Remember “the benefit of the doubt”? That was meant to convey the belief that, when something was in doubt, give the other person a break. Don’t assume guilt, or fault, or ulterior motive. Maybe it was just a mistake, or an accident, or your misunderstanding.

So we tended to ask, “Is that what you meant to say?” or “Why exactly did you do that?” or “Perhaps I’m not understanding this correctly.” We also forgave people when it was their fault, they did make an error. Marriages generally have not ended because of a forgotten anniversary or the divorce rate would be even higher than it is.

Today, we almost always assume fault and flaw, and often we assume malice. We don't just believe someone inadvertently causes us pain, we default to the belief that they intentionally wanted to harm us. We don’t see accidents, we see conspiracies. And we don’t forgive or forget.

We get even.

We’ve moved light years away from “Do unto others….” to “undo others.” The other person isn’t wrong or even mistaken, they are ignorant and unethical. We see this clearly from a higher moral plain. If you’re not here to help me then you must be here to hurt me. There is no middle ground. You’re with me or against me. And if you’re against me, well you’re an inferior and subject to whatever I can dole out to demonstrate that.

I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that most of you will agree that we ought to give each other a break.