Usually this conundrum takes a concrete form: We must decide
whether to overlook a misdeed or make a ruckus about it—one that
may either improve the future behavior of the miscreant or
merely intensify his hostility. Such conflicts are ubiquitous,
varying in severity from petty to tragic. It is only the serious
end of the scale that will concern me here. Much can be learned
from analyzing Greek drama. Ancient Greece regarded tragedy as
the result of human character playing itself out in particular
situations. They were not interested in such calamities as
earthquakes and floods, but rather in the disasters that
proceeded directly from the protagonists’ “tragic flaws” or
hamartia. But there are strong disputes about the proper
definition of hamartia—especially the moral culpability that is
implied. Originally, the term only meant “missing the mark,” as
when an arrow fails to hit its target. Accordingly, the only
“flaw” involved may be a simple error, resulting most often from
an insufficiency of knowledge. For