Grantywanty
Registered Senior Member
Guilt & Shame
- Thread starter Grantywanty
- Start date
This is a late response, I've just found this thread -
I would say that there definitely are such differences. Mainly in the sense whether the feelings of guilt and shame are directed at a person, or at a person's actions.
In Christianity, the focus is on the person, ie. "you're a bad person if you do such and such". Even though it is said that humans will be judged by their actions, it is still the person then who goes either to heaven, or to hell.
Particular traits and qualities and even actions seem to be considered as an unalienable part of the person, the "who you really are".
As far as I know Buddhism, it's different, the focus is on the action. They don't have an understanding and implications of "person" as Christians do. A person's particular traits and qualities and actions are a matter of conditioning, not about "who you really are".
Buddhism also has a different conception of shame and guilt than we in the West tend to have.
They speak of hiri (conscience) and ottappa (moral dread; concern for the results of evil actions). See the Index at Access to Insight.
They conceive them
- as a quality that distinguishes the true contemplative,
- as a basis for acquiring discernment,
- as a quality that safeguards the world,
- as a rare and fine quality,
- as a treasure,
- as a guardian,
- associated with skillful qualities.
Other than that, I think guilt is that which sticks with you forever and which you cannot undo.
Shame is that when you feel you've done something which is below you.
According to this, Christianity would be typically guilt-based, and karmic religions shame-based (ie. when feeling you've done something which is "below you" this is to mean that you've done something which is below someone aspiring for Enlightenment).
I would say that there definitely are such differences. Mainly in the sense whether the feelings of guilt and shame are directed at a person, or at a person's actions.
In Christianity, the focus is on the person, ie. "you're a bad person if you do such and such". Even though it is said that humans will be judged by their actions, it is still the person then who goes either to heaven, or to hell.
Particular traits and qualities and even actions seem to be considered as an unalienable part of the person, the "who you really are".
As far as I know Buddhism, it's different, the focus is on the action. They don't have an understanding and implications of "person" as Christians do. A person's particular traits and qualities and actions are a matter of conditioning, not about "who you really are".
Buddhism also has a different conception of shame and guilt than we in the West tend to have.
They speak of hiri (conscience) and ottappa (moral dread; concern for the results of evil actions). See the Index at Access to Insight.
They conceive them
- as a quality that distinguishes the true contemplative,
- as a basis for acquiring discernment,
- as a quality that safeguards the world,
- as a rare and fine quality,
- as a treasure,
- as a guardian,
- associated with skillful qualities.
Other than that, I think guilt is that which sticks with you forever and which you cannot undo.
Shame is that when you feel you've done something which is below you.
According to this, Christianity would be typically guilt-based, and karmic religions shame-based (ie. when feeling you've done something which is "below you" this is to mean that you've done something which is below someone aspiring for Enlightenment).
Actually in anthropological terms the distinction between guilt-based and shame-based cultures depends on whether people tend to have an internalized feeling (guilt) or a feeling dependent on others' responses (shame). You can feel guilty all by yourself but you feel shame in the presence of others. You can also feel guilt even if no one knows what you did and you can feel shame if people think you did something even if you didn't.
Here's a diagram of the differences I found on the web:
In some societies guilt is the more common while in others it is shame. The distinction was originally drawn between Japanese (a shame based society) and American (a guilt based society) culture. I'm not sure if it is clearly defined by religion as much as it is by other cultural factors, but some religions (e.g., Christianity, especially Protestant Christianity & Judaism) clearly lend themselves to the development of guilt because they put a premium on internalizing morality. Confucianism would seem to lend itself to a shame-based morality but I'm not sure that Buddhism would (although many countries with large Buddhist populations are shame-based societies).
Here's a diagram of the differences I found on the web:
In some societies guilt is the more common while in others it is shame. The distinction was originally drawn between Japanese (a shame based society) and American (a guilt based society) culture. I'm not sure if it is clearly defined by religion as much as it is by other cultural factors, but some religions (e.g., Christianity, especially Protestant Christianity & Judaism) clearly lend themselves to the development of guilt because they put a premium on internalizing morality. Confucianism would seem to lend itself to a shame-based morality but I'm not sure that Buddhism would (although many countries with large Buddhist populations are shame-based societies).
anyone raised with the shame on you hand gesture. I think it was the only sign language my mom knew. Shame and guilt were a HUGE part of my religious childhood.
"Shame on you"
This gesture involves pointing at a person with the index finger of one hand while rubbing the pointed finger with the index finger of the opposite hand. The rubbing motion is directed toward the intended recipient and is repeated at least twice. It is used to imply that the targeted person should feel shame.
"Shame on you"
This gesture involves pointing at a person with the index finger of one hand while rubbing the pointed finger with the index finger of the opposite hand. The rubbing motion is directed toward the intended recipient and is repeated at least twice. It is used to imply that the targeted person should feel shame.
Carrot and stick. Do what the god asks and you'll go to paradise. Don't do what he asks and you'll go to hell.
All religions incorporate older laws and rules in their make up, notable in christianity and islam. On christian sites, some fanatics will claim that all morals come from Jesus as though everybody was savages before he appeared. However, many christian principles were stolen from the Jews and Egyptians, and possibly even from the Indians and Chinese since there was regular commerce between these lands and the holy lands in those days. There is even some evidence that Jesus retired to India after his "resurrection" and died there at an old age.
You cannot sin against a religion you do not believe in. I had two bacon sandwiches this morning which would have been a sin had I been Jewish or a Muslim. So atheists are sin free.
All religions incorporate older laws and rules in their make up, notable in christianity and islam. On christian sites, some fanatics will claim that all morals come from Jesus as though everybody was savages before he appeared. However, many christian principles were stolen from the Jews and Egyptians, and possibly even from the Indians and Chinese since there was regular commerce between these lands and the holy lands in those days. There is even some evidence that Jesus retired to India after his "resurrection" and died there at an old age.
You cannot sin against a religion you do not believe in. I had two bacon sandwiches this morning which would have been a sin had I been Jewish or a Muslim. So atheists are sin free.
Last edited:
and that is why its harder to be an athesist. I have to come up with my own moral code instead of saying "this or that book said so". I actually have to think about it.
Yes, and for that reason atheism should lend itself to a guilt response and not a shame response when you don't live up to that code. If I don't live up to my own ideals of how I should act I may feel guilty but I wouldn't feel ashamed.
I feel more shame than guilt. When I know I have purposely hurt someone, I'm ashamed of myself. When I loose control and yell at my kids, I feel ashamed. I guess I apologize when I feel ashamed, I don't when I feel guilty (like eating the last piece of cake...or three)
hahaha
This is where I get stuck. One, Christianity: intensly driven by language of guilt (purgatory, confession, atonement, etc).
Two. Compare Christianity to Eastern religions. Christianity, ritualized pracitce of self mutilation, patholigical fixation with punishment.
Chrstinanity is, in a word, incredibly selfish.
Is not 'shame' selfish?
For example:
Guilt: That was stupid. Statement protracted, shifts blame to object.
Shame: I am stupid. Statement personal, shifts blame to self.
Can you say more about this getting stuck?
Why do you think you're getting stuck?
Where would you like to go, but can't - since you're stuck?
I think your definitions are wrong.
Shame is the opposite of selfish--it's all about what other people think. I am only shamed when others see me as having done something wrong. Guilt is internalized. I feel guilty because what I have done goes against my own belief system. In both cases, the individual feels responsible but for different reasons.
I don't know...I don't swear. And I'm ashamed of myself when I lose control and do. Even though other people think it was warrented or ok to do so, I'm ashamed that I did so. I went against my own rules of moral conduct.
Do you feel ashamed of yourself when you swear and nobody can hear you or only when you swear in the presence of others? (If the latter then it's still the response of others that's affecting you--whether or not they think it's OK to swear.)
Last edited:
But what if their response is nothing. They don't care that I swore. I do and I'm ashamed and embarrased that I lost my composure in such a way.
I don't think it's that simple, though. Such a formula might certainly be true for some people, but not necessarily for everyone.
One might simply have a particular kind of moral system where one thinks that swearing is never appropriate, period.
I think Christianity is solipsistic. Selfishness is only a symptom of this solipsism.
Till Eulenspiegel
Registered Member
I am a devout Christian, specifically Lutheran and I feel neither guilt nor shame. There is a third option, love.
I do not feel guilt because I know in advance that I cannot be perfect. I will always fall short of perfection in my actions. Since there is nothing I can do about it why would I feel guilty about something that is part of the human condition?
I don't feel shame because again I have done nothing of which to be ashamed, at least not in the religious sense. I might be caught stealing candy from a candy store and feel both guilt and shame but that is not related to my religion but to my interactions with my fellow man.
I am a Christian because of the love I feel God has for me and for the love I have for God. Neither guilt nor shame enters into the equation.
I do not feel guilt because I know in advance that I cannot be perfect. I will always fall short of perfection in my actions. Since there is nothing I can do about it why would I feel guilty about something that is part of the human condition?
I don't feel shame because again I have done nothing of which to be ashamed, at least not in the religious sense. I might be caught stealing candy from a candy store and feel both guilt and shame but that is not related to my religion but to my interactions with my fellow man.
I am a Christian because of the love I feel God has for me and for the love I have for God. Neither guilt nor shame enters into the equation.
Last edited:
Yes but then what you would feel is guilt not shame. Perhaps this discussion belongs in linguistics not religion.
However the key difference between shame and guilt (as anthropologists define it as well as how the English definitions differ) is that you feel shame in the presence of others. If you felt guilt you would feel it even if no one else is present. For example, for a person who believes in the 10 commandments, saying God Damn (even when alone) is a cause for guilt.
It does not matter that the people who hear you don't care--perhaps you were just taught that letting people hear you curse reflected poorly on you (or your parents) or perhaps you were shamed in the past--just that you feel shame in front of them.