Explain that, in philosophy, there is a long tradition that places a positive value on “shame” and “shaming.”

In 3 full pages, please:
1. Interview someone willing to discuss a serious matter seriously. The interview can be virtual. The interview should (roughly) follow this pattern:
Explain that, in philosophy, there is a long tradition that places a positive value on “shame” and “shaming.” It has a positive value, the tradition claims, because it can motivate people to act according to shared moral standards.
Offer the example of either Socrates or MLK and ask: Do you agree with him that “shame” and “shaming” can have a positive value by motivating people to act according to shared moral standards. Why or why not?
Explain that two example of a shared moral standard are “justice” and “truth. Then ask: Do you agree that everyone values these? If not, do you mean they don’t even value even the appearance of them? [You might explain the Basic Distinction here.)
Finally, ask: For anyone who does value these but fails to demonstrate the courage and strength to pursue them, do you think “shaming” can motivate them to pursue what they value? In other words, when they fall short in the pursuit of justice or truth, might it benefit them to feel a sense of shame?
2. In 1 page, please transcribe the interview. How did they respond? Then what did you say? Etc.
3. In 2 pages, please think critically about the exchange of ideas. What was this experience like? Did you interview welcome the invitation to think critically? Do you agree or disagree with your interviewee’s answers to the questions? Which ones? Why?

Last Completed Projects