# The proper response to mistakes that have harmed others?

I have a tendency to feel very guilty when I have harmed others, especially when the harm was quite large. And I do think I've been legitimately quite hurtful and harmful to a number of people over the course of my life.

Some of my guilt has persisted for years after recognizing the mistake[^tp6jlr46gqj]. I think I prefer this to not feeling remorseful at all, but I do also wonder if I'm responding optimally.  I suspect that a form of social anxiety might nudge into excessive feelings of guilt.

Guilt done right?
=================

So here are some musings on how to actually respond when you realize you've harmed another person through your own error. I'm writing this to help myself thinking about it, and sharing it partly to maybe benefit answers, and partly to elicit answers from others.

**Principle #1: ** Your guilt and remorse should not make things worse for the person you harmed. If you're now behaving in ways they disprefer, you're only adding more harm to the previous harm. What even? More on this in a moment.

Understand and address the causes of your mistake 
--------------------------------------------------

If have harmed someone in a way I regret, then I want model why I did that with sufficient accuracy so that I can change something to avoid repeating that mistake. If it was a skill gap, then put in effort to learn the skill. If I had the skill, but failed to notice to apply it, then train myself into better recognition of applying it.

Possibly one ought to apply 5 [Why's analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys) to their mistake (I haven't done this, but might try it later):

> **Five whys** (or **5 whys**) is an [iterative](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iteration) interrogative [technique](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skill) used to explore the [cause-and-effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causality) relationships underlying a particular problem.[^\[1\]^](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys#cite_note-1) The primary goal of the technique is to determine the [root cause](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_cause_analysis) of a [defect](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/defect) or problem by repeating the question "Why?" five times. The answer to the fifth why should reveal the root cause of the problem.[^\[2\]^](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys#cite_note-ohno-2)
> 
> The technique was described by [Taiichi Ohno](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiichi_Ohno) at [Toyota Motor Corporation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota). Others at Toyota and elsewhere have criticized the five whys technique for various reasons (see [§ Criticism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys#Criticism)).
> 
> An example of a problem is: the vehicle will not start.
> 
> 1.  *Why?* – The battery is dead.
> 2.  *Why?* – The alternator is not functioning.
> 3.  *Why?* – The alternator belt has broken.
> 4.  *Why?* – The alternator belt was well beyond its useful service life and not replaced.
> 5.  *Why?* – The vehicle was not maintained according to the recommended service schedule. (A root cause)^\[^

Apologize and make amends
-------------------------

If it seems like it would be welcome (and it not always is and can take some modeling to guess where or not it is), I think it's good to acknowledge to a person you harmed that you did so. Express remorse, express understanding of how you harmed them, and if possible, take some action to rectify any damage done.

In my ideal world, we'd have established general ways to compensate others for harms we did to them. I don't think this is trivial to make work, but part of me would like a world where you can say "Hey Jared, I realize I was a total ass to you at the Christmas party two years ago and embarrassed you in front of everyone, I've Venmo'd you $300 to apologize." Arguably, you've then succeeded once the harmed party feels indifferent between having been harmed and compensated, and never being harmed.

But this is not the world we currently live in. I think some harms will have natural means of making amends, e.g. I forgot your birthday but then I got you an extra nice present, and some will not. Which is tough.

Note, I think some apologies are for the other person and some are for yourself (or both). I think in many cases, the other person doesn't owe it to you to hear out your apology, and might not want to, in which case it'd be wrong to push your apology onto them. Cf. Principle #1. And relatedly, apologizing doesn't automatically mean that you deserve forgiveness. 

**Principle #2: Not all harms can be rectified**

Ideally, you realize your mistake, you apologize, make amends, the damage is undone, and things proceed as though no harm had been caused (or sometimes, things are even better than before because of the trust and caring that get established).

I think sometimes you can't though, and things are really permanently worse and you can't take them back. I hate that feeling, but my fallback is to do what I can: i.e. take responsibility, make changes so I avoid repeating that mistake, and make what amends I can.

Improper guilt?
===============

Guilt as penance? Guilt as social signaling?
--------------------------------------------

A close cousin, even sibling, of guilt is shame. My sense of shame is that it is very social. You are ashamed because you think what you have done is very judgment-worthy, and others would judge you if they knew about.

(An aside: my model is that humans simulate the judgment of others inside their own heads when no others are present.)

I think what can happen with guilt is you realize you've done something that would get the judgment of others, and you self-punish via unpleasant feelings of guilt. The hope is that if the matter comes up, you will be able to authentically display your guilt, i.e. self-punishment, and signal that you think what you did is wrong, and are committed to not repeating it.

At its core, this might be a fine thing to happen. I think it goes wrong if the shame/fear of judgment is excessive, leading one to "punish" themselves with extreme feelings of guilt, hoping to redeem themselves thereby.

I think this can go even worse if a person starts seeking what feels to them like adequate acknowledgment of their guilt display. I think that gets you into the territory where apologies start to be about the apologizer to the detriment of the apologee.

Disruptive Guilt
----------------

Swimmer963 commented that excessive guilt can go awry if it prevents a person from responding productively. If a person feels so painfully guilty when they think about something they did such that they don't allow themselves to think about it all, this prevents them from reflecting on it, making changes in response to their mistake, making amends, etc. In that case, would definitely be better to feel less guilt.

Harming Others and the Social Contract
======================================

A thought that brings me some solace when I feel bad about having harmed others is realizing that hey, I'm human, I'm going to make mistakes, including mistakes with bad effects on others. So are other people. If we want to have a society at all, we have to forgive people – especially if they earnestly work to not repeat mistakes and make amends.

I imagine there's a tacit [social agreement (contract)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract) when you engage with others that says "I might screw up badly and hurt you and you might screw up badly and hurt me". 

For me, doesn't make me feel okay with harming others. Just saves me from the excesses of guilt that I might fall prey to. Humans gonna human.

* * *

Thanks you to my spouse, [@Swimmer963 (Miranda Dixon-Luinenburg)](https://www.lesswrong.com/users/swimmer963-miranda-dixon-luinenburg?mention=user) whose conversation on this topic were very helpful.

[^tp6jlr46gqj]:  Sometimes I only developed the guilt after years, when I reflected on a long-past situation and empathized with another person in a way I wasn't at the time.