A Field Guide to Feelings
Is Holding a Grudge a Rational Thing To Do?
Is there an argument for mercy?
Suppose you’re angry on Tuesday because someone stole from you on Monday. On Wednesday that person returned what he stole, compensated you for the inconvenience, apologized, and credibly promised never to do it again. If you’re still angry on Thursday, you are said to be holding a grudge.
Plenty of people say grudges should be abolished. They are irrational, lead to unbalanced retribution, and hurt the holder of the grudge. I’ve said so myself in my book, The Road to Reconciliation: A Comprehensive Guide to Peace When Relationships Go Bad. It’s one of the many ways that victims get wrecked on the road to reconciliation and fail to find peace. But an article in The Boston Review by Agnes Callard caused me to reconsider. She says holding a grudge is a perfectly rational thing to do. Could this be true?
Grudges begin in anger and retain many of the characteristics of that hot emotion. Feeling angry is a useful indication that you’re the victim of an injustice. Someone, without a legitimate claim, took what was yours. It wasn’t right and they ought to be punished. As far as that goes, anger is a valuable signal and motivation to get justice; but anger often leads to problems such as violence, vindictive…
