Shame is enjoying a renaissance—at least if recent articles in The Guardian and Vox are any indication.

When people feel authorized to mock and denigrate people with whom they disagree, fabricate accomplishments and achievements, and act in hypocritical ways, many people decry this shamelessness. People who do not feel shame, the argument goes, present challenges not just to the individuals at whom such shameless actions are directed but to the rest of us who play by the rules, honor and respect customs, and try to embody the values and principles of Good People (whatever that means).

Shamelessness presents a challenge to our moral fabric, which certainly has some stretch and flexibility, but not to an infinite degree. It can be torn. The argument continues that if the fabric is sundered, shamelessness and even moral anarchy will follow. When nothing is out of bounds and nothing is unacceptable, then everything is acceptable or at least fair game. The remedy is to rehabilitate the concept of shame.

Shame has been a topic in Western philosophy since at least Aristotle (384-323 BCE) and in Eastern philosophy since at least Confucius (551-479 BCE). Both claimed that shame plays an important role in moral development.

For Aristotle, shame is neither an emotion nor a firm character state. It is more a feeling and even a sort of “fear of disrepute.” Shame may be appropriate for youth because they’re........

© Psychology Today