I think the concept of forgiveness is really unintelligent and I'll tell you why.
This is a fun topic. A few thoughts - forgiveness has more to do with emotions and psychology than intelligence. It has more to do with oneself than with the other whom you are 'forgiving'.
It presumes that people commit acts that are 'right' and acts that are 'wrong.'
Going back a little further than this, it presumes that people commit acts that upset us (our emotions)...which acts are normally (not always) interpreted as right or wrong depending on our emotional response to them.
I know this is a norm that most societies are based on, I don't agree that any action can either be black or white- it's too simplistic, actions are more complex than this.
Well some actions are usually considered wrong, hence we came up with laws against said actions that are common to most all functioning societies. Murder/Rape/mugging/extortion/drink spiking/torturing/gang attacks etc for example?
Traditionally, someone 'wrongs' you, and you forgive them for whatever reason, god, goodness, grace etc.
Left it to help the next make sense.
I just don't need that. I think forgiveness is a nice social tool in general, but I think it stems from an unintelligent and simplistic worldview which likes to divide things into categories.
This paragraph is rather unclear. It's unclear if you 'don't need' forgiveness, or don't need your interpretation of it (in the quote above). And to which issue (unintelligent or simplistic) are you referring to with the words after 'simplistic'? Unintelligent is in no way linked to simplistic, which can be very 'intelligent'.
Also a question in relation to forgiveness - what makes it a 'nice social tool'?
If you try and understand actions (where possible) in their complexity then you don't take things personally and there is no need for the view of how people 'wrong' you and why you should forgive them.
Were you trying to say "If you understand that actions have complex reasons, then there is no need to..."? Because one would think that everyone tries to understand any action that influences/moves/changes their world enough. The problem being people very rarely havehave the necessary information to deal with an action they consider wrong (ie an action that has upset them emotionally).
Complicating this view of something that upsets people emotionally as being 'wrong' is the fact most times (not all times) 'emotional upset' is caused by what the person has told themselves in their head.