What sort of world would there be without guilt and shame? I was reading a pair of random articles on Wikipedia last night about social structuring ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_society & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shame_society ). Namely that the “West” uses a “Guilt-based Morality”, and the “East” uses a “Shame-based Morality”.
In essence what would a person be like that didn’t abide by guilt, and shame? They’d in essence be considered a “Sociopath” because they don’t follow the socially-constructed/instilled creeds, but before one leaps to “axe-murderer” ideas of psychopathy. Is there a possibility of a “benevolent psychopath/sociopath”? According to Wikipedia on psychopathy ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy ), it is marked by anti-social behavior, lack of empathy and remorse, boldness, and dis-inhibited egotistical traits.
At some level, that would seem to be anyone who gets a “taste of Power”, but what is Power from a potentially Nihilistic view? It is just another meaning one can have. An ability to control, and influence events. Although, couldn’t the spinning of meanings, and re-purposing them be considered a power? Thus in some way, digging into the depths of “mental/moral/spiritual/existential Hell” to arrive at the Nihilistic mindset of the Value of Nothing. One potentially realizes that they are tearing, and stripping away notions of all meanings (Values, so morals…etc) for themselves simply because the World that they lived in at the time stopped supporting them, and making sense to them.
Thus on the way out of that black pit, the pit of Nothingness, one has in some form to make a decision. Will they play by the rules of the game they have been set-up to play, or will they try to enforce their entire reality upon those around them? I think at some level I have chosen to play by the rules, but to subvert them when I can. I have no desire to enforce worldviews upon individuals, for that is what creates the Nihilistic Fall in a sense.
I guess at some level I may be a “benevolent sociopath”, but you know what? That doesn’t bother me because it is a constructed meaning. I could just as easily say “Hero”, and that doesn’t sound as bad. And what is a hero other than one that has transcended/deviated from the norm in some way? In that regard, tying back to the original question of the post about what would a world be like if there was no shame, or guilt?
I think such a world could possibly be idealistic if only in the sense that people don’t feel destroyed by shame, or guilt. That they are comfortable with who they are, and what they do. Caveat is that one has to go through the conditioning of a guilt/shame society to internalize the mores of some sort, so that they can be stripped away later. That they have some sort of fundamental basis as to what they value, and what they agree with. Not so they can enforce it upon others, but to simply have some merit for why they should exist.
A sort of, these morals/values makes sense to me, and the rest can go down to the Black Pit. The thing is, it’s a constant revision, for to establish a set pattern is anathema to so many notions. Static things are objects, and not subjects. Subjects are able to grow/change/mutate to world events as needed. Thus a pattern that can be established is a pattern of change.