Jarosław Horowski

Addressing the topic of self-harm and self-forgiveness in school education is, on the one hand, important, and on the other, a serious challenge. It is important because various actions of people can lead to (unintentional) self-harm, resulting in self-resentment, which manifests as a negative self-perception and often leads to perpetrators developing attitudes of disguised revenge towards themselves. Such attitudes can hinder their social and moral development, which is why they should be overcome through self-forgiveness. At the same time, it poses a serious challenge because education addressing self-forgiveness should not lay the foundations for attitudes of self-indulgence and acceptance of one’s own moral flaws. This article aims to present the concept of self-forgiveness, based on the assumption that only victims have the right to grant forgiveness (the victim-only view). I argue that this concept of self-forgiveness can be applied in school moral education.

ABSTRACT The significance of harm to the life and development of victims results from the deprivation of certain goods and the violation of their dignity. The experience also impacts the decisions made by the victims regarding the perpetrators and others and, thus, their moral development. In this article, the relationship between the forgiveness and moral reasoning of victims of harm to life is discussed and the unusual and controversial thesis is proposed: Forgiveness is a condition for making morally good decisions. Consequently, from the perspective of victim morality, forgiveness can be considered not as an act of supererogation, but as a necessary act. To confirm this thesis, the misconceptions about forgiveness, which blur the lines between forgiveness and acts such as excuse and pardon, are discussed. Thereafter, how forgiveness conditions the moral reasoning of the victims is shown.

This article argues that Christianity has the potential to strengthen people’s health when solving the forgiveness dilemma. However – paradoxically – the starting point for the analysis is the presumption that a hasty and imprudent decision to forgive may negatively impact the health of the decision-maker, and that Christianity may contribute to people making unconsidered decisions by prompting them to forgive. In the first part of the analysis, the concept of health and its biblical understanding are discussed. The second part includes both a reflection on forgiveness-related dilemmas and the tension between the decision to forgive and the feeling of regret that may negatively influence health. In the third part, the Christian concept of forgiveness with reference to the aforementioned issues is discussed.

The analyses undertaken in this article refer to the harm experienced in close relationships, where the lack of forgiveness and the breakdown in the relationship can be a source of additional suffering for the victim. Referring to the discussion conducted in the Journal of Philosophy of Education in the years 2002–2003, I assume that one of the most difficult challenges for the injured individual is to determine whether change made by the perpetrator of evil encourages the individual to trust the perpetrator or whether forgiveness can actually be understood as consent to further harm. Another challenge is that the injured person must make a decision about forgiveness when s/he perceives change in the perpetrator if lack of forgiveness is not to become the cause of a definitive breakdown in the relationship. I propose the thesis that a person – by reference to acts of self-forgiveness – can learn to identify the moment when forgiveness is possible and necessary. After explaining what self-forgiveness is, what act it relates to and what its moral value is, I show how self-forgiveness and reflection on the process of self-forgiveness can benefit education for forgiveness of another person.

One of the most difficult problems, which is to be solved by contemporary culture, is the ecological problem. It concerns the culture because the hedonistic and consumerist mentality of man plays an important part in it. Biocentrism states that the ecological problem results from traditional Western attitudes to the non-human world based on the belief that humans are the central and most significant entities in the universe. Biocentrism puts forward a teleological argument for the protection of the environment. It indicates that non-human species have inherent value as well and each organism has a purpose and a reason for being, which should be respected. Biocentrism states that the anthropocentric attitude to the non-human world results from the Christian worldview based on the Bible where it is written that God gives man dominion over all creatures. The author analyses the main issues of the Catholic concept of the relationship between human beings and other creatures. He indicates that ecotheology respects the inherent value of non-human creatures because, as the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the modern world Gaudium et spes says: “all things are endowed with their own stability, truth, goodness, proper laws and order”, but maintains that the purpose of the world is connected with its relationship to God. The author considers also what is the human subjectivity in behaving towards the environment and what is the dependence between the autonomy of the world and the subjectivity of man in ecotheology. In the end, the author comes to the conclusion that according to ecotheology the ecological problem results from the broken relationship between the human and God and in consequence it the broken relationship between the world and God.

Forgiveness is one of the most valued decisions in contemporary culture, although it has been emphasised that imprudent forgiveness can cause more harm than good in human relationships. In this article, I focus on the rarely discussed aspect of forgiveness, namely the recovery of subjectivity by the victim in their relationship with the perpetrator. I divide my reflection into three parts. In the first, I deal with the issue of the subjectivity of individuals in social relations. In the second part I present the consequences of the victim’s experience of harm, which include, first, the evoking of negative emotions, and subsequently the impact of these emotions on the way the victim functions as a subject in the relationship with the perpetrator. In the third part I show how – thanks to forgiveness – the victim regains subjectivity. Furthermore, I address the moral value of forgiveness. I argue that the regaining of subjectivity by the victim is a premise for recognising forgiveness as a morally good act and illustrate that forgiveness – properly defined – does not pose a threat to the good of people creating a relationship with the perpetrator.

The direct reference point for these analyses is the process of making moral decisions, but a particular point of interest is the difficulty associated with making decisions when acting subjects are aware that their choice of moral good can lead to the breakdown of relationships with those close to them or to their exclusion from the group that have been most important to them so far in their lives, consequently causing them to experience loneliness. This difficulty is a challenge for education, which in supporting the moral development of a maturing person should prepare her/him for choosing moral good even if this requires personal sacrifices. In these analyses, assuming that knowledge of moral good is not sufficient for morally good actions, I refer mainly to the virtues of character that facilitate making morally good decisions and I seek the answer to the question: what character traits should be shaped in maturing persons, so that as adults they can resist moral evil, even when this will clearly lead to the experience of loneliness? I propose these character traits as expressing moral virtues—especially the cardinal virtues of prudence, justice, temperance and fortitude. In this way, I join in the discussion relating to the teleology of education. I do not touch on the methodology of education, however. The argument is presented in two parts. In the first, I introduce the problem of decision-making implying consent to loneliness. In the second, I reflect on the characteristics of a person who is capable of making such a decision.

ABSTRACTThe purpose of my paper is to determine the consequences of including an education for forgiveness in the context of developing prudence. I aim to answer two questions: what is prudent forgiveness; what constitutes education for prudent forgiveness? I present my analyses in six parts. After introduction, I point to the advantages and doubts concerning forgiveness. Then, I present prudence as a basic virtue guiding human actions. I draw mainly on the approach proposed by Thomas Aquinas, who argued that prudence refers to the perfection of the command. The fourth part addresses the question of the mechanisms of prudent forgiveness. I note that a decision to forgive cannot be made in haste; that it is a decision concerning some good that the victim wants to attain in the future; finally, that forgiveness is prudent in its achievement. In the last part, I transfer prior analyses to the pedagogical level.