The nature of Apology

I recently came across an article that spoke volumes on the subject of apology.

Link to it here.


On a personal level:
This was a very interesting read. You see, some time back, I was "confronted" by an individual who took offense to something I'd written on this very blog. As always, I'd left out his name and key identifying details so that only the two of us would know what I was referring to.

Now, I fully understand that by writing this, that the individual to whom I am referring will think this whole article is an attack on him. That is the way his narcissistic mind works. However, nothing could be further from the truth.This is an article on when to apologize... and when not to!

The catch:
See, I'd said nothing but the truth, and we all know that sometimes the truth hurts. I was not going to apologize for that.

From the article:

"How does an apology make it right? It certainly doesn't undo the wrongdoing; it doesn't make it disappear. But an apology acknowledges the mistake and takes responsibility for it. A sorry from the heart has the following six implications:

1. I am responsible for my behavior
2. I regret my action and the problem it caused
3. I don't blame the other person for my action
4. I would behave differently if I could
5. I am willing to change
6. Your version of the truth is valid"

The facts:
- I had not made a mistake. No untrue statement was made.
- I did not (and do not) regret my actions. Given the chance, I'd make the same decisions again.
- While I do not blame the other person for my action, I'd never have made the observation without his action in the first place.
- I would not have behaved differently if I could.
- Since I made no mistake, since I'd do it all again, it is clear and evident that I would not be willing to change.
- His version of the truth had zero validity.

More on point 6:
How can I say his version had zero validity?
- Because his story kept changing.
- What he wanted me to apologize for kept changing.

More, anecdotal evidence:
A good friend asked me if I would consider an apology that began: "if I have offended you, then I am sorry." A person should not (and I cannot) make such a statement for several reasons:
- From the article:

"Why would you be sorry if your behavior (even if offense is the response) is consistent with your own values? That's like saying sorry for your very existence."

 - Also from the article:

"What if someone is upset as a result of your behavior, but your behavior was consistent with your principles and values? Then you can certainly be sorry that they are upset, but not for your behavior. No apology is required. Indeed, if you apologized to someone who was upset in response to you expressing your beliefs, you would be undermining yourself."

- Here's a quote from another article with a good way of looking at it:

"What is a conditional apology? Is that like saying “I’m sorry if I hurt you by punching you in the face” or “I’ll apologize only if you do too”? Who says that after grade school? "

Had I apologized for making a true statement, then I would in essence be saying: "telling the truth is not something I condone, and not something I will do in the future." This simply is not so. 


So, what should we learn from all of this:
If you are not wrong, do not apologize. To apologize when not in error is to do wrong!
If your words/actions were not wrong, but someone was still offended, do not apologize!
No "grade-school" apologies - either apologize earnestly, or not at all!

If you are wrong, make a sincere apology!