments against those who have harmed, disappointed, or betrayed you. These negative feelings rest on a fundamental assumption: that the people who hurt you could have done otherwise—that they freely chose their harmful actions and therefore deserve your anger, resentment, or punishment.

This assumption isn't just philosophically incorrect—it's the source of enormous unnecessary suffering. If you've been following this course, you already understand that free will is an illusion. No one chooses their actions in any meaningful sense. Behavior is the inevitable result of genetics, past experiences, current circumstances, and countless other factors outside anyone's control.

This recognition transforms our relationship with those who harm us. If their actions were determined—if they literally could not have done otherwise given who they were and the circumstances they faced—then resentment becomes as logical as being angry at gravity when you fall, or blaming the rain for getting you wet.

The Reality of Determined Behavior

To understand why forgiveness is the only logical response to harm, we must first recognize how human behavior actually emerges:

The person who betrayed your trust didn't choose to be untrustworthy. Their behavior was the inevitable result of their genetic predispositions, childhood experiences that shaped their attachment patterns, past situations that reinforced certain responses, and current circumstances that triggered predetermined reactions.

The colleague who undermined you didn't choose to be competitive or insecure. These traits and the behaviors they generate were installed by factors entirely outside their control—perhaps parents who only valued achievement, experiences that created scarcity mindsets, or neurological wiring that produces heightened threat responses.

The partner who cheated didn't choose their impulses or the weaknesses that led to acting on them. Their behavior emerged from a complex interplay of evolutionary programming, attachment patterns formed in childhood, neurochemical responses they didn't create, and specific circumstances they didn't arrange.

In each case, the harmful behavior wasn't freely chosen but inevitably expressed given the person's specific configuration of causal factors. They quite literally could not have done otherwise in that moment with that brain in those circumstances.

The Practical Incoherence of Blame

The belief that others deserve to suffer for their harmful actions isn't just philosophically incorrect—it's practically incoherent. Consider what blame actually implies:

Counterfactual Assumption - Blame assumes the person could have acted differently given the exact same causal factors—an impossibility in a determined world.
Magical Thinking - Blame suggests the person could have somehow transcended their genetics, neural wiring, past experiences, and current triggers to make a different "choice."
Punishment Logic - Blame implies that causing suffering to someone who has caused suffering somehow balances the cosmic ledger—a notion with no basis in causal reality.

The person holding a grudge against a parent who failed them isn't making a philosophical error—they're engaging in magical thinking that defies how causality actually operates. The parent, given their specific configuration of causal factors, could not possibly have parented differently than they did.

Practical Techniques for Deterministic Forgiveness

The Causal Biography Practice

When someone harms you, mentally construct their causal biography—the factors that inevitably led to their harmful behavior:

What genetic predispositions might influence their tendencies?
What childhood experiences likely shaped their patterns?
What cultural messages were they exposed to?
What recent circumstances might have triggered their behavior?

This practice doesn't excuse harmful behavior or suggest you should remain in harmful situations. It simply recognizes the determined nature of the person's actions. The abusive partner isn't choosing to be abusive—they're expressing patterns installed by factors outside their control. This recognition doesn't mean staying in the relationship (your self-protective responses are equally determined) but removes the additional suffering of believing they could have chosen differently.

The Parallel Development Meditation

Imagine how you would have developed and behaved if you had the exact same causal factors as the person who harmed you:

If you had their exact genetic makeup
If you had lived through their precise experiences
If you had received their specific cultural programming
If you faced their exact circumstances and triggers

This meditation reveals a profound truth: if you had their exact causal factors, you would have inevitably acted exactly as they did. The recognition that you would have been them under identical causal conditions doesn't create sympathy through emotional connection but through factual recognition of how behavior actually emerges.

The Resentment Inventory

Examine the resentments you carry and the suffering they create for you:

How does this resentment affect your physical state?
What emotional energy does maintaining this grudge require?
How does this blame narrative limit your perspective?
What opportunities does this resentment prevent you from exploring?

This inventory doesn't create choice about whether to forgive (impossible) but reveals the causal relationship between resentment and your own suffering. The person who recognizes how blame narratives inevitably generate their own suffering doesn't choose to forgive but discovers that forgiveness emerges naturally from this recognition.

The Deterministic Reframing Exercise

Take a specific harmful action that someone performed and reframe it in deterministic language:

From "They chose to lie to me" to "Their brain, given its specific configuration of causal factors, inevitably generated dishonest communication"
From "They decided to betray my trust" to "Their predetermined patterns, triggered by specific circumstances, inevitably produced behavior that violated expectations"
From "They wanted to hurt me" to "Their actions, determined by factors outside their control, coincidentally caused me suffering"

This reframing doesn't change what happened but transforms your relationship with it. The harmful behavior remains harmful, but your understanding of its causal nature removes the additional suffering that comes from believing it was freely chosen and therefore deserving of your ongoing resentment.

Case Study: The Betrayal of Trust

Consider Michael, who discovered his business partner had been secretly diverting company funds. From a free will perspective, Michael's partner made a reprehensible choice deserving of anger, punishment, and permanent distrust. From a deterministic perspective, the partner's behavior was the inevitable expression of causal factors entirely outside their control.

After practicing deterministic forgiveness, Michael didn't excuse the behavior or continue the partnership (his self-protective responses were equally determined). But he recognized that his partner's actions emerged from a specific configuration of causal factors—perhaps financial pressures they didn't create, psychological patterns installed in childhood, risk assessment abilities limited by their neural wiring, and specific circumstances that triggered predetermined responses.

This recognition didn't prevent Michael from taking necessary legal actions to protect himself (these responses were determined by his own causal factors). But it freed him from the additional suffering of believing his partner could have acted differently and therefore deserved his ongoing resentment. Michael's forgiveness didn't erase the harm but prevented that harm from creating additional suffering through blame narratives.

The Paradoxical Benefits of Deterministic Forgiveness

Perhaps the most counterintuitive aspect of deterministic forgiveness is how it can improve outcomes in situations involving harm. By recognizing the determined nature of others' behavior, you create conditions where your predetermined responses can emerge from clarity rather than reactive anger.

The person who recognizes that their colleague's undermining behavior was determined rather than chosen doesn't necessarily become more tolerant of the behavior (their self-protective responses are equally determined). But they become more strategic and less emotionally reactive in addressing the situation. Their responses emerge from accurate understanding of causal factors rather than from the distorting lens of blame.

This isn't choosing different responses (impossible) but removing the distortion that blame creates in your predetermined reactions. The determined system that is you will inevitably respond more effectively to situations you see clearly than to situations obscured by inaccurate blame narratives.

The Liberation of Causal Understanding

There's a profound liberation in recognizing that those who harm you couldn't have done otherwise. This recognition doesn't create passive acceptance of harmful behavior—your self-protective responses are equally determined and will emerge as they must. But it releases you from the additional suffering that comes from believing others freely choose to harm you and therefore deserve your ongoing resentment.

The person who understands that their abusive parent couldn't have parented differently given their causal factors doesn't necessarily restore the relationship (their self-protective boundaries are equally determined). But they free themselves from the ongoing pain of believing their parent chose to harm them when they could have chosen love.

This liberation doesn't require emotional warmth toward those who harm you. Deterministic forgiveness isn't about generating positive feelings but about recognizing causal reality. You can maintain complete emotional neutrality toward someone while still recognizing the determined nature of their harmful actions.

Forgiveness Without Reconciliation

It's crucial to distinguish deterministic forgiveness from reconciliation or continued relationship. Recognizing that someone's harmful behavior was determined doesn't mean you should remain in situations where that predetermined behavior will continue to harm you.

The partner who recognizes their spouse's abusive behavior is determined rather than chosen doesn't necessarily stay in the relationship. Their self-protective responses are equally determined and may inevitably lead to separation. The forgiveness lies not in maintaining the relationship but in recognizing the causal nature of the harmful behavior.

This distinction is particularly important because deterministic forgiveness applies even in cases of the most severe harm. The victim of violence who recognizes their attacker's behavior was determined by factors outside their control isn't choosing to excuse the behavior or prevent consequences. They're simply recognizing the causal reality that the person couldn't have acted differently given their specific configuration of causal factors.

Next Steps

In our next lesson, "What Anxiety Is Trying to Tell You," we'll explore how anxiety about lack of control can be reframed as accurate information about your actual condition. We'll examine how recognizing that anxiety has no bearing on outcomes can transform your relationship with this inevitable emotional state.

Remember: You didn't choose to read this lesson, and you won't choose whether to forgive those who have harmed you. But recognizing the determined nature of others' behavior might inevitably free you from the additional suffering that comes from believing they could have done otherwise. Isn't that a curious comfort?