Forgiveness in psychology has been broken down into distinct components, with terms such as «decisional forgiveness» and «emotional forgiveness» (Song and colleagues, 2025). These terms imply that there are forms of forgiveness centered, for example, on particular thoughts, in which the injured person commits to being merciful toward the unfair. Another supposed form of forgiveness centers on particular feelings in which the injured person feels compassion toward the other. In both cases, the «forgiver» can accomplish the entire forgiveness process through thinking, feeling, or both.
Yet a careful analysis of «decisional» or «emotional forgiveness» shows that they are not only incomplete but also distorted in their understanding of forgiveness as a moral virtue. For example, suppose Jane decides to forgive Martha. Jane can make such a commitment while sitting on the couch, watching soap operas on television, and doing nothing for Martha, ignoring her. As another example, Jane can foster compassion in the heart, and then, that’s it. She is feeling better and therefore does not move forward with reaching out to Martha. In both cases, the thinking and feeling components of forgiveness are just that, components and not the full expression of this moral virtue. It is incomplete because, as with all moral virtues, there is a deliberate expression of the good toward others. In the case of forgiveness, this involves goodness toward those who were unjust and even cruel to the person who forgives.
A danger of reducing true forgiveness to thoughts and feelings is that this can lead to a central focus on the self rather than on the offending person. After all, if the «forgiver» decides to forgive and starts to feel better, a conclusion (a false one) could be this: “Well, I am no longer angry or disrupted by what happened. I will let it go now.» Notice that this conclusion has a focus on the self, not on the other person. Therefore, this is not an exercise of forgiveness as a genuine moral virtue because, as stated above, all moral virtues entail goodness toward other people. Yet, so often, I read that forgiving others is for the self, to feel better, which can reinforce the idea that forgiveness is an internal process only with a consequence and motivation of helping only the self and not the offending person.
After examining the published philosophical and psychological literature on forgiveness, Song and team (2025, pp. 11-12) defined forgiveness as a genuine moral virtue this way: Forgiveness “includes the motivation (the will) to be good, as an end in and of itself, to the one who acted badly, a decision to forgive, cognitive understanding of this other person as a genuine person, softened affect toward that person, and goodness in the form of behavior toward that person. This includes a reduction in negatives and an increase in positives regarding the variables of thinking, feeling, and behaving toward the other person. This definition is the most compatible with the Aristotelian classical realist perspective.»
The Connection Between Fuller Forgiveness and Beauty
Take a look at forgiving in a fuller sense, when it is not only for the self and not only developing thoughts and feelings within the self. Let us take a broader, less reductionist view and see forgiving as existing for the self and others and taking place within the self (motivations, feelings, and thoughts), but also existing outward, in behavior toward others, particularly toward a person who behaved unjustly. What does this behavior look like? On its highest level, it is argued that forgiving is a reaching out to others, particularly toward the one who acted unfairly, with a sense of what is called agape love, or the kind of love that is in service to others and can be quite effortful and even painful (see Enright, 2012). Agape love is not an isolated phenomenon that exists exclusively within the self and for the self. Instead, it flows outward in the language used toward others and in behaviors that uplift them, helping them be their best selves.
With this view of forgiving as a whole process, rather than just an internal one, we can now see that the definition of forgiving expands to include positive behaviors. This can include agape love. If forgiving includes internal and behavioral transformations that flow from those internal changes, then forgiving can bring more beauty into the world by demonstrating mercy rather than cutting people off, which is too common at present. It can make broken relationships more beautiful because it makes second chances possible. It can make others better by combining forgiving with asking the other to grow in humanity. Forgiveness can bring more beauty to relationships with those who were not the ones who acted unfairly. This can be the case because forgiving can be a preventive against displaced frustration and anger that can tumble onto unsuspecting others. Forgiveness stops the displacement, making room for more wholesome relationships with innocent others, as well as those who offend if they are receptive to the mercy of forgiveness. Forgiveness can bring beauty to communities as people realize that each person there has inherent (built-in) worth, and then act on this realization.
How Can We Practice Forgiveness Behaviors If the Offender Is Gone?
This behavioral issue does not apply only when the offending person is present in your life. You can show positive behaviors indirectly by, for example, saying a kind word about the person to others, or by donating even a small amount of funds to a worthy charitable organization in the person’s name. By engaging in these behaviors, you are putting your cognitive decision into behavioral goodness and exercising your feeling of compassion in a behaviorally constructive way. If the person is still in your life, the behaviors can be even more direct, such as showing kindness and, after forgiving, gently asking the person to change their behavior.
The Science of a More Complete and Accurate Application of Forgiveness
The science of forgiveness therapy, particularly in the context of being traumatized by others, does show, and importantly, that forgiving, when it includes thinking, feeling, and behavior toward the other, can reduce clinical levels of depression (Freedman and Enright, 1996) and clinical levels of anger and anxiety (Yu and colleagues, 2021).
In summary, we must be careful about reductionist definitions of forgiveness that break it down into smaller parts and call them forgiveness. Yes, there are decisional and emotional components of forgiveness, but by themselves, they are incomplete. It is time to see what forgiveness is in its totality, and then develop programs that allow hurting people to forgive more broadly and deeply, and put more beauty in the world.
www.psychologytoday.com
