Shame - Not Shaming - Can Be Good
And the danger of temptations that we don't understand or from which we don't distance ourselves; The court can give a defeated defamation case a second life
The Psychology of Shame
Shame as a word, as an emotion often conjure up unwanted feelings yet there is a positive angle to it as well. Have you thought about it?
“While shame can motivate withdrawal,” writes Carl Georg Solberg, Ph.D,
”it can also prompt approach-oriented behaviors aimed at restoring one’s sense of agency and social standing.”
That might be surprising for most people to learn. What Solberg is communicating is different than when people shame others. He’s instead talking about when a person feels shame and is willing to positively respond in an act of high character to make a course correction, improve and make “right” if not by others, then for their own respected sense of self.
They value their power of self decision-making to change thinking and behavior because they can do so and they want other people to see them in an honorable way.
This can be motivated by other people at times yet it is much more likely to be stimulated by how we see and respect our character, how we want it to be at all times and how we prefer or emotionally “need” others to judge it.
This can happen in businesses, in the workplace, in public with strangers and in our closest personal relationships. Of course, not everyone is going to be this way. With shame, it often “feels like” most people instead retreat or get defensive.
More (shame): Did you know…
“Distinguishing between anticipated and felt shame explains (its) role in both deterring transgressions and motivating reparative actions,” Solberg writes. “Anticipated shame serves as a preventive force, while felt shame can drive remedial efforts.”
What’s this mean, where’s the clarity? I’ll tell you.
People who can feel shame in a healthy manner will normally refrain from doing moral wrong and will be inspired to correct errors or moral wrongdoing.
What Solberg is telling us is that when we forecast shame in our lives (and we have to be capable — and not everyone is — of feeling shame and thinking about it) we very well might do what we can to avoid whatever impulse and action necessary to prevent doing something wrong (in some capacity) that will lead us to feeling badly about ourselves.
Or once we feel shame after the fact of bad decision-making, we may decide that we need to do what is required to make responsible corrections.
Solberg provides two quick examples in a professional context.
“Imagine a person considering whether to lie on their resume. Anticipated shame might prevent them from doing so in the first place,” he writes. “However, if they do lie and later feel ashamed about it, that felt shame could motivate them to come clean and make amends.”
Again, if someone’s moral compass, so to speak, is not broken, shame can be a useful emotion to operate competently and better in the world in our interactions in professional and personal interactions.
Next Topic: Urges
Temptations, whatever they may for any person, are strongly alluring and if a person doesn’t understand their potential power to cause problems, from minor to significant and overwhelming, they are beginning to travel down the wrong, potentially dangerous road of their intense emotions and rationalizing psychology.
One error may be all it takes to put ourselves in a bad place.
And if not, when poor, high-risk habits get formed, they are more likely to require professional help to overcome.
Thoughts lead to emotions lead to impulses lead to foolish decision-making actions.
We may not only inflict harm on ourselves either. Whether directly or indirectly, partaking of our temptations can hurt others that we have no intention of hurting.
Finally: Your dead defamation case could get a second chance…
Maybe this section will encourage someone.
“A federal appeals court revived Sarah Palin's defamation lawsuit against The New York Times, finding several major issues ‘impugn the reliability’ of the original outcome,” reports Aaron Katersky at ABC News.
Notice that wording: Impugn the reliability.
Impugn definition: “Dispute the truth, validity, or honesty of (a statement or motive); call into question.” This means, the appeals court judge found that it didn’t trust the original ruling. Shocking, right? It may not feel to us that poor rulings ever rightfully get set aside yet sometimes it can and does happen.
Maybe this will help someone reading this in their own defamation case so let’s look at a little deeper.
“The Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals faulted the trial judge for dismissing the case before the jury had reached a verdict,” Katersky reported.
That’s right, the legal authority did not properly carry out their duty. A judge, mighty in power, erred. Wait, it gets worse.
"Unfortunately, several major issues at trial -- specifically, the erroneous exclusion of evidence, an inaccurate jury instruction, a legally erroneous response to a mid-deliberation jury question, and jurors learning during deliberations of the district court's Rule 50 dismissal ruling -- impugn the reliability of that verdict," the opinion said.
That’s a lot of errors and sloppiness. People in law are imperfect like everyone else.
Most people who suffer due to badly-flawed rulings don’t have high-powered, incredibly skilled and persistent — or in this case, expensive — lawyers however to successfully protest and get a figurative second bite at the apple.
Palin’s attorney spoke about the feelings in regards the appeals court decision.
"Governor Palin is very happy with today's decision, which is a significant step forward in the process of holding publishers accountable for content that misleads readers and the public in general.
“The truth deserves a level playing field, and Governor Palin looks forward to presenting her case to a jury that is 'provided with relevant proffered evidence and properly instructed on the law' as set forth in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals' opinion,” Shane Vogt communicated in a statement.
Yes, “The truth deserves a level playing field.” Absolutely. We take for granted that it will be given that weight with people in authority and power, on the streets, in workplaces and business and in courts. Only a fool would say it happens regularly.
Stories like the one shared here today — the successful appeal and a judge willing to not fall in line with a previous judge’s and court’s decision — are not widely known to people suffering from being defamed.
It’s good to learn of them and share with others. I suspect that this is not a common outcome yet as you and I now know, it’s not an impossible one either.
Michael Toebe is a specialist for trust, risk, relationship, communications and reputation at Reputation Intelligence - Reputation Quality. He serves individuals and organizations by helping them further build, protect, restore and reconstruct reputation.
Follow Reputation Intelligence on Twitter/ “X”
Follow Reputation Intelligence on the Medium platform for more stories/insights