M a g a z i n e o f t h e C e n t e r f o r t h e D e v e l o p m e n t o f P e a c e a n d We l l - B e i n g

Fall 2004 Volume I, Issue 2

$595 US

Plus: Empathy and the Economy:An Interview with

Robert Reich

Why toForgiveBetter health, stronger bonds, and a more peacefulworld. Four authors,including ArchbishopDesmond Tutu,remind us not toforget to forgive.

ii Greater Good Fall 2004

“Look at this:all these kidsand they’re justplaying.”

President Bushfailed thehumility testwhen hesuggested thathis critics didnot know “thetrue nature andheart ofAmerica.”

It takes morethan aninspiringspeech tocreate a fleet ofvolunteers.

For our nation to heal and becomea more humane place, we had toembrace our enemies as well asour friends.

Cover photo: Deborah Feingold

282022

13

16

4

6

10

24

26

Why to Forgive: A Symposium on Forgiveness

6 The New Science of ForgivenessEverett L. Worthington, Jr. has found that forgiveness

carries tremendous health and social benefits—and he’s

taken his research to heart.

Plus: The author tells his own story of forgiveness;

and, is anything unforgivable?

10 Truth + ReconciliationArchbishop Desmond Tutu explains how forgiveness

allowed South Africans to imagine a new beginning—

one based on honesty, peace, and compassion.

Plus: A story of forgiveness from South Africa’s Truth

and Reconciliation Commission.

13 The Choice to ForgiveForgiveness takes practice, says Fred Luskin, but it’s a

skill almost anyone can learn. He shares his research-

tested method for helping people give up their grudges.

Plus: The author’s nine steps to forgiveness.

16 Making Peace through Apology There’s more than one way to say “I’m sorry,” according

to apology expert Aaron Lazare. Some apologies

encourage forgiveness and reconciliation; others only

make things worse. Here’s how to tell the difference.

Plus: Guidelines for what makes an apology work.

Features

20 Caring for the CaregiversTo help teachers deal with the stress of their job, new

programs are drawing on some unconventional—and

research-tested—techniques.

by Sarita Tukaram

22 Gaming the School SystemThanks to one program, students have found that

resolving their differences can be all fun and games.

by Matthew Wheeland

24 Green PeaceWhat could help do the work of medication, meditation, and

community police officers? The answer’s in your back yard.

by Chris Young

Volume I, Issue 2Fall 2004

Magazine of the Center for the Development of Peace and Well-Being

“I knew mysister was inthat building,but my first dutywas to my schoolchildren.”

Forgivenessisn’t justpracticed bysaints ormartyrs, nordoes it benefitonly itsrecipients.

2 from the editors

3 in briefHappiness is

not for sale

Touching research

How to make

friends with

strangers

4 Q&AThe Cost of ApathyAn interview with

former U.S. Labor

Secretary Robert

Reich

26 in printA look at some

of the latest books

on peace and

well-being

28 an idea for thegreater goodAmitai Etzioni

calls for a spirit of

volunteerism for

the 21st century.

29 resources for the greater goodA guide to

organizations

that promote

peace and

well-being

22

10

20

16

6

2 Greater Good Fall 2004

Since the launch of the Centerfor the Development of Peaceand Well-Being and GreaterGood magazine, people oftenask if we study international

peace and diplomacy. It’s a fair assumption,given our name. But our center has its rootsin psychology and education, not peace andconflict studies.

Yet we’re quick to emphasize how thesefields overlap. So many of the principles vitalto peace between individuals—tolerance,empathy, humility—apply to peace betweengroups as well. Indeed, a main mission ofthis magazine is to show how the greatpotential for human goodness extends out-ward from the individual psyche to thelarger society.

Our first issue was devoted to the topic ofcompassion, a primary virtue for the greatergood. We have chosen forgiveness as thetheme of this issue’s symposium because itillustrates the far-reaching power of compas-sion in action. Any exploration of the psychology of peace must appreciate for-giveness’s role in maintaining harmoniousbonds between friends, romantic partners,community groups, and political bodies.

The four essays in the forgiveness sympo-sium form a continuum from the interper-sonal to the international. In the lead essay,Everett Worthington, a psychologist and thedirector of the Campaign for ForgivenessResearch, ties together a range of scientificfindings on the benefits of forgiveness tophysical and mental health, and to the healthof relationships. This research indicates thatrelinquishing grudges large and small makesl i fe more personal ly grat i fying , andstrengthens our connections to family,friends, and even strangers.

Knowing about forgiveness’s benefitsdoesn’t necessarily make it any easier to do.That’s why forgiveness researchers havefocused not only on the rewards of forgive-ness but on successful methods for teachingit. In his essay, Fred Luskin describes themethod that he and his colleagues at Stan-ford University have developed and tested tohelp people let go of lifelong grudges. Hisimpressive results, and the stories behindthem, inspire hope that most anyone canlearn to replace grudges with feelings ofhope and compassion.

As Nobel Peace Prize winner ArchbishopDesmond Tutu describes in his essay, learn-ing to forgive can be vital to the survival ofan entire country. Forgiveness played aprominent role in South Africa’s Truth andReconciliation Commission, which exposedthe horrors of apartheid so that citizenscould begin to confront them and move on.Drawing on the example of South Africa,Archbishop Tutu explains how forgiveness isoften both a moral duty and a politicalnecessity.

Finally, psychiatrist Aaron Lazare bringsthe discussion of forgiveness into the arenaof international relations. Lazare dissects theelements of a successful apology and, apply-ing his analysis to the Abu Ghraib prisonscandal in Iraq, shows how some apologiescan inspire forgiveness and reconciliationbetween one-time enemies—while failedattempts at apology may only make thingsworse.

Integral to each of these essays are storiesof people who chose forgiveness over angerand retribution. Their decisions may seemheroic or even illogical. But the ability toforgive often improved their personalhealth, relationships with others, and practi-cally or symbolically promoted peacebetween cultures. They repaid cruelty withempathy, transforming tragedy into hope.

These instances of forgiveness areadmirable, but they are not aberrations.Some of the people featured in this issuewere simply following their instincts. Inother cases, people struggled with forgive-ness but gradually learned to appreciate itsvalue. The experiences of both groups con-firm what scientists have found repeatedlyin recent years: forgiveness is adaptive andhealthy, and it can be taught to people inmost any circumstance.

In our war-torn world and divided nation,there is a growing hunger for any knowl-edge or skills that might help reduce conflict.Of course, no cure exists for all the problemsthat plague this planet, just as there’s noeasy fix for a damaged relationship. But thescience and stories featured in this issue ofGreater Good convey that forgiveness is avital step in the right direction.

Dacher KeltnerJason Marsh

EditorsDacher KeltnerJason Marsh

Associate EditorElizabeth Cushing Payne

Assistant EditorsAllison Briscoe-SmithChristine Carter

Editorial AssistantLauren Shapiro

Copy EditorElka Karl

Graphic Designiarte design

Circulation ManagerSara Poster

Editorial BoardRichard Davidson, University of Wisconsin, MadisonPaul Ekman, University of California, San FranciscoAmitai Etzioni, The George Washington UniversityOwen Flanagan, Duke UniversityRobert Frank, Cornell UniversityCharles A. Garfield, Shanti; University of California,

San FranciscoAlfie Kohn, authorJonathan Kozol, authorNel Noddings, Stanford UniversityPearl Oliner, Humboldt State UniversitySamuel P. Oliner, Humboldt State UniversityElliott Sober, University of Wisconsin, MadisonFrans de Waal, Emory University

Greater Good (ISBN #1553-3239) explores currenttrends in the study and practice of peace and well-being, including subtopics such as compassion,empathy, altruism, resilience, and conflict resolu-tion. It fuses innovative research with inspiringstories, promoting dialogue between social scien-tists and parents, teachers, community leaders,activists, and policy makers.

Subscriptions: Annual subscriptions to GreaterGood are $9.95 for one year (two issues) and$15.95 for two years (four issues). Orders outsidethe U.S. should add $6 shipping and handling.Checks should be made payable to UC Regents. Tosubscribe or request a free sample issue of GreaterGood, please email Greater@berkeley.edu, call 510-643-8965, or visit http://peacecenter.berkeley.edu.Orders can also be mailed to Greater Good, 1113Tolman Hall, #1690, UC-Berkeley, Berkeley, CA,94720-1690, USA.

Greater Good is published semi-annually by theCenter for the Development of Peace and Well-Being at the University of California, Berkeley.The center is dedicated to studying the roots ofbenevolent relationships between individuals,within families, and across communities.

fromtheeditors Greater GoodMagazine of the Center for the Development of Peace and Well-Being

Fall 2004 Greater Good 3

Wealth and healthit may be a cultural cliché to say thatmoney can’t buy happiness. But it’s also theconclusion psychologists Ed Diener andMartin E.P. Seligman reached after anexhaustive scientific review.

Diener and Seligman analyzed over 150studies on happiness, life satisfaction, andvarious other signs of well-being, and pub-lished their findings in the July issue of Psy-chological Science in the Public Interest.They determined that traditional economicindicators of wealth, such as the GrossDomestic Product (GDP) and average percapita income, don’t accurately reflect men-tal health and happiness within industrial-ized nations. For instance, although the GDPhas risen dramatically over the past severaldecades in the United States, life satisfactionhas not risen in tandem. In fact, there hasbeen an equally dramatic increase in depres-sion over the same time period. Americansare now 10 times more likely to experienceclinical depression or anxiety than they were50 years ago.

“Economics currently plays a central rolein policy decisions because it is assumed thatmoney increases well-being,” write Dienerand Seligman. “But money is an inexact sur-rogate for well-being.” They note that morewealth does increase well-being if it helpspeople meet basic needs that they couldn’tmeet before. But this correlation betweenwealth and well-being disappears as a societybecomes more prosperous.

Because economic markers alone are apoor approximation of well-being, Dienerand Seligman call for a different system ofindicators to follow national and personalwell-being over time. Such a system wouldtrack the factors that previous research hasshown to be crucial to well-being. Theseinclude low divorce rates, high rates of mem-bership in voluntary organizations, highgovernmental effectiveness and stability, andhigh levels of work satisfaction. Such a sys-tem, they hope, would provide governments,organizations, and individuals with a roadmap for the true pursuit of happiness.

—Christine Carter

The right touchone of the first lessons children learn inschool is to keep their hands to themselves.

The reason seems clear: no one wants to betouched inappropriately by a classmate—ora teacher.

But a growing body of research points toconstructive methods of touching as well.Much of this research has focused on thepositive effects of touch in close relation-ships—its role in forming secure, soothingattachments between an infant and a parent,for instance. Now a study has found that cer-tain kinds of touch between strangers canprovide a useful and effective means of com-municating positive reinforcement.

As he reports in the August issue of SocialPsychology of Education, French psycholo-gist Nicolas Guéguen instructed the profes-sor of a 120-person statistics class to give thesame verbal encouragement to any studentwho volunteered to solve a problem at thefront of his classroom. But to a randomlyselected group of students within the class,the professor also gave a slight tap on theupper arm when speaking to them. Guéguencompared the volunteer rate of those whowere touched to those who were not, andfound that students who were touched weresignificantly more likely to volunteer again.In fact, roughly 28 percent of those who weretouched volunteered again, compared withabout nine percent of those who were not.

Drawing on previous research in the field,Guéguen speculates that a touch to the armmay have infused participants with a feelingof self-confidence that motivated their posi-tive behavior. “It is possible that touching,coming from a high-status person, is per-ceived as a sign of distinction,” he writes.“The effect would have been to overcomethe inhibition of correcting the exercise infront of his/her classmates.”

Of course, as Guéguen notes, “touchingtends to have become taboo in the American

school system,” and valid fears about abu-sive forms of touching rightfully limit con-tact within the classroom. But these findingssuggest that as we define and redefine thelimits for this contact, we should not neglectthe sense of comfort and confidence thatmight come through the right kinds of touchbetween strangers. —Jamie Rowen

How to befriend people you don’t likefifty years ago, Gordon Allport recastthe study of prejudice and stereotypes withhis influential “contact theory,” which heldthat contact between members of differentgroups could reduce prejudice. While psy-chologists have tested this theory andsought out the right conditions for friend-ships to form across group boundaries, thequestion of how intergroup contact actuallyworks is more of a mystery. What is it aboutthose friendships that helps break downprejudices?

As they report in a recent issue of the Personality Social Psychology Bulletin,researchers from Australia, the United King-dom, and Italy considered this question inNorthern Ireland, a profoundly segregatedcommunity with a 300-year history of vio-lent conflict. They asked large groups of col-lege-age students and randomly selectedadults about their friendships acrossCatholic and Protestant lines. Not surpris-ingly, they found that people with friends inrival groups, and even those with friendswho had friends in rival groups, showed lessprejudice.

But they also found something else. Basedon the participants ’ own reports, theresearchers determined that the key ingredi-ent in reduced prejudice was reduced anxiety.

Think about it this way: If you hold nega-tive views of a group, when you come intocontact with a member of that group, youare more likely to be nervous—whether it’sabout saying the wrong thing, offendingsomeone, or being treated badly yourself.The researchers found that when someonebefriends a particular member of a rivalgroup, that person becomes less anxious—and more comfortable about interacting withother members of this group in general.

The study suggests the possibility of a rip-ple effect: Seeing friends act comfortablyaround people from other groups couldmake someone less anxious and encouragehim to initiate an intergroup friendshiphimself. One successful way to combat prej-udice, it seems, is by serving as a model toothers. —Allison Briscoe-Smith

in brief

Mik

ki

4 Greater Good Fall 2004

The wealthiest one percent ofAmericans now earns moreafter taxes than the bottom40 percent. Its average after-tax income increased by 200

percent between 1979 and 2000. During thesame period, the bottom fifth of Americanssaw its income rise by just nine percent.

Long before John Edwards spoke of “twoAmericas,” Robert Reich was one of themost prominent critics of these growinginequities. In recent years, Reich, whoserved as Secretary of Labor in the firstClinton administration and is now a profes-sor of social and economic policy at Bran-deis University, has written widely aboutthe challenges middle-class Americans facein a new, globalized economy.

Reich’s writings and lectures stand apartfrom those of other critics who focus oninequality. He doesn’t settle for easy con-demnations of outsourcing or offshoring,nor does he think such effects of globaliza-tion can be easily undone. At the same time,he rejects the idea that these changes needresult in greater disparities of wealth.Instead, Reich attributes rising inequalitynot only to structural economic changesbut to how Americans, and their policymakers, have failed to meet the social chal-lenges posed by the new economy. Whileothers point fingers at the government orbig corporations, Reich also holds a mirrorup to American society.

To Reich, rising inequality is intertwinedwith a breakdown of Americans’ social con-tract—the norms, mores, and values thatdictate their mutual commitments andresponsibilities to one another. His own pol-icy prescriptions for combating inequalitydemand that Americans regain “a sense thatwe have some common bonds—that wehave responsibilities to one another becausewe are of each other,” as he said in a recentlecture, “Social Justice and Social Empathy:Where Did They Go? How Can We RegainThem?” which was sponsored by the Centerfor the Development of Peace and Well-Being at the University of California,Berkeley.

Reich doesn’t shy away from language,like “social empathy,” that’s usuallyemployed by social science researchers. Noris he reluctant to wear his partisan politicalhat: He served as an economic advisor toJohn Kerry during the presidential cam-paign, and his latest book is Reason: WhyLiberals Will Win the Battle for America.But, as was the case in his Berkeley lecture,Reich seems uniquely comfortable in theregion where these fields overlap, exploringthe political implications of our emotionsand values. He recently discussed thistheme with Greater Good.

Greater Good: What does empathy have todo with inequality?

Robert Reich: Any society depends uponempathy in order for people to be able to

answer the question, ‘What do we owe oneanother as members of the same society?’Indeed, without empathy, the very meaningof a society is up for grabs. MargaretThatcher famously declared that there wasno such thing as a society. There might be anation, for strictly political purposes, theremight be a culture, in terms of tradition,but a society, she felt, was a construct with-out meaning. I disagree. I think that wehave all sorts of societies. Some of them arevery tight: clubs, religious affiliations,friendships, neighborhoods. Some are muchlarger, extending outwards in concentriccircles from us as individuals. And we arebound by feelings of empathy and affilia-tion. Those feelings inspire us to come tothe aid of those within these concentric cir-cles.

GG: It’s easy to point to indicators of ris-ing inequality. What do you see as the indi-cators of dwindling empathy?

RR: Rising inequality itself is an indicatorof a breakdown in the social contract. Itmeans that for a variety of reasons, thosewho have resources—and political power—are not taking steps to ensure that largenumbers of others in the same society haveopportunities to better themselves, andhave the resources they need to becomefull-fledged members of that society. Wideinequality suggests that we may not be liv-ing in the same society any longer. In fact, itcould be argued that we’re drifting into sep-

Q & A

The Cost of Apathy

by Jason Marsh

AN INTERVIEW WITH

ROBERT REICH Per

ian

Flah

erty

Fall 2004 Greater Good 5

arate societies: one very rich, one very poor,and one a middle class that’s increasinglyanxious and frustrated.

GG: How did this happen? Is it a new phe-nomenon?

RR: It’s happened before in the UnitedStates in the 1880s and 1890s, the so-calledGilded Age. Inequality of wealth and oppor-tunity were extreme. In happened again inthe 1920s—not quite to the same degree asthe 1880s and 1890s, but inequality was verywide in the ‘20s. It is happening now for athird time.

Now we can have an interesting debateabout cause and effect—that is, is inequalitythe effect of dwindling empathy and a reduc-tion in social solidarity? Or is inequalitysomehow causing it, to the extent that peo-ple who are very wealthy no longer come incontact with people who are poor and nolonger feel the empathy that comes fromcontact. It’s probably both.

GG: So what are some of the broader fac-tors contributing to widening inequalitytoday?

RR: Well, technology and globalization arethe two major structural causes. The moretechnologically sophisticated our economybecomes, and the more globalized, those peo-ple who are well-educated can take advantageof technology and globalization to do contin-uously better. Those who are not well-edu-cated and lack social connections find thattechnology and globalization reduce their

economic security, replace their jobs, andcondemn them to a fairly menial existence.

GG: If we’re not part of that group, whyshould we care about inequality?

RR: In very narrow, selfish terms, wemight care because those of us who are well-positioned might not want to bring up ourchildren in a society that is sharply dividedbetween rich and poor. That kind of societyhas a very difficult time coming to decisions,because the winners and the losers are soclearly differentiated. Democracy itself canbe undermined. Violence, crime, and dema-goguery can result. In other words, it may beincreasingly unpleasant and dysfunctional.The experience of living in a country with alot of disparities of wealth, income, andopportunity may be unpleasant. And thatsociety as a democracy may be increasinglydysfunctional.

GG: With changes in wealth resulting frombroad technological shifts and globalization,what can people do on a local or individuallevel to address growing inequality?

RR: Many things. There are many publicpolicies at the federal, state, and local levelsthat can reduce inequality without necessar-ily reducing the benefits of technology andglobalization. I teach an entire course aboutthese pol icy areas. They range fromimproved education, job training, and earlychildhood education all the way through theearned income tax credit, minimum wage,macroeconomic policies, and many others.

There’s no magic bullet. But it is importantthat the United State becomes more aware ofwhat is happening and why wideninginequality poses a danger. We don’t have tobe economic determinists and throw up ourhands and assume it’s inevitable. There aresteps that can be taken.

GG: Are there policy steps that can be takento address dwindling empathy in particular,that would in some ways motivate people tocare more about inequality in the first place?

RR: Yes. We know from history in thiscountry and elsewhere that empathy isrelated to facing common challenges. Themore people feel that they are in the sameboat, the more they empathize with oneanother. Do we face a common challengetoday? Of course. Terrorism. Global warm-ing. An aging population. All of these andmany others are common problems we face.The art of leadership is the art of enablingpeople to understand their commonalitiesand to build empathy upon that sense ofcommonality.

GG: And do you see that art practiced byour public leaders today?

RR: Not nearly enough. Public leaderstoday—that is, elected officials—tend to betoo dependent on public opinion polls. Andpublic opinion polls only register where peo-ple are right now. You can’t lead people towhere they already are, because they’realready there. The essence of leadership isleading them to where they’re not, butwhere they could be.

GG: So if people aren’t in a position rightaway to be public leaders or effect policychange, what do you hope will change intheir consciousness? What could they startto do tomorrow?

RR: I hope they have a sense of their ownpower, and their capacity to inspire others.Too many people in this country today arediscouraged, if not cynical, about the possi-bilities for reform and progressive change.And yet the climate is ripe for it. People arewaking up to some of the large problems—the social inequities in this country andaround the world—that are beginning tohaunt us. If we do nothing, they will simplyget worse. An individual working alone haslimited capacity, obviously. But individualscoming together—in their communities, intheir neighborhoods, in their small soci-eties—and linking up with others in othercommunities and neighborhoods canaccomplish a huge amount.

Jason Marsh is a co-editor of Greater Good.

The art ofleadership is the artof enabling people to understand theircommonalities and to build empathyupon that sense ofcommonality.

‘‘

’’

6 Greater Good Fall 2004

When Chris Carrier was10 years old, he wasa b d u c t e d n e a r h i sFlorida home, takeni n t o t h e s w a m p s ,

stabbed repeatedly in the chest and abdomenwith an ice pick, and then shot through thetemple with a handgun. Remarkably, hoursafter being shot, he awoke with a headache,unable to see out of one eye. He stumbled tothe highway and stopped a car, which tookhim to the hospital.

Years later, a police officer told Chris thatthe man suspected of his abduction lay closeto death. “Confront him,” suggested theofficer. Chris did more than that. He com-forted his attacker during the man’s finalweeks of life, and ultimately forgave him,bringing peace to them both.

Chris Carrier’s act of forgiveness mightseem unfathomable to some, an act ofextreme charity or even foolishness. Indeed,our culture seems to perceive forgiveness asa sign of weakness, submission, or both.Often we find it easier to stigmatize or deni-grate our enemies than to empathize with orforgive them. And in a society as competitiveas ours, people may hesitate to forgivebecause they don’t want to relinquish theupper hand in a relationship. “It is muchmore agreeable to offend and later ask for-giveness than to be offended and grant for-giveness,” said the philosopher FriedrichNietzsche. I think many people today areinclined to agree with him.

Surely now is a time when the world coulduse some more forgiveness. Americansresent the Muslim world for September 11.Some hold a grudge against President Bushand supporters of the war in Iraq, while oth-

ers begrudge war protestors. Iraqis and muchof the Middle East feel humiliated by theUnited States. Diplomats in the UnitedNations bicker and insult each other, ignitingor re-igniting national rivalries. Still, manypeople hesitate to ask for or grant forgive-ness when they feel they have nothing togain in return.

But a new line of research suggests some-thing different. This research has shown thatChris Carrier’s story isn’t an anomaly. For-giveness isn’t just practiced by saints or mar-tyrs, nor does it benefit only its recipients.Instead, studies are finding connectionsbetween forgiveness and physical, mental,and spiritual health, and evidence that itplays a key role in the health of families,communities, and nations. Though thisresearch is still young, it has already pro-duced some exciting findings—and raisedsome important questions.

Forgiveness and healthPerhaps the most basic question to addressfirst is, What is forgiveness? Though mostpeople probably feel they know what for-giveness means, researchers differ aboutwhat actually constitutes forgiveness. I’vecome to believe that how we define forgive-ness usually depends on context. In caseswhere we hope to forgive a person withwhom we do not want a continuing relation-ship, we usually define forgiveness as reduc-i n g o r e l i m i n a t i n g r e s e n t m e n t a n dmotivations toward revenge. My colleaguesMichael McCullough, Kenneth Rachal, and Ihave defined forgiveness in close relation-ships to include more than merely gettingrid of the negative. The forgiving personbecomes less motivated to retaliate against

someone who offended him or her, and lessmotivated to remain estranged from thatperson. Instead, he becomes more motivatedby fee l ings o f goodwi l l , desp i te theoffender’s hurtful actions. In a close relation-ship, we hope, forgiveness will not onlymove us past negative emotions, but moveus toward a net positive feeling. It doesn’tmean forgetting or pardoning an offense.

Unforgiveness, by contrast, seems to be anegative emotional state where an offendedperson maintains feelings of resentment,hostility, anger, and hatred toward the per-son who offended him. I began with ChrisCarrier’s story because it is such a clearexample of forgiveness. Although he neverforgot or condoned what his attacker did tohim, he did replace his negative emotionsand desire for retribution with feelings ofcare and compassion, and a drive towardconciliation.

People can deal with injustices in manyways. They don’t have to decide to forgive,and they don’t necessarily need to changetheir emotions. But if they don’t changetheir response in some way, unforgivenesscan take its toll on physical, mental, rela-tional, and even spiritual health. By contrast,new research suggests that forgiveness canbenefit people’s health.

In one study, Charlotte vanOyen Witvliet,a psychologist at Hope College, asked peopleto think about someone who had hurt, mis-treated, or offended them. While theythought about this person and his pastoffense, she monitored their blood pressure,heart rate, facial muscle tension, and sweatgland activity. To ruminate on an old trans-gression is to practice unforgiveness. Sureenough, in Witvliet’s research, when people

The New Science ofFORGIVENESS

Everett L. Worthington, Jr. has dedicated hiscareer to the study of forgiveness. He has foundthat it carries tremendous health and socialbenefits—and he’s taken his research to heart.

why to forgive

Fall 2004 Greater Good 7

recalled a grudge, their physical arousalsoared. Their blood pressure and heart rateincreased, and they sweated more. Ruminat-ing about their grudges was stressful, andsubjects found the rumination unpleasant. Itmade them feel angry, sad, anxious, and lessin control. Witvliet also asked her subjects totry to empathize with their offenders orimagine forgiving them. When they prac-ticed forgiveness, their physical arousalcoasted downward. They showed no more ofa stress reaction than normal wakefulnessproduces.

In my own lab, we wanted to determinewhether people’s stress levels are related totheir ability to forgive a romantic partner.We measured levels of cortisol in the salivaof 39 people who rated their relationship aseither terrific or terrible. Cortisol is a hor-mone that metabolizes fat for quick responseto stress (and after the stress ends, depositsthe fat back where it is easily accessible—around the waist). People with poor (orrecently failed) relationships tended to havehigher baseline levels of cortisol, and theyalso scored worse on a test that measurestheir general willingness to forgive. Whenthey were asked to think about their rela-tionship, they had more cortisol reactivity—

that is, their stress hormone jumped. Thosejumps in stress were highly correlated withtheir unforgiving attitudes toward theirpartner. People with very happy relation-ships were not without stresses and strainsbetween them. But forgiving their partner’sfaults seemed to keep their physical stress inthe normal range.

The physical benefits of forgiveness seemto increase with age, according to a recentstudy led by Loren Toussaint, a psychologistat Luther College in Iowa. Toussaint—alongwith David Williams, Marc Musick, andSusan Everson—conducted a national sur-vey of nearly 1,500 Americans, asking thedegree to which each person practiced andexperienced forgiveness (of others, of self,and even if they thought they had experi-enced forgiveness by God). Participants alsoreported on their physical and mentalhealth. Toussaint and his colleagues foundthat older and middle-aged people forgaveothers more often than did young adults andalso felt more forgiven by God. What’smore, they found a significant relationshipbetween forgiving others and positive healthamong middle-aged and older Americans.People over 45 years of age who had for-given others reported greater satisfaction

with their lives and were less likely to reportsymptoms of psychological distress such asfeelings of nervousness, restlessness, andsadness.

Why might that relationship betweenunforgiveness and negative health symp-toms exist? Consider that hostility is a cen-tral part of unforgiveness. Hostility also hasbeen found to be the part of Type A behaviorthat seems to have the most pernicioushealth effects, such as a heightened risk ofcardiovascular disease. Forsaking a grudgemay also free a person from hostility and allits unhealthy consequences.

It probably isn’t just hostility and stressthat link unforgiveness and poor health.According to a recent review of the literatureon forgiveness and health that my colleagueMichael Scherer and I recently published,unforgiveness might compromise theimmune system at many levels. For instance,our review suggests that unforgivenessmight throw off the production of importanthormones and even disrupt the way our cellsfight off infections, bacteria, and other phys-ical insults like mild periodontal disease.

Forgiveness and relationshipsForgiveness has proven beneficial to a rangeof relationships, whether it’s a family,romantic, or professional relationship. For-giveness within close relationships is notharder or easier than forgiving absent indi-viduals, such as strangers who rob or assaultus or people who have moved away or diedsince hurting us. In ongoing relationships,forgiveness is simply different. A presentpartner can make things better or worse. Anabsent person can’t be confronted, but alsocan’t reject a confrontation or compoundharms with new hurts.

Johan Karremans and Paul Van Lange inthe Netherlands and Caryl Rusbult at theUniversity of North Carolina have, in collab-oration and separately, investigated forgive-ness in close relationships. People areusually more willing to forgive if they sensetrust and a willingness to sacrifice from theirpartner. The authors predicted that forgivingwould be associated with greater well-being,especially in relationships of strong ratherthan weak commitment. They figured thatpeople in highly committed relationshipshave more to lose if the relationship fails andso would be willing to make certain sacri-fices. They used several methods, such ashaving people fill out questionnaires, recallpast relationships, and assess their presentrelationships. What they found was that ifpeople were unwilling to sacrifice at times—

Leig

h W

ells

Life Scienceby Everett L. Worthington, Jr.

The phone rang. My brother Mike’s voice

was shaky on the other end of the line.

“Mom’s been murdered.”

That morning, Mike had found our 78-

year-old mother, Frances Worthington,

bludgeoned to death in the doorway to her

bedroom. She had apparently interrupted

burglars in mid-robbery.

Rage grew inside of me during the seven-

hour drive to Tennessee. It swelled as my

brother, sister, and I talked about the murder

scene. That night I was so angry I couldn’t

sleep. Around 3 a.m., I began to consider the

irony of my situation. I had studied forgive-

ness scientifically for seven years, but all day

the word “forgiveness” hadn’t even crossed

my mind. I wondered, “Could the forgiveness

methods I’ve taught other people actually

help me?”

By this time in 1996, colleagues and I had

helped about 1,000 people experience emo-

tional forgiveness by replacing negative,

unforgiving emotions with positive emotions

like empathy, sympathy, compassion, and

love. The last thing I wanted to do was feel

anything positive about the murder, but I

knew that my anger would solve nothing.

Healing could only come from changing my

emotions.

I systematically imagined who the perpe-

trator was and what he must have experi-

enced. I tried to understand his fear and

shame at being caught by my mother, and I

tried to extend compassion toward him. My

own rage was gradually replaced by empa-

thy; my resentment gave way to emotional

forgiveness.

Forgiveness is seldom a once-and-for-all-

time event. My emotions were complicated

when, in the following weeks, a youth con-

fessed, then retracted, then was not

arraigned after a grand jury determined that

the evidence in the case had been contami-

nated.

I struggled with this news, but forgive-

ness held as I extended my empathy toward

overworked and unappreciated police and

courts. I replaced resentment toward the sys-

tem with compassion. Years later, I learned

that the youth had been killed in a fight, and

I felt sad. If he had committed the murder

but hadn’t repented, now he wouldn’t have

the chance.

8 Greater Good Fall 2004

why to forgive

if they wanted to exact revenge rather thanpractice forgiveness—they often sufferedconflict, negative emotions, and poor abilitiesto compromise when inevitable differencesarose.

The researchers also found the relation-ship between forgiveness and well-being inmarriages was stronger than in other rela-tionships. Their findings suggest that themore we invest in a relationship, the morewe need a repertoire of good strategies toguide it through troubled times—and themore these strategies will prove satisfyingand rewarding. Forgiveness is one of thosestrategies.

Colleagues and I developed a scale tomeasure forgiveness between people. Weasked people to remember a specific offensein which someone harmed them, and thenasked about their motives for revenge andfor avoiding the perpetrator. People whoshowed high motivations for revenge andavoidance had lower relationship satisfac-tion. People who tended to forgive reportedgreater relationship quality and also greatercommitment to relationships.

Frank Fincham and Julie Hall, at the Uni-versity of Buffalo, and Steven Beach, at theUniversity of Georgia, recently reviewed 17empirical studies on forgiveness in relation-ships. By their analysis, the studies suggestthat when partners hurt each other, there isoften a shift in their goals for their relation-ship. They might have previously professedundying love and worked hard to cooperatewith their partner, but if this partner betraysthem, suddenly they become more competi-tive. They focus on getting even and keepingscore instead of enjoying each other. Theyconcentrate on not losing arguments ratherthan on compromise. They use past trans-gressions to remind the partner of his or herfailings. Forgiveness, assert Fincham and hiscolleagues, can help restore more benevolentand cooperative goals to relationships.

Learning forgiveness These findings suggest that forgiveness hasbenefits like high self-esteem, better moods,and happier relationships. But skeptical sci-entists will be quick to ask, “Couldn’t it sim-ply be that when people feel good aboutthemselves, feel happy, and feel satisfied withtheir relationships, they’ll forgive almostanything? Could it be that happiness drivesforgiveness, not the other way around?”Sometimes that might well be the case. Butone way to test this idea is to see whetherpeople—cheerful, sad, and everywhere inbetween—could learn to become more for-giving and, if they do, how that might affecttheir mental and physical health. This wouldimply that forgiveness could be possible foralmost anyone, not just the perpetuallyhappy and well-adjusted.

Interventions have been designed for part-ners seeking to make their marriages better,for parents, victims of incest, men offendedbecause their partner aborted a pregnancy,people in recovery for drug and alcohol prob-lems, divorced partners, and love-deprivedadolescents.

Through all these interventions, no onehas yet found a silver bullet that helps peopleforgive instantly. But evidence so far sug-gests that people of various backgrounds andtemperaments can learn to forgive. Forinstance, Robert Enright has developed a spe-cific 20-step intervention that he has testedrigorously, with encouraging results. In onestudy, men who reported being hurt by theirpartner’s decision to have an abortion wentthrough 12 90-minute weekly sessionsdesigned to help them forgive. These menshowed a significant increase in their levelsof forgiveness and significant reductions intheir levels of anxiety, anger, and grief whencompared with a control group. Enright hasreported similar results with other popula-tions, including victims of incest.

Not everyone responds equally to theseinterventions, and a lot of work still mustbe done to determine exactly what makesforgiveness interventions most effective.British researchers Peter Woodruff andTom Farrow are doing some of this impor-tant work. Their research suggests that theareas in the brain associated with forgive-ness are often deep in the emotional cen-ters, in the region known as the limbicsystem, rather than in the areas of the cor-tex usually associated with reasoned judg-ments. In one study, they asked people tojudge the fairness of a transgression andthen consider whether to forgive it orempathize with the transgressor. Ten indi-

People who tendedto forgive reportedgreater relationshipquality and alsogreater commitmentto relationships.

A STORY OF FORGIVENESS

Is Anything Unforgivable?by Jason Marsh

Forgiveness may benefit health and

relationships, but that doesn’t mean

people can—or should— forgive a l l

offenses. Some acts, such as the terrorist

attacks of September 11, are so vicious

that forgiving them seems improbable—

and perhaps even immoral.

Judaism, for instance, teaches that God

cannot forgive a sin against another person

unless the victim grants forgiveness, mak-

ing it impossible to receive forgiveness for

murder. By that reasoning, the September

11 attacks would certainly seem to be

unforgivable.

But some researchers, like psychologist

Ervin Staub, have suggested that forgive-

ness is necessary after acts of murder or

even genocide in order to promote heal-

ing, reconciliation, and psychological well-

being. This idea is consistent with new

findings by psychologists Loren Toussaint

and Jon Webb.

Toussaint and Webb surveyed more

than 400 people six to nine months after

September 11, asking the respondents

how forgiving they felt toward the terror-

ists, themselves, and toward other people

in general. Their results showed that, not

surprisingly, people found it significantly

more difficult to forgive the terrorists than

to forgive themselves or others. Still, Tou-

ssaint and Webb found that feelings of for-

giveness toward the terrorists were more

common than they had expected—42 per-

cent of respondents seemed willing to con-

sider forgiving the terrorists. Those

feelings of forgiveness held regardless of

whether respondents reported being

directly or indirectly affected by the Sep-

tember 11 attacks.

What’s more, people who felt more for-

giving toward the terrorists in general

reported significantly lower levels of

depression and anger and fewer symptoms

of post-traumatic stress disorder than peo-

ple who did not. Toussaint said he was

“surprised and amazed” by respondents’

ability to forgive.

“You can think of forgiveness as a heal-

ing ointment for the incredible wounds peo-

ple suffer from events as heinous as

September 11,” he said. “I’m not advocating

turning around and forgiving on September

12. But six months later, a fair number of

people in our survey suggested that that’s

what they were at least starting to do.”

H Y P O T H E S E S

Fall 2004 Greater Good 9

viduals evaluated several social scenarioswhile the researchers recorded images oftheir brain act ivity. Whether peopleempathized or forgave, similar areas in theemotion centers of the brain lit up. Whenthose same people thought about the fair-ness of the same transgression, though, theemotion centers stopped being as active.This could be a clue for interventionists. Tohelp people forgive, help them steer clearof dwelling on how fair a transgression wasor how just a solution might be. Instead,get people to see things from the other per-son’s perspective.

There are other clues for encouraging for-giveness. Charlotte Witvliet, NathanielWade, Jack Berry, and I have conducted a setof three studies that show that when peoplefeel positive emotions toward transgres-sors—such as when they receive apologiesor restitution for offenses—they experiencechanges in physiology, including loweredblood pressure, heart rate, and sweat activity,as well as lowered tension in the frown mus-cles of the face. When they experience posi-tive emotions toward transgressors, they arealso more likely to forgive them. Sincereapologies helped people forgive and calmdown. Getting fair restitution on top of anapology magnified the effect. Insincere orincomplete apologies actually riled people upmore.

It’s important to stress again that forgive-ness usually takes time. In fact, in a meta-analysis of all research that measured theimpact of forgiveness interventions,Nathaniel Wade and I found that a factor assimple as the amount of time someone spenttrying to forgive was highly related to theactual degree of forgiveness experienced.

So, the question I posed at the beginningof this section—does forgiveness drive hap-piness or vice versa?—seems at least in partanswerable by saying that forgiveness is notnecessarily something that just comes natu-rally to people with high self-esteem andstable relationships. Instead, it is somethingall different kinds of people can learn. Withthe right kind of practice, its benefits can beavailable to most of us.

Teaching people to forgive raises someimportant questions. Are some offenses soheinous that they ought never to be for-given? Are there times when justice shouldtrump forgiveness? (See sidebar.) Justice andforgiveness do clash at times. I do not advo-cate forgiving under all circumstances(unless a person’s religion dictates it). But Iknow that a sincere apology, restitution, or apunishment imposed by the proper authori-

ties can often make it easier for victims togrant forgiveness. The big transgressions arenot necessarily “unforgivable” because theyare big. Instead, big transgressions are oftenthe ones that, if they are ever to be sur-mounted, must be forgiven.

What we don’t knowWhile we have learned a lot over the pastfew years, we also realize that our knowl-edge fills only a tea cup when there is a giantswimming pool of unknowns awaiting dis-covery.

We know little about how children forgiveor how they can learn to forgive. We knowthat not everyone responds equally to theinterventions to promote forgiveness. Whodoes and doesn’t benefit by different for-giveness interventions? How long shouldinterventions last?

We still need to discover how forgivenesscan be better promoted in society at large.How can schools, parents, and sport coacheswork together in communities to fostercooperation and forgiveness instead of vio-lence? Given the role of forgiveness in reli-gious traditions, should youth programs becreated to promote forgiveness at churches,mosques, or synagogues? Can the mediaserve as a tool for effective education, orcan forgiveness education work as anadjunct to therapy by mental health profes-sionals?

Conf l i c ts and transgress ions seeminevitable as humans rub against eachother. The sharp corners of our personali-ties irritate and scuff against those withwhom we interact on a daily basis. But ifthe new science of forgiveness has provenanything, it’s that these offenses don’t needto condemn us to a life of hurt and aggrava-tion. For years, political and religious fig-u r e s , s u c h a s N e l s o n M a n d e l a a n dArchbishop Desmond Tutu in South Africa,have demonstrated the beauty and effec-tiveness of forgiveness in action. Through aharmony of research and practice, I trustthat we can continue to foster forgive-ness—and continue to study the effects sci-entifically—to bring health to individuals,relationships, and societies as a whole.

Everett L. Worthington, Jr., Ph.D., is a professor andchair in the department of psychology at VirginiaCommonwealth University. He acknowledges sup-port from A Campaign for Forgiveness Research, ofwhich he serves as executive director, for fundingpreparation of this essay.

10 Greater Good Fall 2004

Malusi Mpumlwana was ayoung enthusiastic anti-apartheid activist and aclose associate of SteveBiko in South Africa’s

crucial Black Consciousness Movement ofthe late 1970s and early 1980s. He wasinvolved in vital community developmentand health projects with impoverished andoften demoralized rural communities. As aresult, he and his wife were under strict sur-veillance, constantly harassed by the ubiqui-tous security police. They were frequentlyheld in detention without trial.

I remember well a day Malusi gave thesecurity police the slip and came to my officein Johannesburg, where I was serving asgeneral secretary of the South AfricanCouncil of Churches. He told me that duringhis frequent stints in detention, when thesecurity police routinely tortured him, he

used to think, “These are God’s children andyet they are behaving like animals. Theyneed us to help them recover the humanitythey have lost.” For our struggle againstapartheid to be successful, it requiredremarkable young people like Malusi.

All South Africans were less than wholebecause of apartheid. Blacks suffered yearsof cruelty and oppression, while many privi-leged whites became more uncaring, lesscompassionate, less humane, and thereforeless human. Yet during these years of suffer-ing and inequality, each South African’shumanity was still tied to that of all others,white or black, friend or enemy. For our owndignity can only be measured in the way wetreat others. This was Malusi’s extraordinaryinsight.

I saw the power of this idea when I wasserving as chairman of the Truth and Recon-ciliation Commission in South Africa. Thiswas the commission that the post-apartheid

government, headed by our president, Nel-son Mandela, had established to move usbeyond the cycles of retribution and violencethat had plagued so many other countriesduring their transitions from oppression todemocracy. The commission granted perpe-trators of political crimes the opportunity toappeal for amnesty by giving a full andtruthful account of their actions and, if theyso chose, an opportunity to ask for forgive-ness—opportunities that some took and oth-ers did not. The commission also gavevictims of political crimes a chance to telltheir stories, hear confessions, and thusunburden themselves from the pain and suf-fering they had experienced.

For our nation to heal and become a morehumane place, we had to embrace our ene-mies as well as our friends. The same is truethe world over. True enduring peace—between countries, within a country, within

a community, within a family—requires realreconciliation between former enemies andeven between loved ones who have struggledwith one another.

How could anyone really think that truereconciliation could avoid a proper con-frontation? After a husband and wife or twofriends have quarreled, if they merely seekto gloss over their differences or metaphori-cally paper over the cracks, they must not besurprised when they are soon at it again,perhaps more violently than before, becausethey have tried to heal their ailment lightly.

True reconciliation is based on forgiveness,and forgiveness is based on true confession,and confession is based on penitence, on con-trition, on sorrow for what you have done.We know that when a husband and wifehave quarreled, one of them must be readyto say the most difficult words in any lan-guage, “I’m sorry,” and the other must beready to forgive for there to be a future for

their relationship. This is true between par-ents and children, between siblings, betweenneighbors, and between friends. Equally,confession, forgiveness, and reconciliation inthe lives of nations are not just airy-fairyreligious and spiritual things, nebulous andunrealistic. They are the stuff of practicalpolitics.

Those who forget the past, as many havepointed out, are doomed to repeat it. Just interms of human psychology, we in SouthAfrica knew that to have blanket amnestywhere no disclosure was made would notdeal with our past. It is not dealing with thepast to say glibly, “Let bygones be bygones,”for then they will never be bygones. Howcan you forgive if you do not know what orwhom to forgive? In our commission hear-ings, we required full disclosure for us togrant amnesty. Only then, we thought,would the process of requesting and receiv-ing forgiveness be healing and transforma-tive for all involved. The commission’srecord shows that its standards for disclosureand amnesty were high indeed: Of the morethan 7,000 applications submitted to theTruth and Reconciliation Commission, itgranted amnesty to only 849 of them.

Unearthing the truth was necessary notonly for the victims to heal, but for the per-

petrators as well. Guilt, even unacknowl-edged guilt, has a negative effect on theguilty. One day it will come out in someform or another. We must be radical. Wemust go to the root, remove that which isfestering, cleanse and cauterize, and then anew beginning is possible.

Forgiveness gives us the capacity to makea new start. That is the power, the rationale,of confession and forgiveness. It is to say, “Ihave fallen but I am not going to remainthere. Please forgive me.” And forgiveness isthe grace by which you enable the other per-son to get up, and get up with dignity, tobegin anew. Not to forgive leads to bitternessand hatred, which just like self-hatred andself-contempt, gnaw away at the vitals ofone’s being. Whether hatred is projected outor projected in, it is always corrosive of thehuman spirit.

We have all experienced how much betterwe feel after apologies are made and

Forgiveness is not just personally rewarding,it’s also a political necessity, says ArchbishopDesmond Tutu. He explains how forgivenessallowed South Africans to imagine a newbeginning—one basedon honesty, peace, andcompassion. Truth+ R

why to forgive

Reconciliation

Deb

orah

Fei

ngol

d

accepted, but even still it is so hard for us tosay that we are sorry. I often find it difficultto say these words to my wife in the inti-macy and love of our bedroom. How muchmore difficult it is to say these words to ourfriends, our neighbors, and our coworkers.Asking for forgiveness requires that we takeresponsibility for our part in the rupturethat has occurred in the relationship. We canalways make excuses for ourselves and findjustifications for our actions, however con-torted, but we know that these keep uslocked in the prison of blame and shame.

In the story of Adam and Eve, the Biblereminds us of how easy it is to blame others.When God confronted Adam about eatingthe forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowl-edge of Good and Evil, Adam was less thanforthcoming in accepting responsibility.Instead he shifted the blame to Eve, andwhen God turned to Eve, she too tried topass the buck to the serpent. (The poor ser-pent had no one left to blame.) So we shouldnot be surprised at how reluctant most peo-ple are to acknowledge their responsibilityand to say they are sorry. We are behavingtrue to our ancestors when we blame every-one and everything except ourselves. It is theeveryday heroic act that says, “It’s my fault.I’m sorry.” But without these simple words,forgiveness is much more difficult.

Forgiving and being reconciled to our ene-mies or our loved ones are not about pre-tending that things are other than they are.It is not about patting one another on theback and turning a blind eye to the wrong.True reconciliation exposes the awfulness,the abuse, the pain, the hurt, the truth. Itcould even sometimes make things worse. Itis a risky undertaking but in the end it isworthwhile, because in the end only an hon-est confrontation with reality can bring realhealing. Superficial reconciliation can bringonly superficial healing.

If the wrongdoer has come to the point ofrealizing his wrong, then one hopes therewill be contrition, or at least some remorseor sorrow. This should lead him to confessthe wrong he has done and ask for forgive-ness. It obviously requires a fair measure ofhumility. But what happens when such con-trition or confession is lacking? Must thevictim be dependent on these before she canforgive? There is no question that such aconfession is a very great help to the onewho wants to forgive, but it is not absolutelyindispensable. If the victim could forgiveonly when the culprit confessed, then thevictim would be locked into the culprit’swhim, locked into victimhood, no matter herown attitude or intention. That would bepalpably unjust.

In the act of forgiveness, we are declaringour faith in the future of a relationship andin the capacity of the wrongdoer to change.We are welcoming a chance to make a newbeginning. Because we are not infallible,because we will hurt especially the ones welove by some wrong, we will always need aprocess of forgiveness and reconciliation todeal with those unfortunate yet all toohuman breaches in relationships. They arean inescapable characteristic of the humancondition.

We have had a jurisprudence, a penologyin Africa that was not retributive butrestorative. Traditionally, when people quar-reled the main intention was not to punishthe miscreant but to restore good relations.This was the animating principle of ourTruth and Reconciliation Commission. ForAfrica is concerned, or has traditionally beenconcerned, about the wholeness of relation-ships. That is something we need in thisworld—a world that is polarized, a worldthat is fragmented, a world that destroyspeople. It is also something we need in ourfamilies and friendships. For retributionwounds and divides us from one another.Only restoration can heal us and make uswhole. And only forgiveness enables us torestore trust and compassion to our relation-ships. If peace is our goal, there can be nofuture without forgiveness.

Desmond Tutu, the recipient of the Nobel PeacePrize in 1984, retired as Archbishop of Cape Town,South Africa, in 1996. He then served as chairmanof South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commis-sion. This essay draws from his latest book, GodHas a Dream (Doubleday, 2004). Audio of ArchbishopTutu reading from his book can be heard atwww.godhasadream.com.

Making Changeby Linda Biehl (as told to Jason Marsh)

Eleven years ago, near Cape Town, SouthAfrica, Easy Nofemela, Ntobeko Peni, and twoother South African men murdered Amy Biehl,a white American Fulbright scholar. WhenSouth Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Com-mission granted the men amnesty for theircrime in 1998, Amy Biehl’s parents, Peter andLinda, supported the decision. Today, EasyNofemela and Ntobeko Peni work with LindaBiehl at the Amy Biehl Foundation Trust inCape Town, a charity that supports youth edu-cation and anti-violence programs in SouthAfrica. Peter Biehl passed away in 2002.

Ireally do give credit to the Truth and Rec-

onciliation Commission and the amnesty

process. Easy and Ntobeko needed to confess

and tell the truth in order to receive amnesty,

and there was a genuine quality to their testi-

mony. I had to get outside of myself and real-

ize that these people lived in an environment

that I’m not sure I could have survived in.

What would you do if you had been oppressed

for generations? What would you do? I think

you have to ask yourself these questions.

Then there was their desire to actually

meet us. They wanted us to be a part of their

lives. When I walked into Easy’s house for the

first time, I showed him a photo of my new

grandson. Easy looked at me and said, “Oh,

Makhulu!” That means grandmother, wise

woman. From that point on, I sort of became

Makhulu, not only to some of the township

people like Easy and Ntobeko, but also to my

own grandchildren in the States.

They really did include us in their lives. I

sensed their love, their remorse. I don’t know

how they do it everyday—how they look at pic-

tures of Amy all around the office, how they

look at me. But they’ve come to terms with

that inside themselves.

I do think forgiveness can be a fairly self-

ish thing. You do it for your own benefit

because you don’t want to harbor this pain,

you don’t want to hold this cancer in your

body. So you work through it. The reconcilia-

tion part is the hard work. It’s about making

change.

There’s a lot of collective guilt, but Amy

wanted things to be better here. I sense that

she would be right here alongside us, holding

their hands. I take great comfort in that; it

brings me peace. But we don’t really dwell on

the past. We dwell on what needs to be done.

A STORY OF FORGIVENESS

12 Greater Good Fall 2004

Forgiveness is not about turning ablind eye tothe wrong.

why to forgive

Delores was good naturedand attractive, but I couldsee the hurt in her eyes andthe sorrow in the way sheheld herself. Though her

parents were successful business people whoraised her in an upper middle-class neigh-borhood, her mother was cold and critical,while her father was quiet and aloof.Delores grew up feeling unattractive anduncared for, and she struggled to createstrong relationships.

When Delores was thirty, her fiancé Skipdecided he was more interested in sleepingwith local waitresses than remaining faith-ful to her. One day she came home andfound him in bed with someone else. Shesaw this betrayal as an example of howunfair the world was—as proof that shenever got a break. She was angry, hurt, con-fused, scared, and lonely. Skip moved out,but Delores constantly thought of begginghim to return.

I met Delores when she came to a class Iteach to help people learn to forgive others.She rarely spoke without mentioning atleast one of the many people who had doneher wrong. When she began the forgivenesstraining, she doubted it would do her anygood. She was there because her therapisthad recommended the class.

I’ve known many people like Delores.There’s no shortage of people in the worldwho’ve been hurt—by someone they love,by a friend, by someone they didn’t know atall. My classes rest on the simple and radicalnotion that how we react to these hurts is upto us. I teach people to make forgivingchoices.

For eight years, I have directed the Stan-ford Forgiveness Projects, the largest inter-personal forgiveness training researchprojects ever conducted. In conjunction withthis research, I teach classes and workshopsthat offer a concrete method for forgivingothers. I stress that while pain and disap-pointment are inevitable, they need not con-tro l us. I t i s v i ta l to our hea l th andwell-being that we handle what comes ourway without getting mired in blame andsuffering.

Through my research and teaching, I havefound that forgiveness isn’t just wishfulthinking. It’s a trainable skill. My colleaguesand I have developed a nine-step method forforgiving almost any conceivable hurt. (Seesidebar on next page.) We have tested thismethod through a series of studies withpeople who had been lied to, cheated, aban-doned, beaten, abused, or had their childrenmurdered. They ranged from neglected

spouses to the parents of terrorist victims inNorthern Ireland.

What we have found is that forgivenesscan reduce stress, blood pressure, anger,depression, and hurt, and it can increaseoptimism, hope, compassion, and physicalvitality. For instance, in a study we con-ducted with Protestants and Catholics fromNorthern Ireland who had lost a familymember in the violence there, participantsreported a 40 percent decline in symptomsof depression after undergoing the forgive-ness training. Another study involved peo-ple who had suffered a variety of hurts,from business partners lying to them to bestfriends abandoning them. Six months aftertheir forgiveness training, these peoplereported a 70 percent drop in the degree ofhurt they felt toward the person who hadhurt them, and they said they felt more for-giving in general.

This does not mean that forgiveness isever easy. It certainly wasn’t easy forDelores. But forgiveness was something shecould learn to practice, even if it didn’t comenaturally to her. Difficult as it was, Delores’sexperience is emblematic of many othersI’ve seen through this forgiveness training.Each story is different, but most follow asimilar trajectory across the nine steps offorgiveness.

Fall 2004 Greater Good 13

Forgiveness takes practice,says Fred Luskin, but it’s a skill almost anyone canlearn. He shares hisresearch-tested method for helping people give up their grudges.

Jake

Okt

awie

c

TheChoicetoForgive

14 Greater Good Fall 2004

First stepsDelores had mastered the first step beforewe even met: She determined what she didnot like about her fiancé’s behavior andknew in gruesome detail how she felt aboutit. She told anyone willing to listen what alouse Skip was.

Learning the second and third steps of for-giveness was more difficult. Even a yearafter Skip had cheated on her, Delores was inso much pain that she could not thinkstraight. At first, healing meant only thatshe would revive her relationship with Skip.It was a struggle for her to want to heal just

for her own well-being. In fact, Delores con-sidered taking her fiancé back because shedid not think other men would ever find herattractive. In her mind, Skip was the cause ofand the solution to her problem.

Delores thought forgiving condemned herto being a doormat her entire life. Shethought it meant staying with Skip andoverlooking his cheating. She suffered underthe misconception that forgiving Skip meantcondoning his actions, or that it meant for-getting the painful things that had hap-pened.

In truth, these things are very different.Forgiving someone does not mean forgettingor approving of hurtful events in the past.Rather, it means letting go of your hurt andanger, and not making someone endlesslyresponsible for your emotional well-being.Delores struggled to understand how con-trolling the way she felt in the present wasmore important than reviewing what hap-pened to her in the past. She had trained her-self to talk relentlessly of her past and ofhow her parents and poor relationships lim-ited her options and happiness. It was hardfor her to understand that constantly focus-ing on the past was the reason for her cur-rent distress.

I emphasized to Delores that she could notchange the hurtful parts of the past, but onlyhow much space she rented to them in hermind. By putting less blame on the past, shecould change the way she felt in the present.

Glimmers of peaceDelores got her first glimpse at an alternateway of living when she started to practicestress management every time she thoughtof Skip. She saw, if only for an instant, thatbreathing slowly and deeply affected howshe felt. It gave her body and mind a breakand a glimmer of peace. When she did notpractice, she remained in a state of upset andcontinually blamed her ex-fiancé for howshe felt. After a few weeks of this pattern,she started to understand that she couldreclaim her emotional life.

Delores simultaneously experimentedwith challenging what I call “unenforceablerules.” By “unenforceable rules,” I mean thedesires we have that we are simply power-less to turn into realities. For instance, whileDelores wanted Skip to love and be faithfulto her, it was clear there was no way to makehim do so. His behavior was a constantreminder that he did what he wanted andshe had limited power over him.

Delores also started to examine her theorythat her parents had ruined her life. She

noticed that she had an “unenforceable rule”that her parents must love her and treat herwith kindness. Her parents had treatedDelores the best they could, which includedsome cruelty and lack of care. Her parents’behavior was a reminder that no matter howmuch Delores wanted things to go her way,she did not have the power to control eitherthe past or other people’s behavior. By con-tinuing to insist that her past should some-how change, Delores was dooming herself toendless blame, offense, and suffering.

As the forgiveness training progressed,Delores began to look at her suffering andask herself what “unenforceable rule” shewas trying to enforce. I reminded her thatshe would not be so upset unless she wastrying to change something that was impos-sible for her to change. Delores saw that try-ing to change her ex-fiancé’s behavior wouldalways lead to pain and helplessness. Shesaw that just because she hoped for some-thing, it did not have to come true. Sheunderstood that she would not be continu-ously upset if her rules for life were more inline with reality.

Therefore, Delores took it upon herself tocreate more enforceable rules. She wasfinally able to ask herself the revealing ques-tion, “What do I really want?” What shewanted was happiness, confidence, and peaceof mind—things only she could provide forherself. Through asking this question, shesaw that Skip and her parents did not have toremain in control of her life. Because of thisinsight, she started to work on her “positiveintention,” or life goals described only inpositive terms. She realized that her positivegoals were to learn how to value herself andher actions, as opposed to capturing someoneto affirm her. She saw that it was moreimportant for her to feel good about herselfthan it was for other people to feel goodabout her. Identifying these goals helpedDelores to focus more on creating her futureand less on lamenting her past.

In response, she concentrated on learningabout herself and approving of herself. Shetalked about blaming other people and hold-ing onto the past as impediments to her goalof healing. She told me how she was enter-ing counseling, looking for male friends andnot lovers, and appreciating her good quali-ties. She did not gloss over the difficultiesshe faced—there is no miracle cure for life’sstruggles.

Delores found this strategy helped herfree up mental space so she could uncoverother ways to meet her needs. She realizedthat neither Skip nor her parents were ever

why to forgive

I stressthat whilepain anddisappoint-ment areinevitable,they neednot controlus. I teachpeople tomakeforgivingchoices.

Nine Steps to Forgivenessby Fred Luskin

1. Know exactly how you feel about what

happened and be able to articulate what

about the situation is not OK. Then, tell a

couple of trusted people about your expe-

rience.

2. Make a commitment to yourself to feel bet-

ter. Forgiveness is for you and no one else.

3. Forgiveness does not necessarily mean

reconciling with the person who upset

you or condoning the action. In forgive-

ness you seek the peace and understand-

ing that come from blaming people less

after they offend you and taking those

offenses less personally.

4. Get the right perspective on what is hap-

pening. Recognize that your primary dis-

tress is coming from the hurt feelings,

thoughts, and physical upset you are suf-

fering now, not from what offended you

or hurt you two minutes—or 10 years—

ago.

5. At the moment you feel upset, practice

stress management to soothe your body’s

fight or flight response.

6. Give up expecting things from your life or

from other people that they do not choose

to give you. Remind yourself that you can

hope for health, love, friendship, and

prosperity, and work hard to get them.

However, these are “unenforceable rules:”

You will suffer when you demand that

these things occur, since you do not have

the power to make them happen.

7. Put your energy into looking for another

way to get your positive goals met than

through the experience that has hurt

you.

8. Remember that a life well lived is your

best revenge. Instead of focusing on your

wounded feelings, and thereby giving

power over you to the person who caused

you pain, learn to look for the love,

beauty, and kindness around you. Put

more energy into appreciating what you

have rather than attending to what you

do not have.

9. Amend the way you look at your past so

you remind yourself of your heroic choice

to forgive.

Fall 2004 Greater Good 15

going to approve of her in the way shewanted. She was going to have to find that inherself. Her old habit had been to see herglass as empty. She started retraining hermind to see where her cup might already befull.

Delores looked at her life and saw that shehad good friends and was capable of doingwell at work. She found appreciation for herparents’ business acumen and the freedomtheir financial success granted her to attendcollege full time without accruing any loans.She started to enjoy the beautiful area inwhich she lived and she gave herself creditfor her excellent exercise routine.

Delores also practiced gratitude whendoing ordinary, everyday tasks. She foundthat one can be thankful for anything at anytime, whether it’s the beauty of the trees onepasses while driving, the phenomenon ofone’s breathing, or the embarrassing richesof 21st century America. When shopping,she made it a point to marvel at the opportu-nities she had to purchase a stupendousarray of items. She learned to stop for aminute at the local shopping mall and saythanks to all of the people working there.She would walk into her local supermarketand take a moment to appreciate the abun-dance of food choices in front of her.

Delores had experienced the pain of par-ents who were more interested in their busi-ness than in caring for her. She had dwelledfor years on what she had lost. Now she sawthat her parents’ financial success was also ablessing. She was able to appreciate the hardwork they put in to provide a life for her.Delores practiced and saw the value of theold adage that a life well lived is the bestrevenge.

Moving onWhen I bumped into Delores a year after herforgiveness classes ended, it was rewardingto see the changes in her. She was filled withenergy and showed a lovely smile. When Iasked her about Skip, she almost responded,“Skip who?” Instead of Skip, she wanted totalk about how much she had learned aboutherself. When I asked about her parents,she said her relationship with them hadimproved. Delores accepted what they couldoffer and realized their enormous emotionallimitations. As an adult she understood shewas the one with the best chance to create agood life for herself. She was learning to lether parents off the hook. She forgave themfor their mistakes.

The biggest change in Delores was theway she turned her grievances into more

positive stories about herself. She talkedwith pride of forgiving Skip and learninghow to take care of herself. Delores was awoman who took her forgiveness training toheart. She completed the full nine steps andnow presented herself as a hero and not avictim. Forgiveness brought her a sense ofpeace that had previously eluded her for herentire life.

Of course, she did not always have it easy.She still longed for a loving and tight familyand a faithful partner. When she found thelonging overpowering, she told herself tomake the best of what she had. She wouldtake a walk and remind herself of the bless-ings of a beautiful day or the possibilities thefuture might bring. And sometimes, like therest of us, there were times when she wassimply unhappy.

To become a forgiving person we have topractice forgiving smaller grievances. Then,when a bigger insult comes, we are ready,willing, and able to deal with it. Alterna-tively, like Delores, once we learn to forgivea major grievance, we can understand thevalue of limiting the power that pain andanger hold over us the next time we arehurt. No one can make the people in lifebehave kindly, fairly, or honestly at all times.We cannot end the cruelty on this planet.What we can do is forgive the unkindnessthat comes our way and put energy towardmeeting our positive goals. Then we can helpothers do the same.

Forgiveness, like other positive emotionssuch as hope, compassion, and appreciation,are natural expressions of our humanity.These emotions exist within a deep part ofeach of us. Like many things, they requirepractice to perfect, but with this practicethey become stronger and easier to find.Ultimately, they can be as natural to us asanger and bitterness. It takes a willingness topractice forgiveness day after day to see itsprofound benefits to physical and emotionalwell being, and to our relationships. Perhapsthe most fundamental benefit of forgivenessis that, over time, it allows us access to theloving emotions that can lie buried beneathgrievances and grudges.

Fred Luskin, Ph.D., is the director of the StanfordForgiveness Projects and an associate professor atthe Institute for Transpersonal Psychology. He isthe author of Forgive for Good: A Proven Prescriptionfor Health and Happiness (HarperSanFrancisco,2001) and the upcoming Stress Free for Good: TenProven Life Skills for Health and Happiness (Harper-SanFrancisco, 2005), with Kenneth Pelletier, Ph.D.

M E T H O D S

{16 Greater Good Fall 2004

In April of 2004, televised photographs revealedto the world the abuse of Iraqi prisoners held bythe United States military in the Abu Ghraibprison. These photos, and many other imagesthat followed, showed soldiers taking pleasure in

torturing and mocking naked Iraqi prisoners. The prison-ers’ treatment drew criticism from around the world; itwas described as cruel, humiliating, appalling, and unac-ceptable. Iraqis, understandably, were enraged. As detailsunfolded, Americans, including government and militaryofficials, expressed shame that their country’s democraticand humanitarian values were being undermined.

The U.S. government, as the responsible party, soughtforgiveness—not only from the Iraqis, but also from theAmerican public. Toward this end, President George W.Bush, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, andNational Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice offered pub-lic comments, including what some might call apologies.President Bush told the American public how he had apol-ogized to King Abdullah II of Jordan. “I was sorry for thehumiliation suffered by the Iraqi prisoners and thehumiliation suffered by their families,” he said. “I toldhim I was as equally sorry that people seeing those pic-tures didn’t understand the true nature and heart ofAmerica.... I am sickened that people got the wrongimpression.” In an appeal on an Arabic-language televi-sion station, the president said that Iraqis “must under-stand that I view these practices as abhorrent. They mustalso understand that what took place ... does not representthe America that I know.... Mistakes will be investigated.”

}through

}{{

There’s more than one way

to say “I’m sorry,” according

to apology expert Aaron Lazare.

Some apologies encourage

forgiveness and reconciliation;

others only make things worse.

Here’s how to tell the difference.

MakingPeace

Apology

why to forgive

Fall 2004 Greater Good 17

Speaking on the same television channel,Condoleezza Rice said, “We are deeply sorryfor what has happened to these people, andwhat the families must be feeling. It’s justnot right. And we will get to the bottom ofwhat happened.” Secretary of DefenseRumsfeld told the Senate Armed ServicesCommittee, “These events occurred on mywatch. As Secretary of Defense, I amaccountable for them and I take full respon-sibility.”

These attempted apologies and expres-sions of consolation failed to elicit forgive-ness from the Iraqi people or the Arab worldin general. In fact, the words may haveaggravated feelings of hostility and resent-ment. What was missing from these so-called apologies? Why were they flawed?

What makes an apology work?For the past 10 years, I have studied thestructure and function of public and privateapologies. My goal has been to understandwhy certain apologies succeed or fail to elicitforgiveness and bring about reconciliation.During my analysis, I have been surprisedthat most writers and researchers overlookthe relationship between forgiveness andapology. Forgiveness is often portrayed as agenerous gift bestowed on us by someone

we offended, or as a gift we unconditionallyextend to someone who offended us, regard-less of an apology. Yet my own analysis hasconvinced me that forgiveness and apologyare inextricably linked. Indeed, especiallyafter a party has been humiliated, as in thecase of Abu Ghraib, apology is a vital, oftennecessary, step toward assuaging feelings ofhumiliation, promoting forgiveness, andrestoring balance to a relationship.

I believe there are up to four parts to thestructure of an effective apology. (Not everyapology requires all four parts.) These are:acknowledgment of the offense; explanation;expressions of remorse, shame, and humil-ity; and reparation.

Of these four parts, the one most com-monly defective in apologies is the acknowl-edgment. A valid acknowledgment mustmake clear who the offender is (or has thestanding to speak on behalf of the offender)and who is the offended. The offender mustclearly and completely acknowledge theoffense. People fail the acknowledgmentphase of the apology when they make vagueand incomplete apologies (an apology “forwhatever I did”); use the passive voice(“mistakes were made”); make the apologyconditional (an apology “if mistakes havebeen made”); question whether the victimwas damaged or minimize the offense (anapology “to the degree you were hurt” or“only a few enlisted soldiers were guilty atAbu Ghraib”); use the empathic “sorry”instead of acknowledging responsibility;apologize to the wrong party; or apologizefor the wrong offense.

The U.S. apology for Abu Ghraib con-tained several of these deficiencies. For anational offense of this magnitude, only thepresident has the standing to offer an apol-ogy. It appeared that other spokespersonswere apologizing on behalf of PresidentBush, or even to shield him. That was thefirst deficiency. Second, the apology must bedirected to the offended people, such as theIraqis, the American public, and the Ameri-can military. Instead, in President Bush’smost widely publicized comments, he apolo-gized to the King of Jordan and thenreported his conversation secondhand to theoffended parties. He never directly addressedthe Iraqis, the American public, or the Amer-ican military. Third, the person offering theapology must accept responsibility for theoffense. Neither President Bush nor Con-doleezza Rice accepted such responsibility.

Instead, they extended their sorrow to theIraqi people. Feeling sorry does not commu-nicate acceptance of responsibility. The pres-ident also avoided taking responsibility asthe Commander-in-Chief by using the pas-sive voice when he said, “Mistakes will beinvestigated.” In addition, he failed toacknowledge the magnitude of the offense,which is not only the immediate exposure ofseveral humiliating incidents, but a likelypervasive and systematic pattern of prisonerabuse occurring over an extended period oftime, as reported by the International RedCross.

The next important phase of an apology isthe explanation. An effective explanationmay mitigate an offense by showing it wasneither intentional nor personal, and isunlikely to recur. An explanation will back-fire when it seems fraudulent or shallow, asby saying, “The devil made me do it,” or “Ijust snapped,” or “I was not thinking.” Thereis more dignity in admitting, “There is noexcuse,” than in offering a fraudulent orshallow explanation.

President Bush, and others in his adminis-tration, tried to explain prisoner abuse atAbu Ghraib as the work of a few bad apples.Rather than discussing any broader explana-tion for the abuses—or outlining how hewould make sure they did not happenagain—he just stressed that they did notrepresent “the true nature and heart ofAmerica.”

Remorse, shame, and humility are otherimportant components of an apology. Theseattitudes and emotions show that theoffender recognizes the suffering of theoffended. They also help assure the offendedparty that the offense will not recur, andallow the offender to make clear that heshould have known better.

{ }

Left: Jordan’s King Abdullah II and President Bush in theWhite House Rose Garden discussing the abuses at AbuGhraib prison with the media on May 6, 2004. The United

States apologyfor Abu Ghraibcontainedseveraldeficiencies.

AP

/Wid

e W

orld

Pho

tos

18 Greater Good Fall 2004

President Bush failed the humility testwhen he suggested that his critics did notknow “the true nature and heart of Amer-ica,” and that he was as sickened by peoplegetting the “wrong impression” of Americaas he was by the abuses at Abu Ghraib. Inmy opinion, he was implying that the U.S.was a victim in the incident.

Finally, reparation is a way for an apologyto compensate, in a real or symbolic way, forthe offender’s transgression. When theoffense causes damage or loss of a tangibleobject, the reparation is usually replacementor restoration of the object. When theoffense is intangible, symbolic, or irre-versible—ranging from an insult or humili-ation to serious injury or death—thereparation may include a gift, an honor, afinancial exchange, a commitment to changeone’s ways, or a tangible punishment of theguilty party.

Of the three attempted apologies, only Sec-retary Rumsfeld’s apology accepted responsi-bility for the “events.” But neither he norPresident Bush recommended any repara-tions, including his possible resignation.

How apologies healWithin the above structure of apology, aneffective apology can generate forgivenessand reconciliation if it satisfies one or moreof seven psychological needs in the offendedparty. The first and most common healingfactor is the restoration of dignity, which iscritical when the offense itself is an insult ora humiliation. Another healing factor is theaffirmation that both parties have sharedvalues and agree that the harm committedwas wrong. Such apologies often followracial or gender slurs because they helpestablish what kind of behavior is beyondthe pale. A third healing factor is validationthat the victim was not responsible for theoffense. This is often necessary in rape andchild abuse cases when the victim irra-tionally carries some of the blame. A fourthhealing factor is the assurance that theoffended party is safe from a repeat offense;such an assurance can come when anoffender apologizes for threatening or com-mitting physical or psychological harm to avictim. Reparative justice, the fifth healingfactor, occurs when the offended sees theoffending party suffer through some type ofpunishment. A sixth healing factor is repara-tion, when the victim receives some form ofcompensation for his pain. Finally, the sev-enth healing factor is a dialogue that allowsthe offended parties to express their feelingstoward the offenders and even grieve overtheir losses. Examples of such exchangesoccurred, with apologies offered, during theTruth and Reconciliation Commission hear-ings in South Africa.

In the U.S. government’s apologies for theAbu Ghraib incident, there was not a fullacknowledgement of the offense and anacceptance of responsibility, so there couldbe no affirmation of shared values. In addi-tion, there was no restoration of dignity, noassurance of future safety for the prisoners,no reparative justice, no reparations, and nosuggestion for dialogue with the Iraqis. So itshould not come as a surprise that the Iraqipeople—and the rest of the world—werereluctant to forgive the United States.

A causal relationship between apology andforgiveness is understandable based on thisanalysis of apology. The apology repairs thedamage that was done. It heals the festeringwound and commits the offender to a changein behavior. When the apology meets anoffended person’s needs, he does not have towork at forgiving. Forgiveness comes spon-taneously; the victim feels like his offenderhas released him of a burden or offered hima gift. In response, he often wants to return

the gift by downplaying the damage done tohimself, sharing part of the blame for theoffense, or complimenting the offender insome way. Commonly, the relationshipbecomes stronger with a bond forged out ofthe honesty and courage of the offendingparty.

Getting it rightFor an example of this type of apology, it isuseful to compare the Abu Ghraib incidentwith another case of prisoner abuse and itsaftermath.

Eric Lomax, a Scotsman in the militaryduring World War II, was captured in Singa-pore by the Japanese and held prisoner atKanburi, Thailand, from 1940 to 1944. In hisbook The Railway Man, Lomax describes hisexperience of being caged like an animal in atiny cell, beaten, starved, and tortured. Hiscaptors broke his bones. The interpreter,Nagasi Takashi, who appeared to be in com-mand, became the focus of Lomax’s hostility.

After his release from prison at the end ofthe war, Lomax was a broken man, behavingas if he were still in captivity, unable to shownormal emotions or maintain importantrelationships. He frequently thought aboutexacting revenge on the translator and wasunable to forgive, even though he knew hisvengeance was consuming him. In 1989,Lomax discovered that his nemesis was aliveand was writing about his repentance and hisdesire to be forgiven for his wartime activi-ties. Lomax wanted revenge. He wanted toreconstruct his story of those war years. Hewanted to see Takashi’s sorrow. He wanted tohave power over him.

Lomax and his wife wrote to Takashi, whothen asked for a meeting. Both men andtheir wives met for two weeks near the siteof the prison camp in Thailand and atTakashi’s home in Japan. With Takashi’shelp, Lomax was able to piece together thestory of his prison existence. Takashiacknowledged with sorrow and guilt thewrongs for which he and his county wereresponsible. He said he had never forgottenLomax’s face, and admitted that he and oth-ers in the Japanese Imperial Army hadtreated Lomax and his countrymen “very,very badly.” He explained how, since the war,he had argued against militarism and builtmemorials for the war dead. During theirmeetings, Lomax observed Takashi’s suffer-ing and grief.

Before they met, Lomax had been unableto forgive. He was controlled by his grudgesand vengeance. It took a heartfelt andextended apology on the part of Takashi to

why to forgive

Only SecretaryRumsfeld’sapology acceptedresponsibility forthe “events.” Butneither he norPresident Bushrecommendedany reparations,including hispossibleresignation.

meet Lomax’s needs—the need to have hisdignity restored, to feel safe, to understandthat he and Takashi had shared values, togrieve, and to learn that Takashi suffered per-haps as much as he did. After the two weeks,Lomax said his anger was gone. Takashi was nolonger a “hated enemy” but a “blood-brother.”Lomax wrote that he felt like “an honoredguest of two good people.”

Although apology and forgiveness betweenthese men occurred in private, their storyserves as a microcosm of what can happenafter public apologies between groups ornations. Whether an offended party is an indi-vidual or a collection of individuals, an apologymust meet the same basic psychological needsin order for it to bring about forgiveness andreconciliation.

Exceptions and conclusions There are situations in which it is useful toforgive without an apology. One obviousexample is where the offending party isdeceased. Forgiveness then helps the aggrievedget on with his life. In other situations, wherethe unrepentant offender shows no signs of

remorse or change of behavior, forgivenesscan be useful, but reconciliation would befoolish and self-destructive. For example, awoman who has been abused by an unre-pentant husband may forgive him butchoose to live apart. On the other hand,without an apology, it is difficult to imag-ine forgiveness accompanied by reconcilia-t i o n o r r e s t o r a t i o n o f a t r u s t i n grelationship. Such forgiveness is an abdica-tion of our moral authority and our carefor ourselves.

These situations aside, effective apologiesare a tool for promoting cooperation amongpeople, groups, and nations in a worldplagued by war and conflict. Although theapologies of the U.S. government to theIraqis for the abuses at Abu Ghraib fellshort, we must keep in mind that it is rarefor apologies to be offered and accepted dur-ing war. In such times, emotions run high,preserving face and an image of strengthare critical, and it is all too easy to demonizethe enemy. But in the decades since WorldWar II, several nations (or individuals orgroups within nations) from both sideshave apologized for their actions duringthat war. In 1985, Richard von Weizsacker,then the president of Germany, apologizedto all of Germany’s victims of the war. TheU.S. government apologized to JapaneseAmericans who were interned duringWorld War II. Additionally, in the wake ofthe Holocaust, Pope John XXIII eliminatedall negative comments about Jews from theRoman Catholic liturgy. He followed thiseffort by convening the Second VaticanCouncil, or Vatican II, which marked a turn-ing point in the Church’s relationship withJews, Muslims, and others. These and manyother successful apologies, both private andpublic, require honesty, generosity, humil-ity, and courage.

We can only hope that current and sub-sequent administrations in the UnitedStates, Iraq, and other nations can, in thedecades ahead, acknowledge their offenses,express their remorse, and offer repara-tions for acts committed during wartime.Without such apologies, we may be leftwith grudges and vengeance for decades tocome.

Aaron Lazare, M.D., is chancellor, dean, and pro-fessor of psychiatry at the University of Massa-chusetts Medical School. He is a leading authorityon the medical interview, the psychology of shameand humiliation, and apology. His most recentbook is On Apology (Oxford University Press,2004).

When the apologymeets an offendedperson’s needs, he does not have towork at forgiving.Forgiveness comesspontaneously; thevictim feels like his offender hasreleased him of aburden or offeredhim a gift.

What an Apology Must Doby Aaron Lazare

There are up to four parts to an effective

apology, though not every apology

requires all four parts. They are as follows.

1. A valid acknowledgment of the offense

that makes clear who the offender is and

who is the offended. The offender must

clearly and completely acknowledge the

offense.

2. An effective explanation, which shows an

offense was neither intentional nor per-

sonal, and is unlikely to recur.

3. Expressions of remorse, shame, and

humility, which show that the offender

recognizes the suffering of the offended.

4. A reparation of some kind, in the form of a

real or symbolic compensation for the

offender’s transgression.

An effective apology must also satisfy at least

one of seven psychological needs of an

offended person.

1. The restoration of dignity in the offended

person.

2. The affirmation that both parties have

shared values and agree that the harm

committed was wrong.

3. Validation that the victim was not respon-

sible for the offense.

4. The assurance that the offended party is

safe from a repeat offense.

5. Reparative justice, which occurs when the

offended sees the offending party suffer

through some type of punishment.

6. Reparation, when the victim receives

some form of compensation for his pain.

7. A dialogue that allows the offended parties

to express their feelings toward the

offenders and even grieve over their

losses.

Fall 2004 Greater Good 19

M E T H O D S

20 Greater Good Fall 2004

“I knew my sister was in that building, but my first duty was to myschool children,” said Dolch. She prayed for her sister’s safety as shetried to calm her frightened students. After the towers fell and the smokecleared, Dolch’s pupils were free from danger, but she had lost her sister.

Following the attacks, Dolch and many other New York educatorshad to double as crisis counselors at their schools. They providedmuch needed support to their students for weeks or even months onend, but they often failed to care for themselves and attend to theirown recovery. Dolch said her responsibilities to her students, staff,and family required more emotional strength than she thought shecould muster. “I was burning deep inside,” she said. But before sheburned out, Dolch found Project Renewal.

Project Renewal was launched in the spring of 2002 by LindaLantieri, the founding director of one of the nation’s largest school-based conflict resolution programs, the Resolving Conflict CreativelyProgram. Lantieri had visited many schools after September 11 andsaid she saw teachers fading away under intense stress, with little sup-port “to physically, mentally, and emotionally replenish themselves.”Through Project Renewal, she wanted to help educators “learn how todevelop their own inner resources for resilience” so that they couldcare for themselves even as they empathized with other people’s pain.The program received a seed grant from the September 11th Fund, and20 New York City educators enrolled, including Ada Dolch.

To help connect participants with their “inner resources forresilience,” Project Renewal offers them day-long and seasonal resi-dential retreats, yoga classes, and individual stress reduction sessionsfrom certified bodywork practitioners. At the retreats, participantslearn soothing breathing exercises, techniques for relaxing theirmuscles, and basic meditation practices.

Project Renewal is not alone in its approach. Psychologist Mar-garet Kemeny and other researchers at the University of California,San Francisco, have piloted a program that tests whether Easternphilosophy and meditation can bolster teachers’ capacities for empa-thy and compassion. That program, called Cultivating EmotionalBalance, aims to help teachers handle the everyday emotionaldemands of their job, not only a large-scale tragedy like September11.

These programs’ methods might seem more suitable to a New Agespa than a New York City classroom, but they are grounded in recentscientific research on the physical and mental benefits of meditationand similar stress-reduction techniques. This research has suggestedthat people who deal with a lot of stress—including but not limitedto teachers—can develop skills and practices to rein in their anxietiesand cultivate positive emotions.

Two pioneering scientists in this field are Richard Davidson andJon Kabat-Zinn. In 1997, Davidson, director of the Laboratory forAffective Neuroscience at the University of Wisconsin, Madison,tested the effects of “mindfulness meditation” on employees of abiotechnology company. That form of meditation is meant to makepractitioners more aware of their external surroundings and internalemotions.

Davidson divided participants into two groups. Twenty-five sub-jects in the experimental group were given training in mindfulnessmeditation from Kabat-Zinn, who founded a mindfulness-basedstress reduction program when he was on the faculty of the Univer-sity of Massachusetts Medical Center. Over two months, this groupattended a weekly meditation class and one seven-hour retreat. Theywere also told to practice their meditation at home for an hour a day,

Pam

Has

egaw

a

CareCaregiversgivers

When hijackers crashed airplanes into the towers of the World Trade Center onSeptember 11, 2001, Ada Rosario Dolch was at work nearby. Principal of theHigh School for Leadership and Public Service in New York, a school two blocks

south of Ground Zero, Dolch guided her staff and students to safety amidst panic, chaos,and the knowledge that her sister was at work in Tower One.

Caring for the r Care giveby Sarita Tukaram

To help teachers deal with

the stress of their job, new

programs are drawing on

some unconventional—and

research-tested—techniques.

Fall 2004 Greater Good 21

six days a week. The 16 members of thecontrol group did not receive meditation training until after thestudy was completed.

For both groups, the Madison researchers measured electricalactivity in the prefrontal cortex, the frontal part of the brain that isassociated with specific kinds of emotion. Research had alreadyshown that the left side of this region becomes more active duringperiods of positive emotion while the right prefrontal cortex is associated with emotional distress. Davidson’s results showedincreased activity in the left side of the frontal region among members of the meditation group; these people also went from say-ing they were highly stressed to reporting that they felt moreexcited by their work. Altogether, the results suggested a linkbetween meditation and both reduced anxiety and heightened pos-itive emotions.

“Practices such as mindfulness meditation are tools to actively andvoluntarily control our emotions through mental training,” saidDavidson. “They are potentially useful for a large number of occupa-tions and individuals, in that they can decrease stress reactivity andincrease positive emotions in different kinds of people.”

Preliminary results from the Cultivating Emotional Balance pro-gram corroborate Davidson’s findings. The program’s pilot studyinvolved 15 secondary school teachers in a five-week training ses-sion, where they learned Buddhist mindfulness techniques as well asskills developed by Western psychology for understanding their ownand others’ emotions. According to Kemeny, the principal investiga-tor, the results showed that a heightened emotional awareness alsoencouraged a heightened sense of self. After the training, partici-pants showed an increase in affection for others and a decrease intheir negative reactions to stress.

“Often people’s negative reactions stem from a negative sense ofself,” said Kemeny. “In the pilot study, as people developed a sense ofself, they became less vulnerable to outside factors.”

Teachers were the right subjects for the study, she added, becauseof “the emotional demands and stressful nature of their jobs.”Indeed, much of the feedback from participants showed how the Cul-

tivating Emotional Balance program helped them manage theirstress. One teacher wrote that the meditation techniques she’dlearned had given her a “deeper sense of relaxation than [she’d] everfelt before.” Another teacher described how the program had helpedher to empathize with a difficult student. “I probably would havetaken it personally before and felt angry with the kid,” she wrote.“But that’s not what it was about. It had nothing to do with me. Itwas about his internal trauma.”

The response to Project Renewal was similarly enthusiastic. Dolch,for one, said the program helped her “heal from within and restockmy emotional reserves.” After working with teachers in the wake ofSeptember 11, Lantieri said she recognized an ongoing need for Pro-ject Renewal. She decided to expand the program so that it could helpprepare educators to care for themselves and serve their studentsbefore a time of crisis, not just in response to one. Project Renewalhas now become a project of the Tides Center and continues to offerretreats and trainings for teachers in 56 New York City schools. Sofar, the program has involved more than 3,000 educators, who collec-tively serve over 70,000 students.

A clinical trial of Cultivating Emotional Balance is scheduled tobegin in January 2005. As in the pilot study, the seven-part curricu-lum will train participants in skills such as meditation, recognizingemotions communicated by other people’s facial expressions, andstrategies to counteract negative emotions. Kemeny and her col-leagues have already begun to recruit female school teachers(between the ages of 25 and 60) who live in the San Francisco BayArea and are in a relationship with an intimate partner.

Ada Dolch said these programs and research efforts are satisfyinga substantial need, and she only hopes more teachers learn aboutthem. These days, she looks back with fondness on her own ProjectRenewal retreat after September 11. “Each participant left with apocketful of goodies—great tools that they could lay their hands onin times of crisis and carry on their good work.”

Sarita Tukaram is a student at the University of California, Berkeley GraduateSchool of Journalism.

eCare

giversgivers

care

care

giversLeft: Margaret Kemeny, the principalinvestigator on the Cultivating EmotionalBalance research project.

Opposite page: Linda Lantieri (left), thefounder of Project Renewal, with high schoolprincipal Ada Rosario Dolch.

giversJaso

n M

arsh

ers

22 Greater Good Fall 2004

Just before 10 a.m. on a Friday morning in September, theblacktop at Norwood Street Elementary School in LosAngeles was swarming with children. Recess seemed woe-fully understaffed, with just three adults monitoringmore than 100 students. But, almost miraculously, even

those adults seemed unnecessary. The scene was one of peaceful andhappy chaos.

“Look at this: all these kids and they’re just playing,” said MeghannMcMahon, one of the adults on hand. “Where else can you see thatmany kids and not one fight?”

For McMahon, this phenomenon was as gratifying as it was remark-able. She is the Los Angeles Site Director for Peace Games, a programthat she has helped implement at Norwood over the past three years. Inthat time, she’s witnessed a sea change in the way Norwood’s studentsrelate to themselves and their peers.

Peace Games is built on the foundation of Social and EmotionalLearning (SEL), also known as Social and Emotional Education (SEE).The guiding principle of both Peace Games and SEL is that raising chil-dren’s awareness of their emotions—and how to communicate them—will help them become more caring and conscientious people. PeaceGames’ curriculum develops this emotional awareness through struc-tured and engaging activities that focus students on celebrating diver-sity and resolving conflict in nonviolent ways.

The program began at Harvard University in 1992 as a one-day, stu-dent-run project. In 1996—after its methods had been analyzed,refined, and expanded—it became an independent, non-profit organization and has since grown into a year-long curriculum for students in kindergarten through eighth grade. The program nowexists on both coasts, serving 12 schools in Boston, three in Los Ange-les, and three in Alaska. Peace Games is also starting to create a programin New York City.

In the early years of the curriculum, children learn to appreciate theirunique qualities and the unique qualities of other people, and also learnto recognize and communicate their emotions.They engage in exercisesthat encourage self-reflection, such as writing about the traits that setthemselves apart from everyone else. Among the games for youngPeace Games kids is “Blob Tag,” where one student pretends to be aslimy green blob determined to take over the Earth. Each child that thisstudent touches becomes a part of the blob and must link arms to tagothers, emphasizing teamwork and communication.

In third- and fourth-grade classrooms, students are taught communi-cation and cooperation skills for resolving disagreements and celebrat-ing cultural differences. Games for this age group include “TrustWalks,” in which one student leads a blindfolded peer through anobstacle course, and the “Community Power Game,” which has stu-dents assume the roles of city councilmembers, business leaders, par-ents, and members of other groups to find a commonly agreeablesolution to a problem.

In the later years of the curriculum, students discuss gender and cul-tural identities and learn how they can work to promote social justiceand social change. Games for these students include “Build a City,”where students in three groups are given a set amount of funds andmaterials for an imaginary construction project. The students are nottold that each group has started with a different amount of money untilthe end of the game, when they discuss the effects of social and eco-nomic inequality on a community.

Peace Games students of all ages are also required to spend part ofeach school year working on a community service project, a way ofencouraging the kids to apply their peacemaking skills. Last year, Nor-wood students visited a nearby senior center and wrote oral histories ofresidents.

“Peace Games believes that the best way to deal with the twin prob-lems of youth violence and disengagement is to prepare them at anearly age to be thoughtful and engaged peacemakers,” said Eric Daw-son, executive director of Peace Games and one of its founders. Dawsongives three reasons for the program’s success. “First, we meet peoplewhere they live. Second, we focus on relationships—that’s the onlyway real social change happens. And finally, we walk our talk. We teachby doing.”

Dawson said his 12-year history with Peace Games has allowed himto witness its long-term effects. He cited the story of Chiké, who was 10years old when Dawson met him and was discouraged by the feelingthat he was “just not good enough” to make it in society—a message,said Dawson, that is repeatedly conveyed to young people, especiallypeople of color, throughout their lives. After participating in PeaceGames, Chiké went on to college and now has returned to his own ele-mentary school to help teach the program himself. “To watch himdevelop some deep immunity to those pretty horrific messages andthen want to give back to other young people was a real powerful thingto watch,” Dawson said.

A mix of playful methods and serious messages increases the effec-tiveness of social and emotional learning programs such as Peace

Mat

thew

Whe

elan

d

Volunteer Arameh Anvarizadeh tutors a student at Peace Games’Norwood Street Elementary School site in Los Angeles.

Gaming theSchool Systemby Matthew Wheeland

Thanks to one program, students

have found that resolving their

differences can be all fun and games.

Fall 2004 Greater Good 23

Games, according to Jane Perry, a childhood education researcher at theUniversity of California, Berkeley. “Kids are naturally inclined to keepgames going,” she said. “They’ll work really hard at a task if it’s part ofa game or challenge.”

Diane Levin, a professor of education at Wheelock College in Bostonwho studies how games can build peaceful skills in children, also com-mended the Peace Games curriculum. She said it teaches students vitallessons that many public schools currently neglect. “Increasingly,schools focus on one thing: getting students to pass tests,” said Levin.“In the process, the school is cutting off options for kids to get involvedwith social activities.”

The task—and cost—of broadening these options has fallen on localschool districts and dedicated educators. Peace Games came to Norwoodlargely through the initial efforts of Naya Bloom, who directs theschool’s Healthy Start program, a state-funded grant intended to help

schools connect local families with community-based social services.Following an increase in violence and racial tension at Norwood, whichis a predominantly Latino school, Bloom sought out ways to addressthe problem before it got worse, and she asked Peace Games’ staff tomake a presentation at the school. With financial help from a three-year, $325,000 grant from Los Angeles’s School Community PolicingPartnership program, Peace Games was launched at Norwood in 2001.

Among the first things one notices while wandering Norwood’s hall-ways is just how prevalent and visible the Peace Games program is there.From the “Peace Mural” painted across the street to the “What Makes Me Happy” posters decorating the walls, Peace Games has established a phys-ical presence all around the school. And Norwood’s administration hasworked hard to spread the program’s social messages.

“There’s a near-universal level of knowledge about different strate-gies for how to resolve conflict [at Norwood],” said Dee Dee Lonon,who has been the school’s principal for three of Peace Games’ fouryears there. Constant budget pressures aside, Lonon said she and therest of the Norwood staff are committed to keeping Peace Games at theheart of their school. The administration recently instituted a biweekly“Peacemaker Award” for students who put Peace Games skills to prac-tice outside the classroom. “I’ve seen a definite change within theschool community,” said Naya Bloom. “There’s more talk about beingpeacemakers, there’s an openness and a friendliness here now, and it’samong the teachers as much as the students.”

The Peace Mural has made these changes at Norwood especially evi-dent. It covers two brick walls that were previously plastered with graf-fiti from the neighborhood’s two rival gangs.With an immense amountof coordination that involved Norwood and Peace Games staff and theLos Angeles city attorney, students from Norwood and nearby Cren-shaw High School came together to paint a scene of children who were,as described on the mural, “taking a stand for peace and our dreams.”

By creating a culture of peace, Peace Games helps counteract themessages of a popular culture steeped in violence, according to DianeLevin. “Children don’t learn positive social skills by osmosis,” she said.“When surrounded by violence on television, in movies and videogames, children become socialized to resort to violence and aggressionin the face of a conflict.”

Internal studies reveal just how effective Peace Games has been inteaching children different strategies for dealing with conflict.An internalevaluation of the entire program for the 2002-2003 school year found

that 84 percent of teachers at a Peace Games school said the program hadimproved communication among their students; 74 percent of teacherssaid Peace Games had helped their students get along better. When thelessons began at Norwood in 2001, there were 260 office referrals forphysical aggression. Just two years later, that number had dropped 36 per-cent to 166. Similarly, racial and ethnic conflicts dropped by between 50and 70 percent in those years. Most impressively, in the 2002-2003 schoolyear, there was not a single referral for abuse toward a teacher or fordefacing property; there were 26 such incidences in the previous year.

But the responses from Peace Games students and alumni might tellthe biggest story. On that Friday at Norwood, after recess had ended forthose 100-plus students, Naya Bloom sat at her desk with a book oflaminated drawings before her. The drawings were made by a first-grade class Bloom had worked with on Peace Games material. Amongthe many declarations of thanks and love were examples of what thekids had learned. One student, Zulema, wrote, “I learned to be fair. Ilearned not to fight.” Another student, Clark, wrote, “I learned to de-esculate (sic) the problem.”

“The most powerful piece of Peace Games is that kids really takeownership of the program, of their role in it,” said Bloom. “They seethemselves as peacemakers.”

Matthew Wheeland is a student at the University of California, Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism. His work has appeared in Alternet.org, PopMatters.com, and the San Francisco Chronicle, among other publications.

Mat

thew

Whe

elan

d

The “Peace Mural” painted across the street from Norwood StreetElementary School. It spans two walls formerly covered by graffiti.

24 Greater Good Fall 2004

Leslie Keaton’s red brick home is on the edge of Chicago’s IdaB. Wells public housing project. Her back door opens onto acourtyard surrounded by nearly identical two-story build-ings, boarded up windows all around.

But at Wells, Keaton has something some of her neighbors don’t: trees.A sturdy walnut tree rises from the concrete next to her stoop, with tworows of thinner trees in the courtyard. Her six-year-old neighbor Geraldand his two-year-old cousin Chilo race around them in plastic toy cars.

Two researchers at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaignbelieve the trees do more than provide shade around Wells inChicago’s scorching summers. Frances Kuo and William Sullivanhave found that trees may lower crime and improve residents’ mentalhealth as well. At their Human-Environment Research Laboratory(HERL), Kuo and Sullivan have amassed a body of research aroundthe connection between green spaces and people’s well-being.Chicago’s public housing projects are part of their testing ground.

When Kuo and Sullivan began their research here in the mid-1990s, Wells was one of the 12 poorest neighborhoods in the UnitedStates and housed about 5,700 people. Half of the families at Wellswere on welfare and unemployment was over 90 percent. When Wellswas built in the 1940s, the city planted trees around all the buildings.By the time Kuo and Sullivan arrived, many of these trees had sincebeen pulled out and paved over for maintenance reasons, leavingsome yards with trees and others barren.

Kuo and Sullivan ran a number of experiments here. In 2001, theyfound that residents reported being victim to half as many crimes inand around buildings with trees as around buildings without them.Kuo said that after other factors were excluded, such as the number ofpeople per building, the amount of green cover explained seven toeight percent of the differences in crime between buildings.

“It’s staggeringly high, given you expect it to be zero,” she said ofthe trees’ effect. “If most mayors could do something to reduce crimeby that much, they’d jump at it.”

In fact, the city of Chicago used Kuo and Sullivan’s research in adecision to plant 20,000 trees around the city at a cost of $10 millionseveral years ago.

As to why lush environments had lowered crime rates, Kuo andSullivan suggest that green spaces draw people outside to enjoy them,and those increased numbers of people deter crime. In fact, they foundthat 83 percent more people socialized in green spaces at Wells than inbarren spaces. And socializing can have long-term effects on crimeprevention as well: Neighbors who are outside more form strongerbonds and communities, said Sullivan.

The researchers have found that green spaces have psychologicalbenefits as well. In a study Kuo published in September with AndreaFaber Taylor, also of the HERL, they discovered that green spaceshelped reduce the symptoms of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The study, published in theAmerican Journal of Public Health, analyzed parents’ observations ofhow their children behaved in different settings. The parents ratedtheir children’s ability to remain focused on tasks, follow directions,and resist distractions.

The results showed that after spending time in green settings, like apark or a backyard, children had significantly fewer symptoms ofADHD than children in indoor or “built” outdoor areas like a down-town area or parking lot. This finding held regardless of a child’s ageor gender, parents’ income level, community size or location (rural orurban), or severity of ADHD. When children performed the sameactivity in a green setting and another outdoor or indoor location,their ADHD symptoms were consistently reduced only after theirtime in the green space.

Kuo said the study suggests a way to help children deal withADHD—without the unwanted side effects of medication.

She added that she’s gotten positive feedback from parents ofADHD children after sharing her results with them. “They say, ‘Now

GreenPeace

What could help do the work of medication,

The answer’s in your back yard.

by Chris Young

Chr

is Y

oung

Fall 2004 Greater Good 25

we stop by a park and he’s so much better.’ People are building natureinto their lives.”

And the mental health implications extend beyond children withADHD. In their studies at Ida B. Wells and other public housing proj-ects, Kuo and Sullivan found that a higher number of trees loweredresidents’ mental fatigue and stress, factors that can contribute to vio-lence. In a study at nearby Robert Taylor Homes, Kuo and Sullivanfound that individuals’ aggression was lower if they lived in buildingssurrounded by trees than if they did not. These people performed bet-ter on cognitive tests as well.

A buildup of mental fatigue can cause people to feel stressed outand misinterpret social cues, leading to aggression and possibly vio-lence, said Sullivan.

How greenery actually works to reduce stress and aggressionremains something of a mystery, according to Kuo. But she speculatesthat green spaces affect the brain in a way similar to meditation, fos-tering a “gentle engagement” that allows muscles to recover andrelax. She said other leisure activities could have a similar effect,although some—most notably television—have been shown not to.

Despite their research, Kuo pointed out that schools are increas-ingly reducing recess because administrators think they don’t addvalue to the school day, while municipalities are asphalting over moreplaygrounds to save money. “There may be hidden costs to doingthat,” she said.

Sullivan, who is currently analyzing crime data from several majorcities relative to their greenery levels, is concerned that the urban treecanopy nationwide has decreased by at least a third in the last twodecades. He said cash-strapped cities trying to improve public healthand safety should consider investing in green neighborhoods ratherthan some other programs.

“We pour million of dollars into DARE (Drug Abuse ResistanceEducation),” Sullivan said. “But there are no comprehensive studiesthat show there’s a long-term decrease in drugs and alcohol abuse.We’re showing in multiple studies that green spaces have a significantimpact on people’s lives.” To change the paradigm, Sullivan said everycity, county, and state should incorporate green neighborhood spacessuch as parks into their development plans. On a smaller level, plan-ning agencies should show levels of greenery on their maps.

There are signs that more local governments are starting to noticethe researchers’ work. Last year, the United States Conference ofMayors passed a resolution that recognized Kuo and Sullivan’s find-ings and pledged to increase tree cover in urban areas. The researchersare talking to planning and design boards in different municipalities

and to green advocacy groups in states like Georgia, Florida, andWashington. Their findings helped convince officials in Providence,Rhode Island, to add a zoning ordinance that increased the amount oftree cover on new properties, said John Campanini, technical advisorfor the Rhode Island Tree Council, a tree advocacy group.

“They helped us enlighten people on the social benefit of trees,” hesaid.

Still, Kuo believes that she and Sullivan have more work to do.“There’s a notion that (green spaces) are just frivolous and an

amenity—urban forestry to mayors is first on the last list,” she said.“It’s really not seen as a necessary part of healthy human habitats.But I think that’s what our research is pointing to.”

Chris Young is a freelance writer and a student at the University of California,Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism. His work has appeared in various publications, including the Chicago Tribune.

meditation, and community police officers?

Schools are reducingrecess whilemunicipalities areasphalting over moreplaygrounds to savemoney. “There maybe hidden costs todoing that,”said Kuo.

Human-Environment ResearchLaboratory co-director, Frances Kuo.

Will

iam

C. S

ulliv

an

Chr

is Y

oung

L.B

. S

tauf

fer

26 Greater Good Fall 2004

The Anatomy of Hopeby Jerome GroopmanRandom House, 2004, 248 pages

As an oncologist andhematologist, JeromeGroopman has spenthis career working pri-marily with cancerand AIDS patients. Itmight seem unlikely,then, that he wouldwrite a book abouthope, or that such abook would contain

anything but wishful thinking.But The Anatomy of Hope is a sober and

thoughtful book with real medical value. Inhis introduction, Groopman, who is also astaff writer for The New Yorker, admits thathe was once cynical of claims that hope couldaffect a patient’s physical and mental health.“I slammed the door on hope and closed offmy mind to seriously considering it as a cat-alyst in the crucible of cure,” he writes. TheAnatomy of Hope chronicles the gradual

opening of his mind, an education that wasboth professional and personal.

It wasn’t always easy. Using medical casestudies from his own career, Groopman illus-trates how doctors can rely too heavily onoptimism or harsh reality in the face of a graveprognosis. He describes how he graduallylearned to live in the middle ground, neithershielding patients from the truth nor allowingthem to be overcome by fear and doubt.

Groopman’s love for his work is clear inhis heartfelt and engaging writing about hispatients. He goes to great lengths to describetheir diagnoses and how they reacted to theirillnesses. The reader can chart Groopman’sunderstanding of the power of hope throughhis detailed observations and reactions to hispatients’ cases. He leads readers through onecase involving a man with profoundlyadvanced non-Hodgkins lymphoma, a cancerof the respiratory system. Despite Groop-man’s assurances that his chances of survivalwere better than 50-50, the patient hadalready given up. The process of convincingthis man he could be cured, and the vindica-tion of his survival and continued health,

became a cornerstone of Groopman’s educa-tion in the power of hope.

If there is a weakness in The Anatomy ofHope, it is the section where Groopman ana-lyzes research on the physiological and men-tal components of hope. While this sectionoffers key support to his thesis, its tone andstyle depart drastically from those of previ-ous chapters. From the inviting and even con-versational style of most of his book,Groopman abruptly shifts to more technicaldiscussions of research and theory. Themajority of The Anatomy of Hope is capti-vating enough to read in one sitting, but thisjump is likely to disorient a reader who hadbeen previously engaged by Groopman’swriting. It is a shame that Groopman couldn’tmake this important clinical section as acces-sible to the lay reader as his case studies.

In his final analysis, Groopman recognizesthat research on hope and healing is in itsinfancy. But he notes that it has already changedhis own practice of medicine.“We are just begin-ning to appreciate hope’s reach and have notdefined its limits,” he writes in his book’s con-clusion.“I see hope as the very heart of healing.”

—Matthew Wheeland

Resiliency: What We Have Learnedby Bonnie BenardWestEd, 2004, 148 pages

According to BonnieBenard, resilience issomething we all pos-sess. It is an internaldrive to satisfy ourmost basic psycholog-ical needs. It helps usovercome obstacles tostaying on a healthy

developmental path. And it is the reason whymany kids who experience poverty or abusestill turn out OK.

Social scientists have traditionally pre-dicted a bleak life for these children, com-monly dubbed “at risk” kids. Benard’s latestbook, Resiliency: What We Have Learned,puts this assumption in check. Drawing upon adecade’s worth of resilience research from awide range of scholars, Benard shows that

negative factors in a child’s life don’t necessar-ily predict negative outcomes, whereas there isa strong association between positive factorsand positive outcomes.

Benard stresses that this does not mean weshould ignore the effects of abuse or povertyon children. Rather, she argues, we can offsetthese effects by giving children the right kindsof support, enabling them to find their ownnatural strengths. In Resiliency, Benard evalu-ates previous attempts to put these supports inplace at the level of the family, school, andwider community. She also suggests how wecan continue to create such opportunities forchildren in the future.

At the core of Benard’s argument is theidea that the most supportive environmentsfor children contain three elements: caringrelationships, high expectations, and opportu-nities to be an active member of a community.In the home, for example, Benard suggeststhat parents can communicate high expecta-tions by becoming attuned to their child’s

unique strengths, then connecting him or herwith resources that will help these strengthsdevelop—a process Benard calls “talent scout-ing.” Schools can promote caring relationshipsby reducing class size and the size of schools asa whole, creating more small group projects,and encouraging adult-student mentor rela-tionships. As for communities, Benard saysthey must provide more activities that chil-dren can participate in and contribute to.Through job training, art, or adventure pro-grams, among others, she says children notonly develop concrete skills but a sense ofbelonging, purpose, and respect. At the sametime, they act as role models for their peers.

Resiliency is a hopeful and practical book.As a comprehensive review of the resiliencyliterature, it is a rich source of theory. Addi-tionally, Benard has distilled these theoriesinto concrete ideas for action—all in a clearwriting style. As a result, it should be a usefultool for people helping those in need of hope.

—Lauren Shapiro

in print

Fall 2004 Greater Good 27

Making Good: How Young People Copewith Moral Dilemmas at Workby Wendy Fischman, Becca Solomon, DeborahGreenspan, and Howard GardnerHarvard University Press, 2004, 208 pages

The Jayson Blairscandal at The NewYork Times showedthat professionalsuccess and profes-sional ethics don’tn e c e s s a r i l y g ohand-in-hand. Its e e m e d t h a t a nambitious youngjournalist could fly

through the ranks despite—or even becauseof—an inability to tell right from wrong.

These moral failings go beyond JaysonBlair and the profession of journalism,according to four Harvard Universityresearchers who have s tudied “goodwork”—work that is skillful and sociallyresponsible—since the late 1990s.

Making Good: How Young People Copewith Moral Dilemmas at Work summarizesthe findings from their study, which is part of

the broader Good Work Project led by one ofMaking Good’s co-authors, psychologistHoward Gardner. Gardner is well-known forhis expertise in childhood education and histheory of multiple intelligences. Here he com-bines his longstanding investigation of howpeople develop particular talents with a focuson how they develop moral reasoning skills.

Gardner and his research team examinedmore than 100 young people at the start oftheir careers in one of three fields: journal-ism, science, or acting. Through in-depthinterviews and a survey designed to assessparticipants’ values, the authors form a pic-ture of how these budding professionals bal-ance the i r ambi t i on , demands f romauthority figures, and a desire to maintainpersonal integrity. When the researcherscompare this picture with information gath-ered from veteran professionals in the samethree fields, the result is troubling.

Consistently, the young professionalspoint to fierce competition as a source ofstress and a valid reason for crossing moralboundaries. They seem to feel they are “outthere on their own” to succeed, while veter-ans often speak of the powerful support theyreceived from mentors and role models. This

feeling among the young participants oftentranslates into a willingness to justify uneth-ical actions, which they say they will makeup for later, after they’ve achieved success.

To be fair, the book also includes stories ofyoung people who stood by their values, evenif it meant not getting ahead, and of otherswho were seriously considering changingfields because of pressure to behave unethi-cally. The values survey also shows thatyoung people do value good work, even ifthey’re not always capable of producing it.

Ultimately Gardner and his co-authorsidentify six factors that determine whetheran individual is likely to do good work. Theseinclude having strong role models, support-ive peers, and regular opportunities to dis-cuss an organization’s core principles. But, asthe authors recognize, none of these factorscan develop overnight. It will take consider-able individual and collective willpower tomake more young professionals feel com-mitted to anything beyond their own per-sonal success. That kind of shift will requiregood, ongoing work by American culture asa whole, not just by young people strugglingto succeed.

—Jason Marsh

The Psychology of GratitudeEdited by Robert A. Emmons and Michael E. McCulloughOxford University Press, 2004, 368 pages

The title of The Psy-chology of Gratitudesells the book short. Inthis compilation of 14essays, editors RobertEmmons and MichaelMcCullough go beyondthe field of psychologyto incorporate researchfrom anthropology, phi-

losophy, biology, theology, and even prima-tology. This breadth of research gives adeservedly thorough treatment to a humanemotion and virtue that, until now, social sci-ence has largely overlooked.

The volume both defines and exploresthe contours of gratitude. Theologian DavidSteindl-Rast distinguishes gratefulness fromthankfulness. Thankfulness, he says, ismarked by personal gratitude for undeservedkindness “because it typically expressesitself in thanks given to the giver by the

receiver of the gift.” Gratefulness, on theother hand, is transpersonal: its experiencegoes beyond an emotion directed toward anyone person to encompass an “oceanic feelingof universal belonging,” such as when some-one feels grateful for a beautiful sunrise.

Other authors consider the beneficialconsequences of gratitude. PsychologistPhilip Watkins shows that gratitude is partof a cycle of virtue: Gratitude causes happi-ness, while at the same time, that feeling ofhappiness fosters grat i tude. BarbaraFredrickson draws on previous research totheorize that gratitude broadens a person’scapacity to express love and kindness, whichhelps that person build lasting friendshipsand other social bonds. If someone feelsgrateful toward another person, she sug-gests, he’ll try to promote the well-being ofother people in general, not just of his origi-nal benefactor.

The book does touch on negative aspectsof gratitude. Both Robert Solomon, in theforeword, and Emmons, in the introduction,note that gratitude is sometimes accompa-nied by a “perceived inferiority of thereceiver relative to the giver,” which could

induce feelings of humiliation, resentment,embarrassment, or jealousy. Solomon andEmmons also note that people sometimesassociate gratitude with femininity, depend-ence, and feelings of undeserved merit.

These associations point to the role thatculture plays in shaping our definition andexperience of gratitude. Such distinctly soci-ological aspects of gratitude are mentionedin passing, but an exploration of the sociol-ogy of gratitude is strangely absent from thebook—a surprising omission given that it isdedicated to an emotion that is primarilysocial in nature. This absence, however,speaks to the larger point that Emmonsmakes: Because social science has neglectedgratitude in the past, there remain vastopportunities for scientific attention andanalysis in the future.

—Christine Carter

in print

28 Greater Good Fall 2004

Now that the presidentialelection is over, it’s a goodtime to take stock of what Iwas asked to do for mycountry over the past few

years, and what I can expect to be asked ofme in the months and years to come.

When President Bush, during his 2002State of the Union speech, called on me (andmy fellow citizens) to do good for our nationby volunteering 4,000 hours, I was moved. Irushed off a letter to the head of the FederalEmergency Management Agency, tellinghim, “Take my hours, no questions asked—just tell me what you want me to do.” I haveyet to hear back.

I would have to return my Ph.D. in sociol-ogy to the University of California if I didnot realize that it takes more than an inspir-ing speech to create a fleet of volunteers.Sociologists hold that calls for public servicemust be “institutionalized.” That is, peoplemust have structured opportunities to serve,so when they get up in the morning full ofvoluntary gusto, they know where to go andwhat to do. President Kennedy’s often citedcry to “ask not what your country can do foryou” was followed by the formation of thePeace Corps, which has allowed tens of thou-sands of Americans to do good overseas. ThePeace Corps has done us proud as a nationand bettered our youth. Whenever I traveloverseas, I keep seeing how other nationshave copied this fine American institution.

The Bush Administration institutionalizedthe president’s call for service in a peculiarway. Its main task has been to take previ-ously well-established voluntary bodies—including the Peace Corps, AmeriCorps, andSenior Corps—and tie them together with anew ribbon, calling them the Freedom Corps.Administrations like to leave their mark onhistory, and realigning federal agencies andrenaming them is one of the most effortlessways of doing so. (See the Department ofHomeland Security.) But renaming an

agency does not make people jump up anddown, overwhelmed by an urge to sign upand serve.

To be fair, the Bush Administration didadd a new agency to the 15 members of theFreedom Corps. This is the Citizen Corps,which has been allotted a tiny staff and aminuscule budget. If you’ve heard of theCitizen Corps, you must have a particularlykeen sense of hearing. Still, looking for away to commit my 4,000 hours, I knocked onits doors.

I chose the Citizen Corps because Ibelieved that the United States would needmillions of new volunteers if it is to be betterprepared for future 9/11-like attacks. Giventhat we are an open society and that thereare countless “soft targets” for terrorism, itseemed obvious that police alone could notpatrol all our vulnerable points. When Iheard of the Citizen Corps, I imagined vol-unteers dedicating one weekend day amonth, and some hours they could pry looseduring the workweek, to help patrol waterresources, bridges, dams, and electricalplants. I envisioned citizens learning to staffphone banks so that fire fighters and policecould respond to emergencies. And trainedin advanced first aid, as emergency medicaltechnicians are, volunteers could even serveas back up for healthcare personnel. It washeartening to read on its website that theCitizen Corps’ mission is to give expression

to a post-9/11 “wellspring of selflessness andheroism,” which led “people in every cornerof the country to ask, ‘What can I do?’ and‘How can I help?’”

The Citizen Corps’ answers to these ques-tions is a crushing bore. It largely “coordi-nates” local and regional volunteer activitiesconducted by other groups and helps formcouncils of representatives from variousassociations and organizations.

In the years that have passed since Presi-dent Bush’s speech, any inspiration hiswords might have generated has beensquandered. Not surprisingly, Citizen Corpsfailed to capture the imagination and com-mitment of the American people. FreedomCorps is barely known. The Bush Adminis-tration long ceased to promote either ofthese agencies, or any other, as an outlet forthe “wellspring” of American volunteerism.The administration was so eager not toimpose any demands on voters that it waseven reluctant to reiterate the president’scall for more volunteering. It didn’t help thatit was also fighting fires on so many fronts,responding to loads of criticism abroad andat home about preemptive invasions and tor-tures and misleading information. As aresult, it lost the ability to call on people todo good out of a sense of kindness and com-mitment to their fellow citizens.

During the presidential campaign, neitherPresident Bush nor Senator Kerry seemedeager to raise the question of what Ameri-cans should be asked to do for their countryor for one another; instead, they told us whatnew tax cuts we could expect. Indeed, thenation has been so polarized that any call tothe common good might have seemed disin-genuous.

But with the election now behind us, I canonly hope that President Bush will make aconcerted effort to build bridges between redand blue America. Designing new ways forall Americans to work together toward acommon goal—especially protecting oneanother from terrorism—is as good a placeto start as any I can imagine.

Amitai Etzioni, Ph.D., is a University Professor atThe George Washington University. His most recentbook is From Empire to Community: A New Approach toInternational Relations (Palgrave, 2004). This essaymay not be reprinted without permission of theauthor.

an idea for the greater good

Any Volunteers?Why Americans need more chances toserve their country—and each other.

by Amitai Etzioni

It takes more than an inspiringspeech to create afleet of volunteers.

resources for the greater goodOn forgiveness

Research sources

In the field

The Amy Biehl Foundation is a charity that

supports youth education and anti-vio-

lence programs in South Africa.

http://www.amybiehl.org, 949-650-5356

The Campaign for Forgiveness Researchsponsors research and disseminates sci-

entific findings and other information

about new studies of forgiveness.

http://www.forgiving.org, 804-828-8089

The Forgiveness Project is a touring exhi-

bition of artwork and stories that cen-

ters on the themes of forgiveness and

reconciliation. The goal of the exhibi-

tion is to raise the profile of, and funds

for, grassroots conflict resolution and

reconciliation projects.

http://www.theforgivenessproject.com,

00-44-208-964-4034

The International Forgiveness Institute dis-

seminates scientific findings on for-

giveness to interested researchers and

members of the general public. It is an

outgrowth of the research conducted

by Dr. Robert Enright at the University

of Wisconsin, Madison.

http://www.forgivenessinstitute.org,

608-251-6484

The Center for Positive Organizational Scholar-ship at the University of Michigan BusinessSchool offers research and teaching

resources relevant to the burgeoning

field of positive organizational scholar-

ship. This line of research studies the key

factors in creating vibrant, collaborative,

fulfilling, and compassionate workplaces.

http://www.bus.umich.edu/Positive

The Cultivating Emotional Balance Project is

a study being conducted by researchers

at the University of California, San

Francisco. It is testing the effects of an

e ight -sess ion tra in ing program

designed to promote positive changes

in the health and emotional responses

of participants. For the clinical trial of

the program, which will begin in Janu-

ary 2005, the researchers are recruiting

female school teachers between the

ages of 25 and 60 who live in the San

Francisco Bay Area and are in a rela-

tionship with an intimate partner.

http://www.cultivatingemotionalbal-

ance.org, 415-476-7681

The GoodWork Project researches how

leading professionals carry out work

that is high quality and socially respon-

sible. http://www.goodworkproject.org,

617-496-7097

The Human-Environment Research Labora-tory at the University of Illinois, Urbana-

Champaign studies how to create

environments in which individuals, fam-

ilies, and communities flourish and how

to better involve people in the design,

management, and stewardship of their

local environments.

http://www.herl.uiuc.edu, 217-244-0930

The Seattle Social Development Project is an

ongoing longitudinal study testing

strategies for reducing childhood risk

factors for school failure, drug abuse,

and delinquency.

http://depts.washington.edu/ssdp

The Stanford Center on Conflict and Negotia-tion is an interdisciplinary center at

Stanford University that focuses on

identifying and analyzing the strate-

gic, psychological, and institutional

barriers to conflict resolution, as well

as bridges to overcome those barriers.

http://www.stanford.edu/group/sccn,

650-723-2574

The Center for the Fourth and Fifth Rs dissem-

inates articles on character education,

sponsors an annual summer institute in

character education, publishes a newslet-

ter, and is building a network of schools

committed to teaching respect, responsi-

bility, and other core ethical values as the

basis of good character. http://www.cort-

land.edu/c4n5rs, 607-753-2455

The Giraffe Heroes Program is a K-12 cur-

riculum that tries to inspire active citi-

zenship and compassion in youth by

teaching them about the work of local

and international activists.

http://www.giraffe.org, 360-221-7989

The Gottman Institute offers practical,

research-based therapy to married

spouses and couples. It also provides

state-of-the-art training to mental

health professionals and other health

care providers committed to helping

couples. http://www.gottman.com, 888-

523-9042

Operation Respect disseminates educa-

tional materials designed to reduce the

emotional and physical cruelty some

children inflict upon others through

ridicule, bul lying, and violence.

http://www.operationrespect.org,

212-904-5243

Peace Games uses cooperative games and

activities to teach conflict resolution skills

to students in kindergarten through

eighth grade. http://www.peacegames.org,

617-261-3833

Project Renewal, now a project of the Tides

Center, offers a variety of support serv-

ices to New York City educators to help

them deal with the emotional traumas of

September 11 and future crises.

http://www.esrnational.org/lantieri/beyo

nd_renewal.htm, 212-509-0022

A World of Difference Institute provides

hands-on training to help children and

adults challenge prejudice and discrimi-

nation and learn to get along with others

in an increasingly diverse world.

http://www.adl.org/awod/awod_insti-

tute.asp, 212-885-7700

Fall 2004 Greater Good 29

Greater Good

University of California, Berkeley1113 Tolman Hall, #1690Berkeley, CA 94720-1690USA

Subscriptions to Greater Good maga-zine are just $9.95 a year and $15.95for two years. To subscribe, send acheck, made payable to UC Regents,in the enclosed envelope to:

Greater Good1113 Tolman Hall, #1690University of California, BerkeleyBerkeley, CA 94720-1690USA

Please be sure to include youraddress. If you have any questions,don’t hesitate to contact us atGreater@berkeley.edu or byphone at 510-643-8965.

To learn more about the UCBerkeley Center for the Develop-ment of Peace and Well-Being,please visit http://peacecenter.berkeley.edu. The Center’s websiteserves as a clearinghouse forground-breaking research on peaceand well-being, including topicssuch as compassion, empathy, for-giveness, cross-group relationships,and social and emotional learningprograms.

Finding Our HeartNew ideas on where compassion comesfrom, why it’s good for us, and how wecan teach it.

Plus: Compassion and the Death PenaltyAn interview with George RyanIn Search of the Moral VoiceA study of ltruism in war

M a g a z i n e o f t h e C e n t e r f o r t h e D e v e l o p m e n t o f P e a c e a n d We l l - b e i n g

Spring 2004

Volume I, Issue 1

Be a part of the Greater Good!

PRSRT STD

U.S. POSTAGE

PAID

HAYWARD, CA

PERMIT NO. 796