NancyLebovitz comments on Guilt: Another Gift Nobody Wants - Less Wrong

67 Post author: Yvain 31 March 2011 12:27AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (100)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 31 March 2011 08:38:58AM 9 points [-]

I'm currently reading I Thought It Was Me (but it isn't), a book about women and shame-- the author distinguishes between shame (the feeling of deserving to be of extremely low status because of personal defect) and guilt (the feeling that one has not lived up to one's standards and can change).

I can't remember if there's a theory about why shame exists, but the author says it never leads to useful change even though it's pervasive.

She mentions having done some research about men and shame (doesn't seem to have written any books about it) and says that the worst shame for both men and women is about not satisfying gender norms. If true, this might be a clue about why shame exists.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 31 March 2011 09:58:54PM *  5 points [-]

I remember someone making a distinction between shame-based cultures (they claimed that Mideastern, Indian, and Asian cultures were shame-based) and guilt-based cultures. The difference, they claimed, was that shame is social: You feel shame only if you're caught. Guilt, however, is something you feel even if you're not caught.

I think this distinction between shame and guilt is useful, even if there aren't really "shame-based cultures". Also, you should feel shame for things you were accused of doing even if you didn't do them, or which you did under extenuating circumstances that others are unaware of.

"Shame-based culture" sounds like it would appear the same as what some people call an "honor culture", eg., 18th-century Scotland, 19th-century West Virginia, most 21st-century Islamic nations, where defending your honor has extremely high importance.