A Reflection on Harm: WordView Highlights

By Jacob Dwyer

WordView is an opportunity for us not only to reflect upon our own conceptions and predispositions but also learn from others and their experiences. In this collaborative self-reflection exercise, we aim to foster understanding among participants that influences how we can better interact with the world around us. In starting our new three-word series this month, those of us at WordView explored the deeper meanings and perspectives embedded in ‘harm’: what is it, how does it manifest, and what are its implications?

How do you define harm? 

Although many are increasingly using ‘harm’ as a topic of discussion, we found it difficult at first to identify what it exactly was. Words like suffering and trauma arose. We acknowledged that harm could take many forms - physical, psychological, financial  - and more often than not was invisible to the naked eye. Because of this, we found that harm often depends on the perspective of each individual, which can lead to instances where one individual may claim harm while the other does not acknowledge its presence. Harm’s invisibility also leads to circumstances where we may inadvertently commit harm without knowing it, especially if we are engaging with individuals with whom we are also less familiar. 

In addition to being invisible, we determined that harm is difficult to assess because its severity is determined by each individual and their perspective. This means there are moments where our scales of harm’s severity may not match. What one person may deem is extreme harm may not be considered as such for another. While we do not want to question instances of harm in others, we can reflect on the entire situation to determine if any other factors are at play. 

Is harm distinctly different from hurt? 

While we explored the meanings of harm to us, there was a notion that harm was longer-term in nature. Harm can last, and forms of harm that started as one form can turn into another - for example, psychological harm stemming from discrimiation resulting in higher levels of stress, which can have negative health impacts. In comparing it with ‘hurt’, our initial reaction was that there was a difference in the two, with ‘hurt’ being shorter-term and ‘harm’ being longer. Multiple hurts over time could manifest into a ‘harm’. But then, at the moment of feeling pain, are you truly making the distinction? We concluded that the reality was murkier than what the lexical definitions provided.

How does harm manifest?

One particular important factor to consider is power. When thinking about how harm manifests, we discussed how it often is borne of the fear of losing power or privilege. When particularly considering instances where harm was caused through discrimination, harmful reactions can arise from a need to hold onto a place of privilege or power. An individual who follows a masked individual coughing on them may hope to dissuade others from ever infringing on their perceived rights. Words of hate can be individual instances that aim to reinforce existing power structures. A fear of losing power can even result in harm that affects whole communities, cities, and countries, as seen in the actions of dictators. And this fear is based within at least a complicit understanding that those who are marginalized have it worse. Those in power wouldn’t want to be those who aren’t.

What role does intentionality play when harm is committed? 

But what about those moments when the intent is not to harm, and yet harm is committed? All of us had heard some activists say that “Intent doesn’t matter, only impact does.” However, everyone agreed that there are moments where the intent does have a role to play. Someone seeking to cause harm with intent is malicious, while someone causing harm without meaning to could be misguided, unaware, or naive. Understanding the intent allows us to develop a proper response and perhaps use the moment to grow. 

However, we also noted that the “I didn’t mean to” could be a copout to avoid punishment, so we determined that, by looking at what actions followed the incident, we could determine our reaction. For example, if someone says a discriminatory joke and you tell them that what they said is inappropriate, their response will indicate the intent. If they brush you off, it may have been purposeful. But if they apologize and seek more understanding, we have a better understanding that their intent wasn’t to harm and we can engage in learning. We also noted that the latter situation can allow the all more important process of forgiveness to begin. 

What about when both individuals are harmed? 

We ended with a discussion on circumstances where both parties feel harmed, oftentimes for different reasons. Many of us had experienced a circumstance like this. We found it worth acknowledging that every person we interact with has some level of pain, hurt, or harm that they carry with them. In thinking about how an enhanced understanding of harm could lead to changes in our personal lives, we found that embodying this point could help in working toward dialogue to resolve the issue. Even if it seems dialogue only makes things worse, understanding the universality of harm can help us understand the reason for another’s responses and keep the door open for future dialogue whenever possible.