Is it okay to shame people?

[Microcosm]

Is the value of people's feelings more important than promoting good morals? Do others have the right to shame others who do bad things, or is it the transgressors' personal business as to what he/she does?

I feel like outright pointing someone out and making fun of them is not right. I value people's emotions in a way that would make that hard to do for me. However, I think telling someone in a polite and kind way(kind of like constructive criticism) is okay.

What're y'all's opinions?

[Judean Zealot]

Shame is important. Without shame most people would stoop to the lowest things. Obviously, politeness often works far better, but when that fails shame is a perfectly viable means of enforcing duty. The purpose of shame is not to 'educate', but to make the wrongdoer and all those around him/her fear the social consequences of shirking their responsibilities.

Also, there is no such thing as 'private business'. Everything people do has a ripple effect on those around them, even if only to normalise a sort of bad behaviour. Shaming those people is a powerful antidote to the normalisation of dishonesty and laziness. If people fear being publicly called out, they will pay more attention to what they do.

[Uniquemind]

Shaming to me is well an attempt at a weak education to curb behavior and there are different degrees to it.

It's the concept that humiliation will force the misbehaving person to attach concepts together to form a conclusion that their former mindset was wrong.


I'll be back to edit this post later I'm busy atm. Do not quote this post it's undone.

[Jinglebottom]

If one does something fucked up/immoral/illegal/whatever, then they deserve any stigma they may encounter.

[phuckphace]

depends what it is that's being shamed, how this is done and the situation. sometimes, tact is called for, but then again millennials have redefined "shame" to mean "criticizing anything I do no matter how lightly."

for example there is (was) a good purpose behind the former social taboo of being overweight - you would be aware that excessive obesity would be seen as a sign of laziness, irresponsibly and gluttony, which no sensible person would want to be associated with. by the same token though, it does no good for me to hop on Tumblr and troll the "health at any size" SJWs with comments like "kill yourself fatty" and "MAN THE HARPOONS LOLOLOL".

[Microcosm]

Shame is important. Without shame most people would stoop to the lowest things. Obviously, politeness often works far better, but when that fails shame is a perfectly viable means of enforcing duty. The purpose of shame is not to 'educate', but to make the wrongdoer and all those around him/her fear the social consequences of shirking their responsibilities.

Also, there is no such thing as 'private business'. Everything people do has a ripple effect on those around them, even if only to normalise a sort of bad behaviour. Shaming those people is a powerful antidote to the normalisation of dishonesty and laziness. If people fear being publicly called out, they will pay more attention to what they do.

Why not focus on yourself though rather than shaming others? Wouldn't it be more productive to enhance yourself rather than trying(too often in futility) to call another person out on a behavior that they (probably)already know is wrong?

I mean, if you're obese, you know you're obese and you know it's wrong. If someone calls you out on it or "shames" you, the dominant effect is that it leads to serious depression and thus has the much larger ripple effect of spreading negativity.

However, if we focus on improving ourselves, then we can grow to set an example for those around us rather than directly calling them out and causing the spread of negativity and depression.

[Judean Zealot]

Why not focus on yourself though rather than shaming others? Wouldn't it be more productive to enhance yourself rather than trying(too often in futility) to call another person out on a behavior that they (probably)already know is wrong?

I see no reason why one can't both work on himself and be mindful of the public virtue. Again, the purpose of shame is not limited to the person who gets criticised, it sends a message to everyone else as well.

I mean, if you're obese, you know you're obese and you know it's wrong. If someone calls you out on it or "shames" you, the dominant effect is that it leads to serious depression and thus has the much larger ripple effect of spreading negativity.

That's the person's choice. He can either indulge himself in depression or he can get up and decide to do something about it. But in general I would recommend using shame for the initial shock value only and then kindly helping the person help himself.

However, if we focus on improving ourselves, then we can grow to set an example for those around us rather than directly calling them out and causing the spread of negativity and depression.

Absolutely true, this, but it's much more easy for others to push positive examples out of their heads than to push out the fear of shame.

[Jinglebottom]

The thing is, some people believe what they're doing is completely right, and anyone who calls them out on it is an irredeemably awful human being.

[Uniquemind]

If one does something fucked up/immoral/illegal/whatever, then they deserve any stigma they may encounter.

Well it's not that simple either. What is considered fucked up/ immoral /illegal or legal/ right or even wrong.

Are all qualifiers and they all very country by country, and era in time by era in time.

There's no absolute here either.

--

That being said this is NOW a continuation of my post from above.


Shaming to me is an attempt at a weak education to curb behavior and there are different degrees to it.

It's the concept that humiliation will force the misbehaving person(s)/group to attach concepts together to form a conclusion that their former mindset was wrong.

The problem with this is that construct, is a if-then fallacy, it is also a hasty generalization in practice.

Example of theory: If I dump a truckload of shaming or bullying on person/group X then person/group X will adjust behavior.


^That doesn't often work, in fact what often ends up happening is that X remains stubborn out of spite, and they walk/dig deeper down the same path that you originally wanted to get them off of, irrespective of society's betterment or ills.


Shame works as an internal force not an external one society can use in my humble opinion. It works in the same way that repentance or remorse does and this is why it never works on sociopaths or those who choose not to feel such emotions of guilt, shame, and repentance. These types of individuals usually attach their identity and therefore their actions to fixated ideals, usually that of a religious or even just a traditional nature of habit that they're willing to defend to the end for.

[Jinglebottom]

Well it's not that simple either. What is considered fucked up/ immoral /illegal or legal/ right or even wrong.

Are all qualifiers and they all very country by country, and era in time by era in time.

There's no absolute here either.

--

That being said this is NOW a continuation of my post from above.
I agree with you. I would've been more specific, but it's 4 am and I have horrible back pain, so you'll have to excuse me. :)

[phuckphace]

you also have to bear in mind that a lot of SJWs claim "depression" because of negativity they encounter, which is just one of the many ways they attempt to deflect blame from themselves toward everyone else.

they'll also claim that all the negativity in the world flows from "bigots" (or in the case of the most extreme, from everyone who isn't SJW enough) which is again, projection. what actually happens is that a person feels unmoored and alienated in this atomized world (the true source of their depression) and made-up social causes have all the appeal and superficial appearance of a shared faith and community but without the obligations. a good example of this are the Morrissey-type vegans who are indistinguishable in their rhetoric from the right-wing anti-abortion groups (horseshoe theory).

what I'm saying is that you shouldn't buy into the "criticism causes negativity" line because it's flat out untrue. even if all the bigots and Internet trolls dropped dead tomorrow, depression and unhappiness would remain omnipresent - with social liberalism it's a feature, not a bug.

[Microcosm]

you also have to bear in mind that a lot of SJWs claim "depression" because of negativity they encounter, which is just one of the many ways they attempt to deflect blame from themselves toward everyone else.


I agree with this, but I feel that many cases of depression are legitimately caused by the negative effects of shaming. This is seen most clearly with bullying. For instance, bullying a fat kid. It is shaming, but it's shaming in its lowest form: strictly to put someone down. Too often it is difficult to perceive the difference between shaming to promote motivation for change and shaming to put someone down. This is a scenario which shows how shaming can be dangerous to the mentality of the victims.

they'll also claim that all the negativity in the world flows from "bigots" (or in the case of the most extreme, from everyone who isn't SJW enough) which is again, projection. what actually happens is that a person feels unmoored and alienated in this atomized world (the true source of their depression) and made-up social causes have all the appeal and superficial appearance of a shared faith and community but without the obligations. a good example of this are the Morrissey-type vegans who are indistinguishable in their rhetoric from the right-wing anti-abortion groups (horseshoe theory).


I don't deny that these types of people exist.

what I'm saying is that you shouldn't buy into the "criticism causes negativity" line because it's flat out untrue. even if all the bigots and Internet trolls dropped dead tomorrow, depression and unhappiness would remain omnipresent - with social liberalism it's a feature, not a bug.

Isn't shame or distaste towards someone else an inherently negative affection? Even if it is intentive on motivating or provoking change?

I see no reason why one can't both work on himself and be mindful of the public virtue. Again, the purpose of shame is not limited to the person who gets criticised, it sends a message to everyone else as well.

I'd argue that there is no definite consensus on the virtues that are said to deserve shame, else there would be no need to shame for the virtue at all(see: Gay Rights). If it is assumed that people have different views that may or may not be justified, how can we truly "be mindful of the public virtue"? Or should we all promote our own individual rules of virtue and enact shaming based on those?

That's the person's choice. He can either indulge himself in depression or he can get up and decide to do something about it. But in general I would recommend using shame for the initial shock value only and then kindly helping the person help himself.


Depression is often out of our control. It can be very difficult to use it as a motivational tool. However, I do see your point.

[Uniquemind]

I agree with this, but I feel that many cases of depression are legitimately caused by the negative effects of shaming. This is seen most clearly with bullying. For instance, bullying a fat kid. It is shaming, but it's shaming in its lowest form: strictly to put someone down. Too often it is difficult to perceive the difference between shaming to promote motivation for change and shaming to put someone down. This is a scenario which shows how shaming can be dangerous to the mentality of the victims.



I don't deny that these types of people exist.



Isn't shame or distaste towards someone else an inherently negative affection? Even if it is intentive on motivating or provoking change?



I'd argue that there is no definite consensus on the virtues that are said to deserve shame, else there would be no need to shame for the virtue at all(see: Gay Rights). If it is assumed that people have different views that may or may not be justified, how can we truly "be mindful of the public virtue"? Or should we all promote our own individual rules of virtue and enact shaming based on those?



Depression is often out of our control. It can be very difficult to use it as a motivational tool. However, I do see your point.



Again I repeat for my TL;DL.

Shame is something that is a personalized force, not an external one.


Shame should come and hit an individual hard, to personally motivate them to change a flaw they have that when looked at logically, makes sense and under analysis should be logically explained as harmful. (Being fat for example).

If those who genuinely care about you, bring it up, whether it's an act of love or an act of shaming someone (in which case you would question if that person is a friend), lies in the difference between that 3rd party, saying such comments just to say them or saying them out of genuine compassion.

You discern the difference based on the history of the bond of past mutual behavior OF the friendship/relationship/family or whomever said it.

In regards to the friend that tells you you're fat, those that are really genuinely friends, will HELP you or encourage you directly, through SPECIFICS and not general vague catch-all statements.

1. They'll help you get exercise daily by offering to take walks or work out with you.

2. They'll HELP YOU CHANGE YOUR DIET!

--

Do you understand the difference and the reason why I am a proponent of scaling back the importance shame plays in society?

Education and the acquisition of more knowledge, serves the same purpose at a higher degree of specificity that shaming someone does, making shame almost all but obsolete.

There are cases where the person receiving criticism will take that criticism (even healthy criticism that is educational) the wrong way and offensively.

In those cases the fault lies with that person being overtly sensitive, and also perhaps not yet ready to hear criticism because they have not internalized a self-motivation and source of internal-shame to change. In which case you leave those individuals to deal with their own flaws, the ball's in their court. If they change their mind, they know you left an open door policy with them.

[Kahn]

Yes.

[Uniquemind]

So I ask everyone here.

On this issue, has my view on the world, hit the nail on the head both it's broad concept, all the way down to the specific?

Do you agree with it 100%? If not, then explain where the error is in my understanding on this. Because this is an issue I have thought about and played with for years and I apply the concept in the advice I give to others, so it's very important to me that it is correct in a fluid real world practical perspective.

[Judean Zealot]

I'd argue that there is no definite consensus on the virtues that are said to deserve shame, else there would be no need to shame for the virtue at all(see: Gay Rights). If it is assumed that people have different views that may or may not be justified, how can we truly "be mindful of the public virtue"? Or should we all promote our own individual rules of virtue and enact shaming based on those?

First of all, I just want to clarify that by 'shaming' I am not referring to intense bullying. I am referring to harsh condemnation of the act, even if it causes the perpetrator shame.

There obviously are some things which are clearly opposed to the public virtue: stealing, dishonesty, selfishness, and laziness, for example. There is no justification for these things in a productive member of society.

I also dislike this frequent hand waving about "Oh, it's too complicated to think this through, so let's just ignore it" mentality. One sees it in primarily in regards to religious thought, but it also pops up here. A person has to think through every case on their own, there's no shortcut. Consider it honestly, and if you're convinced that it is in the public interest, speak up.

On this issue, has my view on the world, hit the nail on the head both it's broad concept, all the way down to the specific?

I think you hit it on the head, but with too weak of a hammer to really drive it through. :P

Ultimately, while positivity is much more pleasant and definitely leaves all parties involved feeling better, in my own experience it rarely works with entrenched behaviour. It's just way too easy to shake off.

But I absolutely agree that any shame ought to be followed by productive solutions.

[Stronk Serb]

If they are doing something immoral or simply wrong, they deserve the shame. Also the shamer should not be like the one he shames, for it removes the legitimacy from the smaher's shaming.

[tovaris]

Yes we should shame people for doing wrong things. Morals are ther in place and can be reproduced by such institutions as ahaming

[Microcosm]

What do you guys think would be the proper and improper situations in which to shame someone?

[phuckphace]

I've been thinking about this more and I've realized that shame doesn't carry the same kind of weight that it once did thanks to social liberalism. say for example there's a gay pride parade in town and the degenerates in fishnet hose, heels and eye-paint start swinging their dicks around - it's a normal impulse for normal people to reach for a rock or a can of pepper spray, but at the same time the "shame-ees" are of the mindset that they aren't doing anything wrong and it's the shamers who are on the wrong side of history. if you're a proud degenerate (and you obviously are if you find it thrilling to flaunt your degeneracy in public) having rocks bounced off your dome will only reinforce your victim-complex and the narrative that you're being persecuted for "being yourself." it's also the case that, unlike back on Old Earth, the degenerates now have the MSM firmly behind them (so to speak) and the confidence that the narrative will be spun in their favor.

this is probably one of the most unfortunate effects of having lost our close-knit communities to atomization, as they encouraged people to conform and the social cost of not doing so was too high. now people are unmoored and free to float wherever they may with disastrous results (see: the current year).

tl;dr - freedom is death

[Uniquemind]

I've been thinking about this more and I've realized that shame doesn't carry the same kind of weight that it once did thanks to social liberalism. say for example there's a gay pride parade in town and the degenerates in fishnet hose, heels and eye-paint start swinging their dicks around - it's a normal impulse for normal people to reach for a rock or a can of pepper spray, but at the same time the "shame-ees" are of the mindset that they aren't doing anything wrong and it's the shamers who are on the wrong side of history. if you're a proud degenerate (and you obviously are if you find it thrilling to flaunt your degeneracy in public) having rocks bounced off your dome will only reinforce your victim-complex and the narrative that you're being persecuted for "being yourself." it's also the case that, unlike back on Old Earth, the degenerates now have the MSM firmly behind them (so to speak) and the confidence that the narrative will be spun in their favor.

this is probably one of the most unfortunate effects of having lost our close-knit communities to atomization, as they encouraged people to conform and the social cost of not doing so was too high. now people are unmoored and free to float wherever they may with disastrous results (see: the current year).

tl;dr - freedom is death

Not all homosexual people are that flamboyant and "in-your face" about it though. Those people that do that are just being selfish in an attempt to sooth their chipped shoulders and attach their social identity to a historical and present-day political movement.

But you're touching on a broad concept of why I think shaming doesn't really work anymore, and stern educational lectures between right and wrong in various situations is a better method.

Also in response to an older comment of yours, depression has a genetic factor too, irrespective of the environment and sociology.

[Miserabilia]

I think shaming people is part of a natural social process, there's really no stopping it so why try.
It has it's uses, evolutionairy, atleast that's likeley.

I don't beleive people should be "protected" from shaming. I don't beleive in safe spaces or keeping people safe from their own feelings. I do think people should get helped and protected in many ways, but only yourself should be responsible for protecting yourself against your own feelings.