Today is World Philosophy Day. Julian Baggini asks whether we should celebrate it and if so how. On the question of celebration I'll pass. But I think a good way of marking the day is to ask an ethical (or other philosophical) question to which one doesn't know the answer.
Here's mine. Susan Jacoby makes a case against 'cheapening forgiveness'. She does not 'see unconditional forgiveness as an absolute good'. If there is no contrition by the wrongdoer, she says, forgiveness may not be to the point; and 'there are unforgivable offenses, for which the withholding of forgiveness is a perfectly appropriate response'. So my question is: what is the argument the other way? I set aside this one:
Always forgive your enemies - nothing annoys them so much.It doesn't show a truly forgiving spirit. Also, the idea that forgiving is better for your own mental and emotional condition seems to me to be dealt with satisfactorily by what Jacoby says. One doesn't have to be eaten up by hatred or ill will towards the unforgiven; one can merely get on with one's life, directing feelings of love and benevolence towards more appropriate others. What's the opposing argument?