[HN Gopher] Refusing to apologize can have psychological benefit...
___________________________________________________________________
Refusing to apologize can have psychological benefits (2012)
Author : bookofjoe
Score : 101 points
Date : 2022-04-03 12:26 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
| servytor wrote:
| You need to apologize in your head. You have to talk about how
| sorry you are in your head. If you are going through something,
| you have to apologize for it in your head. If you have trouble
| apologizing in your head, for whatever reason, just write down
| the apology on a piece of paper.
|
| I apologize all the time out loud. For my whole life, I have
| almost never apologized in my head. I like apologizing out loud
| when I am wrong or have insulted, because I see it as a chance at
| righting a wrong. But until recently I have never apologized in
| my head. Not because I don't like doing it, but because of some
| sort of mental block that affects my ability to form an inner
| monologue.
|
| An 'inner universe' empty of thought and apologies is a huge
| personal liability. Trust me.
|
| Just google what I quoted and have some imagination.
| joeman1000 wrote:
| Your first paragraph is scary.
| [deleted]
| cato_the_elder wrote:
| Yet another reason to never apologize to the mob.
| traq10 wrote:
| "In two empirical studies, we examined the unexplored
| psychological consequences that follow from a harm-doer's
| explicit refusal to apologize."
|
| In most cases there is no single harm-doer. In one-on-one
| relationships, one party can nag for a long time until the other
| party explodes verbally.
|
| In group settings a group can harass, obstruct and libel an
| individual until that individual explodes.
|
| You need the full background, which is missing in modern mob
| justice, because the individual is de-platformed and shamed
| without an opportunity for clarification.
| KarlKemp wrote:
| Yes, I'm sure Alex Jones had some very good reason to hatefully
| accuse the parents of murdered children of staging the event,
| the funeral, and their professions of greed.
|
| And that Milo whatshisname guy, he certainly had some totally
| legit justification to say that he "can't wait for vigilante
| squads to start gunning journalists down on sight".
|
| Now I can't even think of anything that would make that remark
| seem anything other than the ramblings of a fascist lunatic,
| but we all know there are no bad people in the world, so we
| should have given him a bit more time and he would have
| certainly made his case for indiscriminate murder.
| obventio56 wrote:
| Op said "most cases"
| KarlKemp wrote:
| Oh, it must be one those terms that changes meaning to suit
| the argument. I love those terms!
|
| (FWIW I had picked the first two examples I know of from ht
| tps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deplatforming#Deplatforming_in.
| ..)
| fnlaU wrote:
| What do these examples have to do with interpersonal
| relationships or group dynamics? You are doing the same as
| cancel mobs:
|
| Take unrelated extreme examples and link them by association
| to anyone who loses their patience.
| KarlKemp wrote:
| It can either be an unrelated incident _or_ an _extreme
| example_ , not both.
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| You neither always nor never apologize.
|
| What you do is
|
| * place your own judgement above all others in deciding if an
| apology is appropriate,
|
| * take all other input, including bystanders and the plaintif, as
| nothing but advice and input of varying degrees of worthiness of
| consideration
|
| * do your honest best at that judgement and review it after some
| time to see if you still think the same thing after considering
| everything for some days, even years.
|
| * don't apoligize for following the above at all to anyone ever.
|
| That first one triggers most people into accusing you of the
| worst arrogance but seriously F anyone who demands that you be
| humble for no other reason than appearing humble. Your humble
| comes in the form of the integrity to make good when actually
| called for. You can judge the rightness of this by the fact that
| you never demand anyone else abase themselves to you, because you
| don't, _right?_
| eyelidlessness wrote:
| I'm not surprised by the specific psychological benefits
| enumerated. Speaking as someone who has struggled for much of my
| life to learn to apologize--a challenge for a variety of reasons,
| but definitely exacerbated by rejection sensitivity--that's
| exactly what refusing to apologize felt like, even if I didn't
| realize it at the time. However, this came with some pronounced
| social damage. Not to mention hurting people I care about, again
| even if I didn't realize it at the time.
|
| Learning to apologize, when I'm in the wrong or even just when
| I've mistakenly caused harm, hasn't been easy. I still have work
| to do. But it's had psychological benefits too. It's helped me
| form more stable and trusting bonds, which has had the
| unintuitive-to-younger-me benefit of assuaging my rejection
| sensitivity, and even making me feel more _secure_ in my self
| esteem. It's helped me feel I can also better trust others, and
| that I can expect the same regard when I've felt wronged.
|
| I'm not disputing anything in this study, but I think this
| perspective is also worth sharing.
| mlatu wrote:
| "Being an asshole can have benefits."
|
| Yeah, no shit.
| hnarn wrote:
| I think it's pretty important to not only read the headline, but
| also the abstract:
|
| > In two empirical studies, we examined the unexplored
| psychological consequences that follow from a harm-doer's
| explicit refusal to apologize. Results showed that the act of
| refusing to apologize resulted in greater self-esteem than not
| refusing to apologize. Moreover, apology refusal also resulted in
| increased feelings of power/control and value integrity, both of
| which mediated the effect of refusal on self-esteem. These
| findings point to potential barriers to victim-offender
| reconciliation after an interpersonal harm, highlighting the need
| to better understand the psychology of harm-doers and their
| defensive behavior for self-focused motives.
|
| Note that the "psychological benefits" mentioned here are
| completely individual: greater self-esteem, increased feelings of
| power/control, etc.
|
| This study says nothing about any "benefits" of refusing to
| apologize in a social context, i.e. whether it would improve ones
| standing among other people from a group psychology perspective,
| which a lot of comments seem to (understandably) default to
| discussing.
|
| The abstract specifically mentions these findings as being
| interesting within the context of "victim-offender
| reconciliation", i.e. understanding what keeps offenders from
| apologizing even if they are fully aware their actions were
| wrong.
|
| I think it's pretty safe to assume that the "benefits" in a
| social context would not outweigh the negative effects of being
| shunned by the group as an unreliable agent, but that's just my
| perspective (no apologies).
| kfarr wrote:
| Or maybe it's that people with higher self esteem are less
| likely to apologize? Not sure how causality is proven here
| hnarn wrote:
| I'm not sure what you're referring to. The abstract I quoted
| says:
|
| > Results showed that the act of refusing to apologize
| resulted in greater self-esteem than not refusing to
| apologize.
|
| The causality is right there.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| aka abuser psychology can benefit the abuser .. check
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| > Note that the "psychological benefits" mentioned here are
| completely individual: greater self-esteem, increased feelings
| of power/control
|
| Yes, I read that as well. But the last time I check deriving
| benefit from the pain or at least discomfort of others is
| sociopath 101.
|
| It would be foolish to buy into this usefulness of this study
| without gaining an understanding of the long term effects.
|
| That is, one soda per week...not so bad. One or two per day and
| before you know it you're packing on pounds.
| hnarn wrote:
| > the last time I check deriving benefit from the pain or at
| least discomfort of others is sociopath 101
|
| I don't know where you checked, but what you're describing is
| sadism, which is not something inherently a part of
| antisocial personality disorder. Sociopaths do not enjoy the
| suffering of others, they simply do not care about it and
| therefore do not consider it in their actions.
| photochemsyn wrote:
| One key element in the corporate world related to apology and
| real benefits of not apologizing is liability. Admissions of
| wrong-doing open corporations to large settlements so they tend
| to avoid such apologies. Apologizing over an accident where
| malicious intent was not involved is another matter.
|
| As a good example, subprime fraud settlements related to the
| 2008-2009 economic collapse were held up over corporate
| refusals to admit wrongdoing. Their motivation was clearly
| protecting their bottom line (avoiding larger settlements)
| and/or avoiding criminal prosecution.
|
| https://www.jonesday.com/en/insights/2013/11/admissions-of-w...
|
| If there are real consequences to apologizing for ones actions,
| such as having to pay a settlement, lose a job, serve time in
| jail etc., then it's obvious some people will not want to
| apologize. In contrast, if it's something like apologizing for
| being late to a meeting, that's just simple politeness.
| However, if a person or corporation repeats a pattern of
| behavior like that without changing that behavior but
| apologizes all the time for it, that can get pretty annoying,
| apologies or not.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| The general counsel for a large health-care system told me
| that they strongly encourage their doctors to apologize. It
| turns out, not surprisingly, that it greatly reduces
| lawsuits.
| DoreenMichele wrote:
| Unfortunately it's just an abstract and I can't seem to download
| the PDF, so not much to go on. Apologizing is more complex than
| we think. I apologize less than I used to while still taking
| ownership of my actions because past experience has taught me
| some people decide that if you apologized, you are now their
| bitch.
| Fargoan wrote:
| I rarely apologize and don't like it when people apologize to me.
| Just don't be an asshole and you won't have anything to apologize
| for.
| wreath wrote:
| I noticed in tech in particular people apologize for the
| stupidest thing, almost apologizing for their own existence. This
| is particularly worrisome when you see your manager apologizing
| for his own gender, whiteness or using the "wrong" word du jour.
| It's worrisome because I imagine him making a case for my for
| promotion, or shielding the team from some bullshit decision
| coming from top (or sideways). It radiates meekness, weakness and
| unreliability, it's worse when it's from your leader.
|
| I'm not saying people shouldn't apologize, but they should do so
| with care and only when they mean it. Some people prey on your
| weakness (even if they also come off as harmless victims!) and
| once you show signs of it, you're done.
| hackernewds wrote:
| It's called conflict avoidance. I do not see vulnerability and
| humility as a sign of weakness though
| awb wrote:
| That's an interesting way of looking at it because I see the
| ability to apologize as a sign of strength, respect and
| leadership. And when someone refuses to apologize, I usually
| see fear and untrustworthiness.
|
| If someone was apologizing too much, it might be annoying, but
| if someone isn't apologizing enough it feels dangerous to me.
| Maybe because of history when dictators try to use "strength"
| and being "right" as their defining leadership qualities, while
| falling short on reasoning, reconciliation and respect.
| ironmagma wrote:
| And then there are other people who refuse to apologize for
| anything, even something that should be trivial to apologize
| for like rescheduling a meeting. Not that every meeting
| rescheduling requires an apology, but you start to notice who
| took the LinkedIn advice of "to apologize is to show weakness."
| nemo1618 wrote:
| Trump (almost) never apologizes, going through great contortions
| to avoid it whenever possible -- and clearly he doesn't suffer
| from any self-esteem issues. I always figured that his reasoning
| was "apologizing = showing weakness = less respect," but maybe
| there's something more to it.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > clearly he doesn't suffer from any self-esteem issues
|
| I would say that clearly he does have extreme self-esteem
| issues, so much that he has to constantly protect himself.
|
| Donald Trump appears to be a narcissist. Narcissts are
| extremely vulnerable inside, so they put up the hardest
| possible defenses - they can never show it at all - and insist
| everyone around them must comply with their worldview, a
| worldview constructed to make them safe.
|
| The people who feel safe showing vulnerability are the ones
| with self-esteem and confidence, not the people shielding their
| esteem behind layers of armor.
| vsareto wrote:
| Well that's because he's a narcissist
| scaramanga wrote:
| Yes, there is something more to it, a quite extreme personality
| disorder.
|
| The idea that they don't suffer from self-esteem issues, I
| think, is what is up for debate. Clearly if he wasn't a
| billionaire, he would have some pretty bad life outcomes as a
| personality disorder that severe would be completely
| debilitating. However, even for a billionaire, you have to
| think that the fragility of their ego, the instability of their
| self-image, their vulnerability to external indicators of
| value, their lack of self knowledge, must lead to a quite
| unsatisfying life experience? But who knows, I don't doubt
| there are limits to the ability of a normal human to empathise
| with one of these people.
| xlii wrote:
| Of course it has psychological benefits because passive
| aggressive and other forms of toxic and exploitative behaviors
| are a thing.
|
| And there is A LOT of it to which apologizing is a form of
| submission. Getting stronger in such situations creates
| quantitatively less apologizing but in the observer eye it can
| make person be perceived wrongdoer.
|
| Apologizing is also a very morally complex subject. E.g. Elder
| cuts in queue. Depending on cultural setting even making a
| comment about it makes crowd expect commenter to be wrong doer
| ("respect your elder"), yet on the other hand standing for
| oneself makes them more assertive.
|
| Social dynamics is hard and life isn't binary - chains of events
| are complex.
|
| Curiously enough I heard interesting advice - never buy flowers
| for a partner as apology. After a while they will only be a
| monument of bad times.
| [deleted]
| primitiveape wrote:
| WarOnPrivacy wrote:
| I found I get more power from fully owning up for my part in
| personal conflicts.
|
| Mitigating damage I did clears my conscience. I generally don't
| expect the same from the other party because I have no control
| over what they do. Perhaps they'll consider my example and that
| may potentially lead to better feelings of their own but not
| everyone is in a place to do that. I haven't always been.
|
| Because these are almost always people I have good (or no)
| history with, I typically develop some genuine regret for being
| part of their negative experience. It's easy to express regret in
| an apology.
| vmception wrote:
| Someone do a different study on the chronic apologizers
|
| In my anecdata, its women around me that are apologizing for very
| benign things, often and habitually, apologizing for basically
| breathing and other things that I'm sometimes saying ".... You
| don't have to apologize for that"
|
| I've heard a couple of reasons for why they think they do it but
| for a studies' sake:
|
| Could there be overlapping results and motives as this study,
| despite being an opposite far extreme of behavior? Or could the
| psychological result be purely negative? something else?
| nobody9999 wrote:
| >In my anecdata, its women around me that are apologizing for
| very benign things, often and habitually, apologizing for
| basically breathing and other things that I'm sometimes saying
| ".... You don't have to apologize for that"
|
| A dear friend of mine does that. We kept telling her to stop
| apologizing, but she just keeps doing it.
|
| So my peer group made it a drinking game. Every time <my
| friend> apologizes, everyone has to drink.
|
| It hasn't made her stop apologizing, but it's less
| disconcerting when you're half in the bag. :)
| jancsika wrote:
| > So my peer group made it a drinking game. Every time <my
| friend> apologizes, everyone has to drink.
|
| Chances are that someone who apologizes for "basically
| breathing" doesn't have the ability to even express mild
| displeasure at the game, much less feel comfortable
| requesting that it stop. So it's a coin flip whether your
| friend a) feels like part of the group during this activity
| in a positive way, or b) takes the whole ordeal as yet
| another reason from the universe to apologize.
| nobody9999 wrote:
| yeetsfromhellL2 wrote:
| Definitely not all women are chronic apologizers, but I can't
| think of ever meeting a chronicly apologetic man. I don't think
| parental norms and society, taken together, encourage it or
| even really allow it, at least in the West.
|
| I suspect there's big overlap between women who are chronic
| apologizers and women with overbearing mothers (NPD, BPD
| types).
| jaminal wrote:
| Have met and worked with many male chronic apologizers. I am
| a recovering one myself!
|
| Interesting idea re: NPD/BPD in parents as a possible
| correlate. Connecting the dots in existing clinical research
| may agree.
| kelseyfrog wrote:
| While it's less socially acceptable to be a male chronic
| apologizer, I can easily think of one in my life. Still,
| there are many more male apology abstainers that I've known
| over the years. Hell, I was raised by one.
| hnarn wrote:
| I'm not sure if it's necessarily gender-coded, but one thing
| that I have noticed is that I personally value apologies less
| from people that constantly apologize, the same way that it's
| hard to see a compliment as genuine if you're the 10th person
| in line receiving a compliment from the same person.
|
| In addition to the frequency of apologizing, I think it also
| makes it worse if you're constantly apologizing about the same
| thing, especially if it's something bad that the apology is
| actually valid for. It always makes me think of the pretty
| harsh but sometimes valid saying "don't be sorry, be better".
|
| An apology in my mind only works if it's rare, heartfelt and
| honest. If it happens all the time, for trivial things and does
| not action any change in behavior from the person, it's pretty
| close (or worse) than not apologizing in the first place.
| dijonman2 wrote:
| Not just women are serial apologizes: plenty of men fall victim
| to this as well.
| vmception wrote:
| I bet! That's why I wrote it that way of here's my experience
| maybe others experience something similar
| [deleted]
| arketyp wrote:
| I find constant apologizing distancing, having the reverse
| effect. It's like not putting trust in me having empathy enough
| for whatever little inconvenience the "offending" party is
| causing me. It also sometimes feels like projection, like an
| unconscious way of expressing that I should be sorry for being
| brash.
| xvector wrote:
| Matches my anecdata. The people I know that never apologize
| definitely have more confidence and self esteem than the people
| I've seen apologize.
| number6 wrote:
| I bet they never make mistakes, huge boon for self esteem
| kranner wrote:
| Doesn't match mine. The people I know who do this come across
| as insecure and defensive. I think it takes high self-esteem to
| not feel as if apologising for your mistakes would lessen you
| in any way.
| scaramanga wrote:
| Sadly, it's easy to mistake self-esteem for grandiosity,
| which is why it's important to take a bit more time, and pay
| a bit more attention to people before figuring them all out.
| nobody9999 wrote:
| >Matches my anecdata. The people I know that never apologize
| definitely have more confidence and self esteem than the people
| I've seen apologize.
|
| That sounds about right. But those same people are also pretty
| universally considered gigantic assholes.
|
| On the other hand, as someone who tries hard to take
| responsibility for my actions, including apologizing for my
| screw ups, I have lots of confidence and self esteem.
|
| Much of that comes from my belief (whether founded or not) that
| being a decent human being is an important part of living a
| good life. And when I take responsibility for myself, that
| enhances my sense of personal integrity and value.
|
| On the gripping hand, there are no absolutes and context is
| vital. As such, YMMV.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| > The people I know that never apologize definitely have more
| confidence and self esteem than the people I've seen apologize.
|
| IME, they try to project more confidence and self-esteem
| because they feel very vulnerable.
| darkwater wrote:
| Yes but it's probably the other way round: they are so full of
| themselves that don't even think for a moment to apologize
| because they might be wrong.
| scaramanga wrote:
| It's well known that it is this way around. The construction
| of a grandiose self (the sort of self that would be above the
| need for apologising) appears to be, inherently, a defensive
| formation in cluster B personality disorders.
| paskozdilar wrote:
| I don't think that them being "full of themselves" is
| necessarily true.
|
| Apology serve a purpose - to communicate to another person
| that we acknowledge the mistakes we have made and commit to
| not doing them again, in order to assure them not to break
| the relationship (be it romantic, business, friendship or any
| other kind). So a lack of apology could also mean that a
| person either doesn't care whether the relationship continues
| or not, or is confident that the person needs him more and
| will not break the relationship regardless of an apology.
| scaramanga wrote:
| Yeah, it's just that normal people don't consciously
| perceive this is a rational transaction. They see that
| they've hurt the other person and realise that perhaps
| damage can't be undone, which feels terrible, but they can
| at least give the other person the feeling that their
| suffering is at least visible, and matters, which is often
| the best that we can do. So we apologise.
|
| Then there's the other kind of person, who sees other
| people as pawns to be used for their own ends. Everything
| is a transaction, sure they might apologise to you if you
| can do something for them, but if you can't do something
| for them, then they can devalue you to where no apology is
| needed, in order to make themselves feel superior, in that
| way, they can extract something (self-esteem) from you
| regardless. In this case the wronged person has insult
| added to injury, since not only were they wronged, but the
| wrong can't even be acknowledged, which can feel quite
| invalidating, and can have the effect of gaslighting people
| into questioning whether or not THEY were the bad person in
| this scenario.
| paskozdilar wrote:
| I don't think there is a black-and-white distinction - it
| is possible to feel the things from your first paragraph,
| yet understand the purpose of the very feeling. It
| doesn't take a psychopath to analyze human behavior.
|
| > Everything is a transaction, sure they might apologise
| to you if you can do something for them, but if you can't
| do something for them, then they can devalue you to where
| no apology is needed, in order to make themselves feel
| superior, in that way, they can extract something (self-
| esteem) from you regardless.
|
| I don't think this would be rational behavior, but rather
| pathological behavior. Rationally, it would be in one's
| interest to keep good relationships even with the people
| who don't "serve a purpose" at the moment, because it is
| impossible to know when one might need them, and "they
| serve a purpose" again. The only reason one would
| devaluate others is that they feel some kind of
| _irrational_ need to feel superior, even if that feeling
| costs them good relationships.
| strokirk wrote:
| An apology doesn't necessarily need to involve committing
| to never doing the action again.
| paskozdilar wrote:
| Well, if someone apologizes for the actions they do, but
| they keep doing them intentionally, their apologies would
| quickly become meaningless.
| avivo wrote:
| It's ideal to look at any such individual study within the
| broader context of the literature.
|
| The best way I currently know do do that is searching Connected
| Papers e.g.
| https://www.connectedpapers.com/main/e29e416fc39cca3195915bb...
|
| And then clicking on derivative works, which leads to this paper
| (citing the original) which provides much more context on the
| study, benefits, and downsides to apologies.
| https://psyarxiv.com/ykxns/ "The psychology of offering an
| apology: Understanding the barriers to apologizing and how to
| overcome them"
| [deleted]
| marstall wrote:
| when I argue with my wife, we always make up in the end with a
| one or both of us apologizing, saying the words "I'm sorry".
|
| sometimes it takes a day for me to get to saying it. And
| sometimes it feels like a major blow to my ego when I do finally
| say those words, even if I mean them.
|
| But I always come out the other end feeling a million times
| better. And never feel like I'm less of a man or whatever. feel
| stronger because I'm closer to my partner. and I'm no longer
| battling within myself.
|
| I have a hard time understanding people who don't apologize, when
| they know they've done wrong! It seems so stressful.
| Veen wrote:
| People can have different perspectives on the same events. One
| can genuinely believe an apology is deserved, while the other
| genuinely believes it is not.
| awb wrote:
| Sure, but an apology to me kinda feels like an
| acknowledgement that someone else's reality is valid. Not
| that I agree with it, or have the same reality, but just that
| I believe their experience is real.
|
| If someone says "You're a jerk" and I don't want to
| apologize, I'm basically saying: "You and I live in two
| different worlds. In your world I'm a jerk and in my world
| I'm not. My world is right and yours is wrong."
|
| You could do that, but it's risky. Either the other person
| capitulates and agrees they were wrong or there will be
| unresolved damage to the relationship.
|
| If someone says "You're a jerk" and I say, "I'm sorry, I
| don't want to come across as a jerk", I'm basically saying:
| "You and I live in two different worlds. In your world I'm a
| jerk and in my world I'm not. But your world is important to
| me and I know that me being a jerk in your world is a real
| experience for you and I feel sorry about that."
| TrackerFF wrote:
| Life Pro Tip: Always apologize if you make a mistake, even if the
| apology is delayed. I went around far too long with this _" don't
| apologize for anything"_ power move mindset, but truth be told -
| you turn into a colossal douchebag. People remember, simple as
| that...and if you have even an ounce of conscience, it will all
| add up. I can understand that narcissists and such can go through
| their lives without giving a shit.
|
| People that never apologize is a huge red flag.
|
| edit: To expand on this
|
| Yes, being on the other end of the scale is not good - being a
| pushover that comes off too insecure, can come with its own set
| of problems. Perception is a bitch, and unfortunately something
| you'll get evaluated/judged on in your career.
|
| I've seen that _especially_ in tech, there are lots of very
| opinionated workers, that take things like knowledge very
| personal. It 's okay to not engage in discussions you're not 100%
| sure/confident on, or just tell someone that you'll get back to
| them when you know.
|
| Just know that some people _know_ they 're wrong, but will still
| try to steamroll you. It's just one of many suppression
| techniques.
| lowwave wrote:
| For sure, however really get the feeling now days people are
| too sensitive now days get offended by anything a bit taboo,
| not PC or out of norm.
| kelseyfrog wrote:
| There's definitely been a shift over the years, so I can see
| why someone would attribute it to sensitivity. However,
| actions that were done in the past that caused people to live
| in silent misery when done now are openly confronted. What
| appears as an increase in sensitivity is simply a perfectly
| natural response to abject behavior. People weren't less
| sensitive in the past, there were social mechanisms which
| curtailed these natural responses. The reinforcement of the
| idea that "people are too sensitive now days get offended by
| anything" is an excellent example of such a mechanism.
| hnarn wrote:
| I don't really understand why anyone would consider _" don't
| apologize for anything"_ a "power move". I understand why
| someone who lacks empathy would default to that kind of
| behavior, but I don't agree that it's rational. Being open,
| honest and actionable is what creates a dependable leader or
| co-worker in my mind, anyone that attempts to cover up
| problems, blames others and avoids resolving issues would lose
| my trust very quickly, which from a Machiavellian perspective
| is not in that persons interest. Humans are very social beings
| and we have been conditioned over thousands of years to
| identify unreliable partners and shun them, the idea of the
| "highly functional psychopath" is a complete myth, because the
| only context a person like that can succeed is in one where
| human relationships are irrelevant (because they are temporary,
| for example).
| theknocker wrote:
| scaramanga wrote:
| I always wondered how so many people I know who are in high
| positions manage to be so immature and irresponsible, they
| never take responsibility, they play childish blame games,
| and so on. I feel like if I followed their example, I'd be a
| pariah.
|
| Then I realised... That stuff is not the way you become
| powerful, it's a perk of power to be enjoyed. Not having to
| consider the lives, experiences or needs of others is the
| reward, it's the entire definition of success for these
| people.
|
| And in the personal examples I know, the people just arrived
| at their positions of power via their parents, their
| background, and their connections, not through shrewd
| Machiavellian manoeuvring.
| hnarn wrote:
| > That stuff is not the way you become powerful, it's a
| perk of power to be enjoyed.
|
| Well, I don't know. I partly agree. First of all, I don't
| think it's a "perk" that people who did not have that kind
| of personality in the first place would like to enjoy. I
| also think that there's an inverted funnel of empathy when
| it comes to people in leadership positions, because the
| larger a group becomes, the more beneficial "maneuvering"
| becomes and the less beneficial "classic" emphatic traits
| becomes that would make you likable in a smaller group.
|
| > the people just arrived at their positions of power via
| their parents, their background, and their connections, not
| through shrewd Machiavellian manoeuvring.
|
| I think it's pretty safe to assume that anyone that grew up
| with "powerful" parents will have a pretty Machiavellian
| personality by default just based on the context they grew
| up in, so even if they get the position completely on the
| merits of nepotism I think it's pretty unlikely they will
| be very empathetic and "bleeding heart" kind of people.
| There are scientific studies for example that show that
| empathy decreases with material wealth.[1]
|
| [1]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-wealth-
| reduce...
| wolverine876 wrote:
| 'Power corrupts' is the entire answer to the puzzle.
| scaramanga wrote:
| Or to put it another way, people with money and power don't
| get shunned for their shitty behaviour because people need
| money. What actually happens is that people turn themselves
| in to codependents or enablers.
| [deleted]
| DantesKite wrote:
| Why were you a "colossal douchebag" to people?
|
| I find one doesn't have to apologize if one isn't cruel in the
| first place.
| DantesKite wrote:
| Actually, I take back what I said. I was wrong.
|
| Apologies are useful and not necessarily indicative of
| cruelty. It acts like a social lubricant and I can understand
| using it tactically, just to keep the peace.
|
| For some reason, I was only thinking of genuine, remorseful
| apologies, as if OP was just harassing people all day long,
| but obviously that's not the case here. There's a lot of
| small gestures one can do to avoid social faux paus.
| playpause wrote:
| He didn't say his original transgressions were bad enough to
| make him a colossal douchebag. He said refusing to apologise
| for them turned him into one.
| [deleted]
| lliamander wrote:
| While I'm sure not intended, this comment sounds quite
| sanctimonious.
|
| While I'm not the OP, I would say that the answer to your
| question is that it doesn't require being intentionally
| cruel. People in general will (metaphorically) step on each
| other's toes from time-to-time. If a person is unwilling to
| apologize over even a small matter, that suddenly becomes
| pretty rude.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| How do you know the other person doesn't see you as cruel, or
| selfish, arrogant, self-centered jerk, or simply douchebag?
|
| This whole thing is about accepting other possible viewpoints
| if you don't want to end up as social outcast. I mean we're
| already in the territory of not-very-balanced people that
| hurt others enough to have apology expected and don't figure
| they actually need to apologize on their own (or are too
| lazy/afraid to do so).
| sonicggg wrote:
| It does not seem you read the article.
| zozbot234 wrote:
| The Life Pro Tip should be to avoid mistakes in the first
| place. An apology is an express acknowledgement that you've
| screwed up that first part, for the avoidance of doubt; hence,
| it is best kept short and to the point. "Apologizing" simply
| has no meaning otherwise.
|
| That's why you see people often saying things like "I'm sorry
| that you seem offended" and the like. It's a way of clearly
| stating that you don't think an apology is called for in the
| first place, without being outright insulting or burning
| bridges in the process.
| User23 wrote:
| My principles aren't contingent on how other people feel. I
| don't accept "never hurt feelings" as a moral imperative so
| it's not something I'd apologize over alone. That's not to
| say that violating my principles couldn't also hurt feelings,
| it often does. Also, from a getting cooperation perspective
| hurting feelings can have pretty low utility. But imprudent
| and immoral are different.
| thewebcount wrote:
| That's often called a non-pology and is considered a dick
| move. Everyone knows what you're doing and saying and it only
| serves to make you look like a fool.
| playpause wrote:
| This seems logically incoherent to me. Maybe I'm reading it
| wrong. But anyway here's my version:
|
| Avoid making mistakes that harm others. Be aware that you
| will make some anyway, and you won't always recognise them as
| mistakes at the time. (If you take pride in having a spotless
| record, you're liable to deceive yourself.) And when, on
| reflection, you realise you have harmed someone by mistake,
| figure out what you can do to 1) fix the harm and 2) prevent
| it happening again. And then tell them this plan in a way
| that commits you to it. That's an apology. This way you make
| fewer and fewer harmful mistakes over time. The idea that
| someone can just "avoid mistakes in the first place" to avoid
| needing to apologise is dangerously lacking in humility, in
| my opinion.
| zozbot234 wrote:
| It's not about taking pride or lacking in humility, but
| simply about not considering it "normal" to screw things
| up. If you don't think of screwups as something "everyone
| does anyway", fixing them and making damn sure they won't
| reoccur becomes second nature. You don't _need_ more than a
| simple apology, because everything else is implied and a
| spoken commitment would be meaningless anyway.
| throwaway743 wrote:
| > That's why you see people often saying things like "I'm
| sorry that you seem offended" and the like. It's a way of
| clearly stating that you don't think an apology is called for
| in the first place, without being outright insulting or
| burning bridges in the process.
|
| Nah it's blatantly insulting for anyone who can hear and has
| half a brain.
|
| It's not an acceptable "apology" if you even want to call it
| that. It only proves that whoever said that is self absorbed,
| tone deaf, and not someone worth interacting or doing
| business with as they're only looking out for their own
| bottomline and saving face.
| Fargoan wrote:
| In my experience, people are generally offended over minor
| stuff that shouldn't bother them. I rarely apologize for
| offending people because I think they're in the wrong/I
| just don't care.
| bigDinosaur wrote:
| Life pro tip: don't think that the usual act of apologising
| (i.e. saying 'I'm sorry') is the only path to a genuine
| apology. Personally I don't really care if someone doesn't
| explicitly _say_ the words 'I'm sorry', I care far more about
| their actions insofar as they show some level of contrition. If
| you've done something that has deeply hurt me, and never say
| the word sorry, that's fine (although it's not like I object to
| someone actually saying that literal phrase) - so long as you
| took other actions to rectify the situation.
|
| I think being aware that different people value different forms
| of apologies is useful, I highly doubt I'm unique here.
|
| Personally I've found there are ways to communicate that
| dramatically lessen the chance of hurting someone else, thus
| avoiding having to say sorry much/at all. It's worth finding
| out what these methods are (e.g. couching criticism in general
| terms while still being specific to someone's work can be very
| effective).
| Teever wrote:
| There's merit to what you're saying but I think the crux of
| the issue depends on what the person who needs the apology
| (whether verbal or not) wants.
|
| If the scenario is one where the person apologizing can't
| verbally apologize but the other person wants/needs a verbal
| apology then maybe what that first person is offering isn't
| really an apology?
|
| In that case it's a 'water, water, everywhere but not a drop
| to drink' kind of scenario and what they're offering isn't so
| much for your sake, but their own.
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| I feel like the more it matters the less likely I will get an
| apology (or apology equivalent). Or maybe the causation goes
| the other way.
| Brian_K_White wrote:
| Without the explicit words, there is no acknowledgement, no
| admisssion, no character, no integrity.
|
| Concilliatory actions without admission are not apologies,
| they are just a way to have your cake and eat it too. Abusing
| someone and then getting them to still deal with you after.
| It's even a brainwashing and abuse tactic, following abuse
| with kindness.
|
| There was some article a while back that said '"Do you want
| to go to the store?" is not "I apologize"'
| Kim_Bruning wrote:
| When I was younger, I had the impression that people said
| "sorry" way too quickly and weren't sincere about it. So I
| set myself a goal for one year to not use the literal word
| "sorry", instead using word and deed to apologize.
|
| In one particular case I still remember, a batch job I had
| set up had failed to run, and an entire department couldn't
| do their work properly the next day; during the "no literal
| sorry" year!
|
| Instead of just saying "sorry" and being done, instead I
| was forced to come up with something more:
|
| * "Oh no, that's terrible! We were anticipating this issue
| due to <reasons> and were already partially mitigating it"
|
| * "Additional QA will likely lead to diminishing returns,
| but we can still add extra testing time to our daily batch
| update, at least it can't hurt"
|
| * "Did you know your sysadmins can manually continue the
| job if this occurs? Send one of them over and I'll show
| them how!"
|
| Apologizing 'properly' with or without the word "sorry" is
| hard, but can be done. You need to show that
|
| a) you are aware of the problem/mistake and recognize it.
|
| b) you are acting to prevent the problem from happening
| again.
|
| c) you are (willing to) engage with the other party and
| empower them where possible.
| llampx wrote:
| How was that incident received versus one where you could
| just say sorry?
| loopz wrote:
| If a vendor says sorry but can't or won't do anything,
| that gets frustrating quickly.
| Kim_Bruning wrote:
| * They accepted that my team was doing all it could to
| mitigate, and found ways to make life easier for us.
|
| * they agreed to let us to continue writing batch jobs
| the way were were doing, and even gave us more complex
| tasks.
|
| * They sent over a sysadmin to learn how to work with our
| scripts.
|
| I don't have an exact duplicate scenario in which I only
| said "sorry"; but I think we can assume that it would
| have been rather less likely for the above to happen if
| no-one had explicitly mentioned them.
| wolverine876 wrote:
| I place more value on the words than you do, but I agree that
| actions have a much larger impact. Another way to see the
| same thing is that there are more ways to communicate than
| literal words.
|
| Apologies are about rebuilding trust, communicating to
| someone: 'I breached your trust, and now you can trust me
| again: I care about it, I care about its impact on you, and I
| care about your trust.' Talk is cheap; actions are what
| really convey it.
| vmception wrote:
| > I went around far too long with this "don't apologize for
| anything" power move mindset, but truth be told - you turn into
| a colossal douchebag
|
| My first exposure to that mentality was watching Jersey Shore
|
| It was so amusing how a simple apology was the line that
| couldn't be crossed
|
| I didn't understand it at all, and, yes, they were the laughing
| stock of the country. Douchebag mascots.
|
| I occasionally see that mentality, but from people in that same
| region in the US. I wonder if there is something cultural and
| if that extends to a culture from "the motherland" (often times
| people in the US just _believe_ a cultural pattern they
| practice is from a place in Europe they share some heritage
| with, but its all made up)
| throwaway743 wrote:
| Nah dude. Northeast born, raised, and living. I apologize
| whenever I'm in the wrong out of realization and empathy, as
| do others.
|
| Self absorbed douchebags are everywhere in the world
| unfortunately. If you encounter people like that, it's just a
| sign that they're a bad bunch.
| davewritescode wrote:
| Half the jersey shore folks came from where I grew up and I
| apologize when I'm wrong.
|
| I'm definitely a strong presence and being able to apologize
| when I'm wrong helps me be more forceful when I feel I need
| to.
|
| Not apologizing is a sign of insecurity IMO unless you really
| feel like there's no possibility you could've been wrong.
| keraf wrote:
| Acknowledging mistakes and sincerely apologizing for them is a
| social quality that I strive to achieve and that I appreciate
| in people I interact with. Everyone makes mistakes, some might
| have higher consequences, but ignoring them or refusing to own
| up (recognize, apologize, make up for it) is the worst imo. For
| non-serious things I gladly give it a pass the first times. But
| when done repeatedly, I find it hard to maintain an acceptable
| relationship.
|
| I learned my lesson through a romantic relationship where my
| ex-partner would never apologize, regardless of how small or
| big the issue was. Even when bringing it up, she would straight
| up refuse to simply say "sorry", justifying herself that it's
| not worth dwelling on this and to move on. I tried to
| understand her point of view and adapt but ultimately after
| years, it made me feel terrible and I just couldn't get over
| this. It ended up not working out for various reasons, but this
| is definitely red flag I'm looking out for now in any type of
| relationship.
|
| As said above, I tolerate it when it is not repeated, as people
| might genuinely not realize it or just forget to do so.
| mmcgaha wrote:
| I do not say sorry but I will admit my mistakes, work to make
| up for them, and try to understand why I made the mistake so I
| don't repeat in the future. Sorry is cheap and I refuse to use
| it.
| cinntaile wrote:
| There is nothing cheap about saying sorry if you do all those
| other things you mentioned?
| mmcgaha wrote:
| The problem with sorry is that it invites someone to say
| "It's OK" or even "It's not OK." Neither of these matter
| because it is about you not them.
| [deleted]
| marstall wrote:
| how does that work? do people forgive you, does the
| relationship/friendship return to what it was before? do you
| say "I made a mistake" or some phrase similar to "I'm sorry"?
| mmcgaha wrote:
| Yes, something along the lines of "I made a mistake" or
| "what I did was wrong". I am not talking about accidentally
| bumping someone and saying sorry; those really are shallow
| and just about being polite.
|
| So here is an example of how I want to to say "sorry" to
| others. I was rude and not contributing to the
| conversation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29835478
| matthewmacleod wrote:
| There's a great amount of ego wrapped up in it. Nobody really
| likes the idea of being wrong or incompetent, or being seen to
| be weak or ineffective - despite it being a thing that happens
| to all of us, all the time, and it not being a moral failing.
|
| Different people do seem to develop quite different tools for
| dealing with this - some people over-apologise for minor
| transgressions the point of annoyance; others react with anger
| at the idea someone might accuse them of being less-than-
| flawless. Still others have a habit of avoiding engaging in
| anything with the risk of making them look foolish, or beat
| themselves up relentlessly, or just live in denial that
| anything's gone wrong.
|
| I would definitely back up what you say, though. There's
| probably not much that leaves me with more confidence in a
| person's competence and character than taking ownership or an
| error and apologising for the inconvenience.
| treeman79 wrote:
| Was with someone who was a some people are professional
| victims. Offended at everything, forcing apologies over every
| perceived slight. Particular if they were at fault.
|
| A no apologize rule is sometimes a defensive measure to shut
| such people down. Doesn't mean it's healthy at all. But I've
| found it critical to survival
| paulryanrogers wrote:
| Demanding verbal apologies is an curious technique.
|
| Generally I was taught I need to apologize when at fault yet
| sincerely, and never lie. So in situations where a harm was
| accidental, or not clearly a harm to anyone, except in the
| mind of the victim it can be an awkward place. Moreso if the
| victim has a glass jaw and a habit of throwing stones. Of
| course every person and situation is unique, so diligence is
| required to maintain a healthy sense of empathy without
| reinforcing destructive behavior.
| dmichulke wrote:
| Alternative life pro tip: Don't do anything in extremes.
|
| Neither do always X nor do never X.
|
| PS: Yes, there are cases were "always" or "never" should be
| used but they're special cases and easy to identify because
| they relate to law, ethics, identity.
| jasfi wrote:
| Absolutely, there's often a context that isn't always obvious
| to people not directly involved. In with people directly
| involved actually, which may be specific to an individual.
| awb wrote:
| Ethics and apologizing seem very intertwined.
| dqpb wrote:
| Surely it's ok to do some things in the extreme, no?
| jawzz wrote:
| Don't do anything in extremes, including not doing anything
| in extremes.
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| never do anything in extremes, except this rule... and of
| course, many many other rules
|
| there's no single pattern you can apply to an extremely
| complicated existence
| anonu wrote:
| I like to think that as humans we can make choices that override
| our primordial lizard brains. Given this research, apologizing
| feels like one of those higher order functions that makes us
| human. If we didn't know how to reconcile we wouldn't be much
| better off than wild animals.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| _> feelings of power /control and value integrity_
|
| As opposed to _actual_ value integrity.
|
| Go ahead. Don't apologize, even if Every. Damn. Person. In. Your.
| Life. knows that you screwed up.
|
| You'll be alone, unemployed, and shunned.
|
| But you'll _feel_ great about it.
|
| And that makes it all right.
| ilamont wrote:
| _Moreover, apology refusal also resulted in increased feelings of
| power /control and value integrity, both of which mediated the
| effect of refusal on self-esteem._
|
| That's what drives a lot of people these days, the power trip. Of
| course, it overlooks the long-term damage and salting of the
| fields that comes with being obstinate, obnoxious, ignorant, or
| unwilling to accept the facts or their own human flaws.
| username223 wrote:
| It's amazing how long such people can avoid facing those long-
| term consequences, while benefiting from the powerful ego-
| defense of being "often wrong, never in doubt."
| scaramanga wrote:
| Yeah, recently Chun Doo Hwan died, he went all the way to his
| death never apologizing for the Gwangju massacre, and
| insisting that the whole thing was a communist plot to
| besmirch his good character.
|
| There are only consequences if someone makes there be
| consequences.
|
| And, as a species, we're generally quite bad at letting the
| worst among us not just roam free, but rise to the very top.
|
| Edit: Chun Doo Hwan, not Park Chung Hee, getting my dictators
| mixed up, sorry.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-04-03 23:01 UTC)