Here are some easy ones, none of which fall foul of your complaints:

1) You do something you thought was right and then afterward, someone explains something that makes you realize it was wrong.

2) You happen to not be a robot, and you let emotion, thoughtlessness, carelessness, etc get the best of you temporarily, perhaps because you're distracted or tired or stressed. In a later moment of clarity, you realize that you disagree with your behavior and you make that clear to the other person.

Apologies serve a pretty significant functional purpose. They're a relatively costly emotional signal to someone that you are aware that what you did was wrong and will try to avoid it going forward.

Note that this is why apologies tend to be more relevant with those you have an existing relationship with: with strangers, it's both easier to fake sincerity and it'd never checked that your following behavior is consistent, so the signal is a lot less costly and thus less useful.

Speaking as someone who has a lot of experience with people who don't apologize in their immediate family, apologies do one thing and do it well. They de-escalate situations in which honest mistakes have been made, and decrease resentment over time for those mistakes. People who don't apologize create the impression that they don't actually care about other peoples' feelings, and guess what: we notice that.

Example: you play soccer, you tried to tackle for a ball and misjudged your tackle and kicked the player instead of the ball, why would not your apology be honest? You honestly did not want to hurt the player, I would feel better if I hear an apology

Yeah, that makes sense. Apologizing for genuine mistakes that have consequences for others, that makes sense.

Typically nobody apologizes for mistakes unless there are consequences for someone else.

I think part of an apology has to be the understanding that the problematic behavior will change.

The whole reason for apologies is emotional: person who was hurt feels a relief knowing that the offender understands their mistake, regrets it and intents to avoid similar behaviour in future. Offender feels a little better knowing that the victim does not hold a grudge and does not intend any revenge.

Of course if neither victim nor offender felt any human emotions then apology would make no sense to them.

I mostly agree. I apologize a lot less than I used to.

Once in a while, I find it meaningful to give an apology, usually not by itself but as part of an attempt to right things. Without trying to make things right, yeah, apologies are mostly manipulative BS intended to massage feelings so as to avoid having to actually fix anything.

I think the difference is the individual's personal experience with apologies.

For me in my life, I've apologized mostly insincerely to placate emotionally unstable and abusive people.

I've also had apologies demanded of me by mostly those same people, usually as a tactic to get an admission of guilt to use as leverage to escalate the conflict and justify higher degrees of abuse.

If I played a lot of soccer and accidentally kicked people in the shins a lot growing up, I'd probably feel differently.

I spent many months withdrawing from medication while participating on a particular email list. During that time, I often said things in a less than stellar fashion and I repeatedly wrote sincere, heartfelt apologies and posted them publicly to the list.

The result: I became everyone's bitch. People could randomly start shit with me because they just felt like being an asshole that day and the entire list would go "There she goes again!" and blame it entirely on me and start some beat down.

This is the exact opposite of the result I would have expected. I would have thought it would prove I was a decent, respectful person who deserved respect in return etc. Nope.

I write a lot fewer apologies these days because most people are just assholes and I have no plans to volunteer to be their bitch.

It depends on your audience.

If your audience is emotionally healthy people, they see an apology as you saying "That thing I just did? Yeah, that's not what I think normal, acceptable behavior is." That makes them more willing to give you a free pass for the time you messed up (because we all know that we all mess up from time to time).

If your audience is bullies, control freaks, and other such jerks, an apology is handing them a loaded gun that they can point at your head.

If your audience is mixed, I have no idea what course to suggest...

Maybe the particular email list vis-a-viz your expectiation was the problem? Seems like it was a sparring ring, which is fine if that's what you want from it, but not if it's not.

I don't think so. I do think some social environments are particularly bad about things like that. But it is really rare for people to be genuinely respectful.

A lot of genuinely nice people just never have it come back to them. They just keep getting taken advantage of. Everyone expects them to be "nice" in the face of terrible behavior. If they get fed up with it, they get accused of being in the wrong.

This seems to be tied to that thing I hate so much: pecking order. Apologizing doesn't signal you are decent, honorable etc. It signals you are low man on the totem pole. And it opens a door on horrible social crap. Good luck closing it once it is open. Best to just not open it.

Apologies make sense when your predictions are imperfect and there is uncertainty around your hidden brain state. So, often. An apology lets the recipient know the fault didn't lie with your objective function, but with your predictions. It also signals to the recipient that you care about them.

Examples:

-You make a joke that offends someone when your goal was to make them happy not offended

-You make a mistake at work that you thought would save everyone time but now causes someone else extra work

-You accidentally knock someone down while playing sports

In all of these examples you had a friendly objective function that because of imperfect prediction resulted in an unfriendly outcome. An apology tells your victim that the pain you caused them was accidental, not purposeful, and reassures them that you care about them and will exert effort to not hurt them in the future. These are things worth saying because otherwise the apology recipient may not know.

P.S. I am sorry you are being downvoted. You laid out your thinking and asked for examples that could change your mind. I find that pattern commendable.

I've felt better when people have apologized to me, and I've felt better when I apologize to others. When someone has been wronged, it's better to clear the air, acknowledge what happened and move on with a repaired or even improved relationship. The alternative is... what? Just pretending it didn't happen? Has a tendency to just make bad feelings and false assumptions fester with a lot of people.

>> you’re sorry, and you did it? that makes no sense

You did it, and it was the result of a miscommunication, or your feelings have changed, or you didn't realize what the consequences would be. What you're saying is that you recognize what happened, you empathize, and you're willing to change some things to do better. If the other person doesn't hear this, it can take a long time for them to notice that you're doing better, harming the relationship.

edit: don't think of it as feigning regret, think of it as a chance to properly communicate something that has been miscommunicated.

Lets say you do something reckless, and it hurts me in some way. Without an apology, how can I tell you have genuine remorse? That you regret what you did, and want to avoid it in the future? That you are committed to fix the damage you've done? For all I know, you don't care about me, you don't want to change, and you don't plan on fixing your mistakes. I have no reason to trust you, and every reason to oppose you. An apology convinces me that you're not a threat - just a person who made a mistake. It also reminds yourself that you are capable of mistakes, and that you must not succumb to hubris.

Of course, it shouldn't be an empty apology. For it to work, the feeling must be genuine, and it should be accompanied by action.

If I make a mistake which hurts another party, which I do often, I apologize to said party. In those instances where I make a mistake and apologize, I do so to assure the other person that it was not my intention to hurt them, but rather I had made a mistake.

>you’re sorry, and you did it? that makes no sense

In Vulcan, no. In real life it makes very much sense. We are not one-dimensional cartoon characters, and we can do things for lots of reasons, while also understanding they are wrong and being sorry for the other.

>I’ve also never felt better after being apologized to, and I’ve never had an apology improve my situation or anybody else’s, at any point in my life, ever.

You'd be surprised.

>Anyone have a good pro-apology argument? I can’t think of one.

Well, if one understands that people can do bad things to you or affecting you, but still care for you, an apology can help make it clear that this is the case (that they do care for you, despite what they did).

I think some of the problem is in the way we apologise. In English we say "I'm sorry", which literally means "I have sorrow" -- or "I feel bad". From that context, I personally don't like apologies. I don't want people to feel bad. Receiving an apology is not a revenge kind of thing.

When I moved to Japan and learned Japanese, I realised that they have a different way to say it: "sumimasen", or in English, "it doesn't end (here)". In that context and apology is a way of saying that you have reflected on the incident and you are continuing to reflect upon it. You aren't just going to ignore the situation.

People often bring up the issue of guilt wrt apologies. In the west, our punishment systems are guilt based. If you do something wrong you are a bad person and you must be punished. But an apology does not have to mean that. An apology is taking responsibility for your part in the incident. It can be viewed as the opposite of being a bad person: you are acknowledging what happened and are intent on acting on that information.

There is a kind of "formula" for a good apology. First, you need to acknowledge the other person's feelings. It's kind of pointless from a "how do I make this better" perspective, but many people are blinded by their own emotions. If you don't acknowledge them, then they will fixate on that emotion and won't get beyond it. Even saying, "I can see that you are upset and I think I understand why" is usually enough.

Second, you need to indicate that you understand what the issue is. You should summarise why you think there is a problem and you should ask the other person for verification. After dealing with acknowledging their feelings, it is vital that you agree on the facts. It is best to avoid discussing feelings at this point -- only discuss what actually happened.

Finally, you need to indicate how you will change your behaviour to make things better. It's often the case that you don't know what to do. A good technique is to ask the other person what they suggest. If you still can't come up with anything good, even saying "I don't actually know how to improve the situation, but I will continue to work on it in the future" will be incredibly useful.

In this way, you help the other person move beyond their current emotional state, you clear up any confusion about the facts and you create a plan to make things better in the future. This is useful, not just for the other person, but for you as well. There is no need to feel guilty or bad.

Is this comment a satire?

No, you're on HN

Yes.

You've never made a mistake before?

Apologising reduces amount of litigation for negligence.

It's complicated.

http://www.millerthomson.com/assets/files/article_attachment...

Intro:

Alberta now has apology legislation. Historically lawyers advised their clients – “Don’t apologize, it can be construed as an admission of guilt in litigation.” Litigation, unfortunately puts people in adversarial positions that generally prevent open and forthright dialogue between the opposing parties. Apology legislation is intended to allow parties to apologize for making an error without the apology being used in the litigation process as evidence of wrongdoing. It does not mean a person can no longer sue. It simply means that the apology can’t be used in the lawsuit. The goal of apology legislation is to prevent litigation. In some cases, plaintiffs simply want some closure, some acceptance of responsibility and aren’t necessarily looking for financial compensation. Apologies can have significant, and some feel almost magical, properties in resolving conflict and restoring relationships. There is an emotional component in all disputes and if that component can be reduced or satisfied, some of those disputes may be resolved without proceeding to court.