Two Notions of Shame

Ratio 27 (3):328-349 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

On most accounts present in the literature, the complex experience of shame has the injury to self-esteem as its main component. A rival view, originally propounded by St Augustine, relates shame to the structure of human agency, and more specifically, to the conflict between will and desire. A recent version of this view developed by David Velleman relates shame to the capacity of self-presentation and the need for privacy. I examine two different interpretations of Velleman's theory and argue that neither suggests a credible alternative to the received view

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 97,405

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-05

Downloads
61 (#280,033)

6 months
14 (#308,795)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Y. Sandy Berkovski
Bilkent University

Citations of this work

A Hobbesian Theory of Shame.Y. Sandy Berkovski - 2015 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 53 (2):125-150.

Add more citations

References found in this work

A Theory of Justice: Revised Edition.John Rawls - 1999 - Harvard University Press.
The expression of the emotions in man and animal.Charles Darwin - 1890 - Mineola, New York: Dover Publications. Edited by Francis Darwin.
A theory of justice.John Rawls - 2009 - In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Exploring ethics: an introductory anthology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 133-135.
Shame and Necessity.Bernard Arthur Owen Williams - 1992 - University of California Press.

View all 13 references / Add more references