Is guilt ever a useful concept?

Post Reply New Topic

Thank you for the kind words.

You're welcome

Guilt preserves our moral fabric. Without guilt, there is no repentence, no forgiveness, no improvement in our behavior.

When you've made a mistake and done something wrong, a bell rings in your head that tells you to apologize or try to repair the damage.

I think sociopaths are the ones that don't feel any guilt or dismiss it.

If you are being self-indulgent, ignoring others' feelings or stepping over the underdog instead of helping him/her up, with no guilt at all, you are not improving yourself or anyone else. You sleep soundly because you have no conscience. This is scary.

Guilt keeps us all in check. It is our innervoice telling us that we need to change for the better, somehow.

equinn

How can guilt be void of emotion? It is, indeed, a feeling that prompts us to do for others and change our behavior. Otherewise, we are all robots.

Otherwise we could do what we whant and may not learn. Like if someone murderd someone then you would want there to be guilt involved.

I'm afraid that you entirely missed my point. Guilt is an abstract concept and has no existence outside of the human mind. This feeling doesn't seem to benefit anyone so should be discarded as dead wood in a forest. What is right for me is not necessarily right for others. Perhaps you need a concept like guilt because your concept of humanity is as an emotional being and not a rational being.

I would rather be a rational robot than a fearful, guilt-ridden, angry human. I fear humanity's emotions are responsible for much of the evil we create for ourselves and others. Our rationality is our saving grace and the vehicle by which we can ascend to a state of true-knowing where only facts may be disputed and all concepts are one and the same things. The universe is infinite and our lives are infinitely tiny by comparison. Once you realise what this implies, try to imagine a world without anger, guilt, hate, greed, jealousy, envy. Emotions are what is wrong with humans and cloud our judgment like a thick fog.

I love people but this is an intellectual concept. I still feel all the emotion I so dislike but accept this as part of my intrinsic humanity and try to grow beyond the narrow confines of the emotional prison. My emotions are timeless and eternal and will never cause me pain again as I know my true goal is knowledge of the world and not of my "self". I find others endlessly fascinating and making learning of them my key goal. Any suffering I experience during this ascent is another opportunity to learn and put aside such empty concepts as right,wrong,guilt,hate,fear,envy.

I try to follow these ideals but failure is inevitable and welcomed as an opportunity to learn more about the world and its concepts. If I die, I am certain that if a rational creator exists, then he will welcome a being of pure reason unhindered by the emotions of our physical selves. If not, I have no fear and welcome change even the change of being into non-being.

Again I apologise to anyone if what I write causes confusion,anger or fear. I will be happy to clarify and expand my ideas for anyone that requests further opinion. Thank you.

You'd make a great Vulcan.

Most of these ideas are derived from Buddhist philosophy both Zen and other forms. Some come from Star Wars and some from my extensive reading of all kinds of literature, film etc.

I don't expect you or anyone else to share my opinions. I only wish to offer an opinion which I find very useful personally.

Have you read 'Brave New World' or seen 'Equilibrium'?

I have read Brave New World by Aldous Huxley and seen Equilibrium.

I don't think asking someone if they have seen a movie or a book constitutes an argument though.

I didn't think the scenarios in each were realistic or well thought through. Brave New World is far better and more worthy of discussion. I found Equilibrium a cliched depiction of mind control by a totalitarian dictator.

I don't think emotions are intrinsically wrong, they just inspire a lot of the mayhem humans are responsible for. People don't go to war rationally. People don't kill rationally. They kill and go to war because they are angry, fearful and full of hate.

Actually, people who are (usually through brain damage) unable to feel emotion, are unable to make decisions (i.e. judgments) at all.

Or they are scared, often it is fear that causes someone to attack, that is what happens with most animals and is true with humans aswell. Just look at how America acted when they were attacked, everyone was scared and a war started. What about if you felt too guilty in a war that you could not kill a child, would or if you were that person, would you then think that emotions are weak.

I didn't know that. Are emotions connected to reason in any demonstrable way? I was always told emotion had no place in a civil discussion. Whether people need emotions as a pre-requisite for exercising will is an interesting idea?

Have you read Lois Lowry's The Giver?

Who wants a controlled, flat world where people lack passion and drive.

I've spoken up in an environment that is too controlled. This is more frightening than human emotions.

What about laughter and tears and everything that makes us so interesting and vibrant?


Some of our innovative thinkers, movers and shakers are highly emotional.

A world with controlled emotinos? Dullsville.

I don't find laughter or tears interesting at all. They are simple phenomena and are closely related. I find reason and rationality the most unique thing about humans and therefore the aspect of us that should be cherished. Animals feel emotions too. Are these any less important than your emotions or mine?

Guilt is an emotion that guides us to live within our moral values.

Guilt can be an emotion that is imposed on us by our parents, taken too far it can become self defeating.

There are some beautifully written posts in this thread, you guys have a wonderful way with words.