A Child's Guilt

[Nakosis]

Whatever the intention of adults may be when they are reinforcing feelings of guilt in children, it presents only negative manifestations. Such negative manifestations include panic, fear, [tag-ice]introversion[/tag-ice], sleeplessness, shame, lack of initiative, and loss of self-esteem.

When you use guilt as a way to prod children of any age into doing or acting how you want them to, or to feel bad for something that is already over, you are taking a huge step to helping them become anxious thinkers. Anxious thinkers are filled with the physical manifestations of anxiety.

Although using guilt on your children will grant you the temporary quick-fix to a troubling situation that your son or daughter is causing, this guilt is felt within the child and works fast to internalize feelings of [tag-tec]anxiety[/tag-tec]. Have you ever played the “feel bad game” with your child? Most of us have at one point or another. To an adult it is very innocent and with no harmful intentions, but to the child it the start of guilt and worry.
Understanding Guilt and its Effects on Children - Parenting Tips and Advice

Do you feel using guilt is a useful tool to correct behavior?

At some point in my life a decided to never feel guilt. I go about life doing the best I can, not intending harm. If I make a mistake, I accept that and make whatever amends I can to that person, not out of guilt but because if I made life more difficult for someone, I take the responsibility to help fix things.

I don't use guilt on my kids. What I try to do is show actions have consequences. When we choose to do something we have to be ready to deal with the consequences. No real need to make kids feel guilt or use guilt to control behavior IMO.

Am I wrong? Is guilt a necessary part of the human psyche which allows one to be a good upstanding citizen?

Do you feel guilt. If so do you think this feeling of guilt is necessary for you to be a good person?

 

[Sunstone]

Guilt is a useless emotion, except perhaps to other people who might find a use for your guilt in manipulating you.

It is sometimes said that guilt is necessary to enforce one's own morals. I think that's hilarious. It's like saying I have to bully and beat myself up to make me do the right thing.

I have heard exceedingly naive people state that guilt is how we know something is wrong, that guilt is our moral conscience speaking to us. But a person will feel guilt over doing something that is good and decent if they were at some point in their lives (usually at some point in their childhood) trained to feel guilt over doing something good and decent.

An example is sexual guilt. Few Westerners fully appreciate how thoroughly their sexualities have been corrupted by their being taught to feel guilt over sex. In contrast, the Japanese are well known for how little guilt they feel about sex. My second wife, Tomoko, was Japanese. She is not the only Japanese woman I have known. I did not realize how much I myself had been taught to feel guilt over sex until I was in a position to compare their guilt-free attitudes to my own. It seems to me that sexual guilt is a great example of how a person can be taught to feel guilt over something that is good and decent.

Despite that guilt is a useless -- or worse than useless -- emotion, we in the West (especially) are taught that it is some kind of virtue or mark of virtue. There is a sort of "cult of guilt" in the West. Basically, the West assigns to guilt the credit for a whole lot of good and decent behaviors that are really motivated by such things as empathy, compassion, kindness, reciprocity, fairness, etc. For example, you have to be a pretty unusual person if the only reason you do not murder people at will is because you fear you would feel guilt over doing so. Most of us do not murder people at will out of empathy, fairness, reciprocity, etc. than truly out of fear of feeling guilty.

Again and again, the West assumes guilt is responsible for good and decent behaviors the West should recognize are motivated by things other than guilt.

 

[dianaiad]

Guilt is good. Guilt is that feeling of having done something wrong, that prompts you to 'repent,' or fix that wrong. There is a word for someone who lives a guilt free life; sociopath.

What should be avoided is undeserved, unwarranted, overbearing guilt, or guilt over things one is not, after all, responsible for.

Should you teach your child to feel guilt? ABSOLUTELY! A child who steals something should be taught to feel guilt...which can be assuaged by returning that 'something,' apologizing, paying for it and/or asking for forgiveness, at which time the guilt is satisfied and goes away.

A child who is being a bully should be taught to feel guilty about that so that s/he will stop doing that, and apologize to those s/he has harmed.

A child who does something dishonorable, who cheats, or lies...that child should be taught the 'art of guilt,' so that s/he will no longer be dishonorable, a cheater or a liar.

That's what guilt is FOR; the feeling of being sorry for having done something wrong, and the prompting to fix that wrong.

Anyone who doesn't feel that sort of guilt isn't someone I want to associate with, OR be.

What we should avoid doing is instilling guilt for things that children are not responsible for, and cannot help: making a child 'feel guilty' for his parent's divorce, for instance.

Guilt is also good for getting people to do things they should do, not just for making them feel sorry for things they have done. I wouldn't give a fig for someone who really could pass the guy ringing the "Santa Bell" without putting a dollar in the bucket, or who could see the woman trudging up the road carrying a gas can and NOT stop and offer her a ride (or him...) and not feel a little bit guilty about it.

"Guilt" is what happens when one is aware that one is doing something against one's morals or ethics. It's an important part of those morals and ethics; one's honor is more than a mental exercise, after all. It's emotional and spiritual as well, and guilt is part of that.

You don't want to feel guilty? Good. The best way to avoid that is to live according to what one thinks is honorable. It is NOT to decide that feeling bad about 'being bad' is, well, a bad thing.

 

[Sunstone]

Guilt is good. Guilt is that feeling of having done something wrong, that prompts you to 'repent,' or fix that wrong. There is a word for someone who lives a guilt free life; sociopath.

"Sociopaths"? Is that what you would call the millions of Japanese people who typically feel little or no sexual guilt? If so, that's quite curious. And if you would not call practically an entire nation "sociopaths" for their lack of sexual guilt, then are you not being logically inconsistent by calling at least some people in other nations "sociopaths" for lacking other kinds of guilt?

 

[Sunstone]

That's what guilt is FOR; the feeling of being sorry for having done something wrong, and the prompting to fix that wrong.

Is that so? Doesn't your position imply there are no better ways, causes, reasons for avoiding immoral behavior than guilt? And if so, what do you make of compassion, empathy, kindness, reciprocity, humaneness, love, fairness, etc as motives to avoid immoral behavior? Do you support the logical implication of your belief that guilt is necessary that those other things are not good reasons or causes to avoid immoral behavior?

Anyone who doesn't feel that sort of guilt isn't someone I want to associate with, OR be.

[sarcasm] As for myself, I am grateful I do not have to associate people who so lack in any virtues or admirable traits such as compassion, empathy, kindness, etc. that they must rely on guilt to avoid immoral behavior. Were I a theist, I would thank my gods they did not create me as such a person. [/sarcasm]

All sarcasm aside, I do pity people whose morality is based on guilt and not on anything better than guilt.

 

[dianaiad]

"Sociopaths"? Is that what you would call the millions of Japanese people who typically feel little or no sexual guilt?

Why should they, if the way they behave does not violate their beliefs or standards? Why should they feel guilt for violating YOUR beliefs? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

If so, that's quite curious. And if you would not call practically an entire nation "sociopaths" for their lack of sexual guilt, then are you not being logically inconsistent by calling at least some people in other nations "sociopaths" for lacking other kinds of guilt?

Y'know, I don't remember talking about 'sexual guilt,' and in fact, I don't remember the word 'sexual' coming up in the OP.

Wait....let me check...

Nope, nothing about 'sexual guilt' in there. Is there some reason you are moving the goalposts? Are you talking about guilt in general (as I was) or whether you think everybody else ought to abide by your personal sexual mores, and not feel guilty about violating their own, because YOU don't want to feel guilty about violating yours?

I mean, really.....guilt is very personal, and attached to one's own honor and beliefs, not anybody else's.

For instance, if I were to go to Starbucks and have a fancy coffee drink, it would be perfectly reasonable of me to feel guilty. After all, as a Latter-day saint I promised not to drink coffee. For me, then, it would be breaking a promise and thus a 'sin.' So yeah, I should feel guilty and repent.

However, I'm quite certain that you made no such promise; getting a cup of coffee isn't in any way sinful or even a mild mistake. Therefore you should not feel guilt. You have done nothing wrong.

By the same token, I never give anything up for Lent. It's not a part of my belief system. It is, however, a part of the belief of many other Christians. So they should feel guilty for doing something THEY think is wrong, but if I don't believe it to be wrong, then 'guilt' isn't an appropriate emotion for me.

BTW, you are dead wrong about the Japanese. Their attitudes regarding sex are very complicated, and 'guilt' for missteps is very much a 'thing.' In fact, 'guilt' and the Japanese are very well acquainted. They don't adhere to western Christian sexual more's, but their own are, in point of fact, even more restrictive...and, er, complicated. I did say that already, right?

Wait. I'll bet you think that geishas are prostitutes, don't you?

 

[Sunstone]

Why should they, if the way they behave does not violate their beliefs or standards? Why should they feel guilt for violating YOUR beliefs? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.



Y'know, I don't remember talking about 'sexual guilt,' and in fact, I don't remember the word 'sexual' coming up in the OP.

Wait....let me check...

Nope, nothing about 'sexual guilt' in there. Is there some reason you are moving the goalposts? Are you talking about guilt in general (as I was) or whether you think everybody else ought to abide by your personal sexual mores, and not feel guilty about violating their own, because YOU don't want to feel guilty about violating yours?

I mean, really.....guilt is very personal, and attached to one's own honor and beliefs, not anybody else's.

For instance, if I were to go to Starbucks and have a fancy coffee drink, it would be perfectly reasonable of me to feel guilty. After all, as a Latter-day saint I promised not to drink coffee. For me, then, it would be breaking a promise and thus a 'sin.' So yeah, I should feel guilty and repent.

However, I'm quite certain that you made no such promise; getting a cup of coffee isn't in any way sinful or even a mild mistake. Therefore you should not feel guilt. You have done nothing wrong.

By the same token, I never give anything up for Lent. It's not a part of my belief system. It is, however, a part of the belief of many other Christians. So they should feel guilty for doing something THEY think is wrong, but if I don't believe it to be wrong, then 'guilt' isn't an appropriate emotion for me.

BTW, you are dead wrong about the Japanese. Their attitudes regarding sex are very complicated, and 'guilt' for missteps is very much a 'thing.' In fact, 'guilt' and the Japanese are very well acquainted. They don't adhere to western Christian sexual more's, but their own are, in point of fact, even more restrictive...and, er, complicated. I did say that already, right?

Wait. I'll bet you think that geishas are prostitutes, don't you?

You either did not grasp my point -- which was a pretty simple, easy to grasp point -- or you are dodging, deflecting, weaseling your way around it.

I suspect the latter. Hope you can live with yourself.

 

[dianaiad]

Is that so? Doesn't your position imply there are no better ways, causes, reasons for avoiding immoral behavior than guilt?

Guilt is what you call that feeling of having done something wrong. You can call that feeling anything you want, but 'guilt' is what it is, and that feeling of having done something wrong is what prompts someone to repent..or fix the problem and not behave in that way again.

Guilt isn't what keeps someone from doing something wrong in the FIRST place. It's what prompts the 'sinner' or wrongdoer, to repent. The remembrance of guilt is what keeps someone from doing that wrong thing AGAIN.

Guilt is very useful.

What keeps someone from doing something wrong in the first place is the knowledge that it IS wrong. If part of that is the idea that once having done it, one will feel sorry (i.e...guilty)

And if so, what do you make of compassion, empathy, kindness, reciprocity, humaneness, love, fairness, etc as motives to avoid immoral behavior?

All very good reasons to avoid immoral behavior. Guilt is what one feels AFTER one has engaged in immoral behavior, that means that one is sorry for having done it, and keeps one from doing it again.

Do you support the logical implication of your belief that guilt is necessary that those other things are not good reasons or causes to avoid immoral behavior?

Wow. You really ARE moving goalposts and committing strawman fallacies here. What do ANY of those things have to do with guilt? That is, the emotion of regretting having done something against one's own principles, something that keeps one from doing that thing AGAIN?

[sarcasm] As for myself, I am grateful I do not have to associate people who so lack in any virtues or admirable traits such as compassion, empathy, kindness, etc. that they must rely on guilt to avoid immoral behavior. Were I a theist, I would thank my gods they did not create me as such a person. [/sarcasm]

All sarcasm aside, I do pity people whose morality is based on guilt and not on anything better than guilt.

Well, so do I. but frankly, sunstone, I pity even more those people who are so convinced of their own rectitude that they don't feel guilt for anything they do.

As I mentioned, there is a word for people who feel no guilt for anything they do, no matter how horrific it may be.

Sociopaths.

Because people who feel no guilt won't feel any of those other things you mention, either; no compassion, empathy, kindness...nothing but self approval.

Those who do not feel guilt do not improve in character. Quite the opposite. If one doesn't feel guilty when one has done wrong, 'doing wrong' continues. If you don't feel guilty about shoplifting, you will continue to shoplift. If you don't feel guilty about lying, you will continue to lie. If you don't feel guilty about killing the pedestrian you ran over in the crosswalk, you'll run over someone else if the situation occurs again.

Guilt is what keeps people from repeating their 'sins.' (and 'sin' is the violation of one's personal morals/ethics, not the violation of anybody ELSE'S morals/ethics). Compassion, empathy and kindness might keep one from doing something wrong in the first place, but guilt (regret for wrongdoing) is what keeps one from doing it AGAIN.

 

[dianaiad]

You either did not grasp my point -- which was a pretty simple, easy to grasp point -- or you are dodging, deflecting, weaseling your way around it.

I suspect the latter. Hope you can live with yourself.

Yep...you have no cogent response, so you go straight for the personal insult.

I win.