Friday, December 11, 2009

Contemptuous Apology

There are seven (7) emotions discovered to be universal until now. The lesser known of these emotions is contempt. Contempt is a feeling or attitude of moral superiority or disdain. Every emotion can be experienced toward others or oneself, including contempt.

A contemptuous apology can be as obvious as it appears to be or notably difficult to identify. The latter is likely to be more frequent because an obvious contemptuous apology will generally immediately provoke anger from the person who receives it and deprive the deceptive person from the benefits of an apology.

Morality
Most contemptuous apologies are driven by a sense of moral superiority from the apologetic person rather than moral inferiority. The contempt is directed toward the person who is receiving the apology. The apologetic person is morally rationalizing his or her actions. The source of moralization is as various as it can be. The following few examples are the individuals (or entrepreneurs) most likely to morally rationalizing their actions.

  • Self-Righteous Individual
  • Excessively Religious Individual
  • High Regard for Oneself
  • Passionate Individual
  • Moral Entrepreneur

Moral Superiority
For example, a passionate morally-driven entrepreneur may feel that his or her situation is worst than his or her business partners, employees, subcontractors, customers and/or competitors. Such person will rationalize his or her actions (lying, stealing, etc.) because they work for a greater purpose (i.e. a passion) and/or they deserve more (i.e. they are less rich) than others.

This type of apology is unlikely to be truthful and is undoubtedly insincere. The apology will be incomplete (i.e. not taking responsibility, possibly shifting blame, etc.) with a considerable amount of extraneous information. The extraneous information will include rationalization for the apologetic person's behaviour. The apologetic person will cause harm all over again because "the end justifies the means".

Moral Inferiority
The less frequent contemptuous apologies driven by a sense of moral inferiority is most often seen in a person with low self-esteem and/or Dependent Personality Disorder (DPD). Such person may apologize quicker than any other persons and may take the blame for things they are not responsible for. This is insincere and may be untruthful (i.e. an incomplete apology, facts are wrong, etc.).

Whether or not the person will cause harm to others is unclear but he or she may cause harm to himself or herself. That person is likely to cause harm all over again when he or she is responsible for the harm because the apology serves another purpose, such as maintaining the dependency, than to apologize, ask forgiveness, etc. Furthermore, a person with an extreme form of Dependency Personality Disorder is often destructive and will cause great harm to others.

Sympathetic Apology
A sympathetic apology can be driven by any kind of concerns, such as pity, compassion, and so on. These concerns are aroused by the misfortune, affliction or suffering of another (see at the bottom of the page here). Consider the sympathetic apology from a friend to another when a beloved person died, "I am sorry for your loss". The apologetic person can go further and offer support to his or her friend, which is likely to comfort the person of concern.

However, the sympathetic apology becomes contemptuous whenever an apologetic person is responsible for the harm. Consider the previous example with a twist, the friend who is sympathetically apologizing is a multiple murderer on the run. Now, "I am sorry for your loss" sounds insincere. It is also untruthful because it is a half-truth where being responsible for this loss is completely omitted (lie by omission).

The sincerity would be further questioned if the apologetic person would say "I will never kill your beloved again!" (See Promise). We know for certain that it won't happen again. The apologetic person could pursue and say "Let's make a baby together!" (See Form of Restitution).

Little to say except that such person is extremely dangerous. That person may still feel pity for the other person, in a contemptuous manner, as in "I pity you because you mourn this piece of garbage." Disdain and possibly disgust are central in this statement.

Strategic Apology
The first-move strategy is among the many strategic apologies available to the deceptive person. A person may feel that he or she deserves apologies from another person and will attempt to obtain it in a deceitful manner. This deceptive person believes that if he or she makes the first move, the other person will offer a truthful and sincere apologies in return. The rationale behind the first move is that the one who apologizes first has great wisdom and is generous; for this reason, and because the first person to apologize is supposedly virtuous, the other person should be grateful and should ask forgiveness to the deceptive person for what is perceived to be at fault.

An apology is not about other's faults but one's own faults. There are situations where the responsibility can be shared among the persons involved but it cannot be upheld in an apology. Blaming onto others may be a sign of deception because it is a distraction from the initial objective in a truthful and sincere apology.

This strategic but contemptuous apology will be incomplete with a considerable amount of extraneous information. The apology is most likely to take a form of Non-Apology Apology. The extraneous information often includes rationalization on the behalf of the person who receives the apology, which is a sign of deception. Deception is systematic at the moment an apologetic person rationalizes for the behaviour of the person he or she apologizing to and the whole purpose of the apology should be questioned.

A first-move strategic apology can also be motived by an immediate gain from an apology. It is an attempt by a deceptive person to use the person they are apologizing to and ask favours in the future. This is a highly manipulative behaviour.

Conclusion
Be aware of the master deceptive persons! They are skillful and resourceful. They try to convince rather than to convey an apology. Any strategy can be used to reach their objectives. Because they often feel morally superior, they will disregard and disrespect those who fall under their moral level. They try to obtain the benefits from an apology without actually doing so. They feel no guilt or shame to entrap, deceive, lie, use, steal or so toward what they perceive a morally inferior person. Watch for any indicator of contempt in their apologies and the person's attitude before, during and/or after their apologies.

4 comments:

  1. Don't you think it's time for you to heal your wounds and turn over a new leaf - once and for all? We received your message about 'apology', you don't need to write more. Using 'rationalization' certainly help you to convince yourself, but if you really want a better remedy you should also focus your energy on 'forgiveness' and 'acceptance'. It worked for me. Paradoxically in the recent months your blog has looked like a diary filled with contempt hidden behind subtle essays. You are losing a precious time... so for the sake of fresh air, what about a little change?

    #1 I suggest forgetting the past that hurt you.
    #2 Free your mind, use some form of meditation that suit you.
    #3 Write fresh articles not related to your tensions.
    #4 Stay optimist and open-minded.

    It's the best way to heal your wounds. I'm ready to provide encouragement, help and support with your achievement. You can do it. All I want is your own good.

    Meditate on this.

    Have a good week-end Ian!

    P.S: what are you doing for xmas? Want to meet and do something distracting not related to business?

    Take care.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have written this essay because there is very little available on this subject. My wish is to bring a contribution to the field of statement analysis and detecting deception techniques.

    I have used multiple reliable sources of information, from studies to research, to lay the foundation for this work. I am considering to conduct my own study. This is a work-in-progress and more blog posts related to Detecting Deception in an Apology are to be expected.

    You're strange. You make it sound like the subject is a personal matter.

    Detecting deception in general is likely to be a recurring theme on my blog.

    Ian.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If what you say is true, my most sincere apologies.

    Your essays are certainly well-written, and interesting. Are youpPlanning to write on other types of emotion or behavior?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Pay attention class! We have a demonstration of classic simple non-apology apology. You can read more about the subject at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology .

    Let's dig into blackthirteen statement. He or she wrote: “If what you say is true, my most sincere apologies.” Take note that it is the equivalent of “My most sincere apologies if what you say is true.”

    The statement does not acknowledge what I have said is true. Deceptive people tend to let others presume the meaning what they are saying to avoid direct denials, [direct] deceptions and [direct] lies.

    The mechanism in the recipient of an apology often works as such: “I have written a true/truthful statement, therefor, he or she offering his or her most sincere apologies.” A person in self-deceit or denial is likely to fall for the con. The reasons can be various but it can be as simple as willing to believe the person is sincere in spite of the facts.

    The use of a conditional in the statement is a clear indication that the apologetic person does not believe or doubts that “what you say is true”. How can he or she sincerely apologize when in disbelief or doubts? He or she cannot.

    Any student can to tell me what blackthirteen apologizes for? That's right. There is no accountability in his or her statement. We don't know what he or she is apologizing for. It is obviously up to me to presume what it is all about.

    This statement is not an apology for the missing elements and for the use of a conditional, and is undoubtedly insincere.

    Ian.

    ReplyDelete