“Redemption”

Barrett Emerick

From the Introduction:

Society loves a redemption arc. We talk about redemption for athletes or sports teams, redemption of people’s souls, redemption for people who have been “cancelled” (often emerging from #MeToo), for politicians who had been removed from office for ethical or legal transgressions, and lots of popular media include redemption as a central plot point.

In general, it is compelling to think that someone who was once wicked has now become good, that someone who was accused of sexual harassment now understands why their actions were wrong and works as an ally, that a former white supremacist has reformed their ways and become someone who speaks out against racism. Some of the great pieces of fiction portray them, and they are engrossing for many reasons.

First, lots of us want to believe that people are capable of changing their ways, and that people who have been bad can become good. … Second, humans are profoundly social beings who exist always in relation to others, within a particular community (or set of overlapping communities) and who are trained in the attendant social norms and expectations. …

Finally, and related to that point, I think we generally want to root for people to make good. We value achievement and excellence — and not just for reasons born from capitalism. It is engrossing to watch an athlete at the top of their game, to listen to a musician perform beautifully. And, I contend, there is something especially compelling about someone who becomes excellent after having failed to be. ...

Given the popularity of the concept in the social imaginary, it is surprising that redemption is largely absent from the philosophical literature. In this project, I aim to begin to fill that gap, exploring and analyzing redemption through a secular/non-religious lens.