Journal of Philosophical Meditations 8 (20):109-143 (2018)

Authors
Hossein Dabbagh
Institute for Cognitive Science Studies
Abstract
Shame’s conceptualization is one of the most challenging discussions in psychological studies. This challenge creates many ambiguities for both psychologists and theologians in Eastern cultures especially Iranian-Islamic culture. This paper discusses the dominant psychological researches about shame and tries to compare the outcome of these researches with Abdulkarim Soroush’s theological-moral view about shame. This comparison, we believe, helps us to understand their different approaches for further psychological and theological studies. We used descriptive-analytical method for the current research and our resources were mostly psychological books, article and set of Soroush’s lectures. Also use the soroush books of Gods ethics for showing the soroush views in moral epistemology We conclude that although psychologists and theologians are talking about the same terminology, i.e. shame, they are coming from totally different planet in different paradigms with different philosophical-psychological assumptions. The different assumptions is showed for example about type of problem representation, innate view about shame, attention to ontological component of shame, truthful of shame, attention to virtue ethics of shame and methodology of investigation of concept and function of shame. This philosophical and psychological assumptions is discussed.
Keywords shame’s conceptualization, psychological studies, moral psychology, paradigmatic difference
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

A Dual-Process Model of Cheating Intentions.J. J. Sierra & M. R. Hyman - 2006 - Journal of Marketing Education 28 (3):193--204.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Shame, Violence, and Morality.Krista K. Thomason - 2015 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 91 (1):1-24.
In Defense of Shame: Shame in the Context of Guilt and Embarrassment.John Sabini & Maury Silver - 1997 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 27 (1):1–15.
Guarding Moral Boundaries: Shame in Early Confucianism.Jane Geaney - 2004 - Philosophy East and West 54 (2):113-142.
A Conditional Defense of Shame and Shame Punishment.Erick Jose Ramirez - 2017 - Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences 4 (1):77-95.
The Corporeality of Shame: Px and Hx at the Bedside.Fritz Hartmann - 1984 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 9 (1):63-74.
The Truth of Shame-Consciousness in Freud and Phenomenology.Robert Metcalf - 2000 - Journal of Phenomenological Psychology 31 (1):1-18.
Shame, Guilt and Morality.Fabrice Teroni & Otto Bruun - 2011 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 8 (2):223-245.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-10-18

Total views
108 ( #102,936 of 2,462,828 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #31,045 of 2,462,828 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes