#Guilt and Identity

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Guilt

The philosophy of guilt examines the nature, origin, and ethical implications of guilt as a complex emotional and moral phenomenon. Guilt is a feeling of responsibility or remorse for some offense, crime, or wrong, whether real or imagined. Philosophers explore guilt in the context of morality, psychology, and existentialism, seeking to understand its role in human behavior, ethical decision-making, and the development of personal and collective identity.

Key Concepts in the Philosophy of Guilt:

Definition of Guilt:

Moral Emotion: Guilt is typically defined as an emotional response to the belief that one has violated a moral or ethical standard. It is often distinguished from related feelings like shame, which involves a negative evaluation of the self, whereas guilt involves a negative evaluation of a specific action.

Types of Guilt: Philosophers and psychologists often differentiate between different forms of guilt, such as:

Personal Guilt: Feeling responsible for one’s own actions.

Collective Guilt: Feeling guilt for actions committed by a group to which one belongs.

Existential Guilt: A more generalized feeling of guilt tied to one’s existence or perceived failings in living authentically.

Ethical Implications:

Guilt as a Moral Compass: Guilt is often seen as a mechanism that helps individuals adhere to ethical norms. It can act as a motivator for moral behavior, encouraging individuals to make amends and avoid repeating wrongful actions.

Excessive vs. Deficient Guilt: The appropriate amount of guilt is a subject of ethical debate. Excessive guilt can lead to unhealthy psychological states, while too little guilt may indicate a lack of moral sensitivity.

Philosophical Perspectives:

Kantian Ethics: In Immanuel Kant’s moral philosophy, guilt is related to the failure to adhere to one’s duty or the moral law. Kantian guilt arises from recognizing that one’s actions have violated the categorical imperative, the fundamental principle of moral duty.

Existentialism: Existentialist philosophers like Jean-Paul Sartre explore guilt in the context of freedom and responsibility. Sartre argues that guilt (or "bad faith") arises when individuals deny their freedom and responsibility by conforming to societal norms or by failing to live authentically.

Psychoanalysis: Sigmund Freud and other psychoanalytic thinkers view guilt as a product of internal conflicts, particularly between the id, ego, and superego. Freud suggests that guilt arises from the tension between instinctual desires and the internalized moral standards of society.

Guilt and Responsibility:

Moral Responsibility: Guilt is closely tied to the concept of moral responsibility. Philosophers debate whether individuals should feel guilty only for actions they directly control or also for unintended consequences and actions by others (as in collective guilt).

Legal vs. Moral Guilt: Legal systems often distinguish between legal guilt, which is determined by the law, and moral guilt, which is a personal or societal judgment based on ethical standards.

Guilt and Redemption:

Amends and Forgiveness: The philosophy of guilt also explores the processes of atonement and forgiveness. Can guilt be resolved through acts of redemption or making amends, and how do these actions influence personal and social relationships?

Religious Views: Many religions address guilt and its resolution through rituals, confession, and forgiveness. In Christianity, for example, guilt is often linked to sin, and redemption is achieved through repentance and divine forgiveness.

Psychological Aspects:

Healthy vs. Pathological Guilt: Psychologists study the impact of guilt on mental health, distinguishing between guilt that is a healthy response to wrongdoing and guilt that becomes pathological, leading to depression, anxiety, or obsessive behavior.

Guilt and Empathy: Guilt can be seen as an expression of empathy, where an individual feels guilt because they understand and internalize the harm they have caused to others.

Collective and Historical Guilt:

Collective Guilt: This concept involves feeling guilt for actions committed by a group, such as a nation or community. It raises questions about the extent to which individuals are responsible for the actions of others and the moral implications of historical injustices.

Guilt and Memory: Philosophers explore the role of guilt in collective memory and historical consciousness, particularly in the context of war crimes, genocide, and colonization.

Guilt and Identity:

Formative Role of Guilt: Guilt can play a significant role in the formation of personal and collective identity. It can shape one’s moral self-conception and influence how individuals relate to their past actions and to others.

Guilt and Self-Perception: The experience of guilt often leads to self-reflection and can influence how individuals see themselves in relation to their moral values and the expectations of society.

The philosophy of guilt offers a deep exploration of one of the most profound aspects of human emotional and moral life. By examining guilt through ethical, psychological, and existential lenses, philosophers seek to understand how this emotion influences behavior, shapes moral responsibility, and contributes to both individual and collective identity. Guilt is not only a personal experience but also a social and historical phenomenon, with significant implications for ethics, law, and culture.

[hinamie]

*about any given drawing* cranking the saturation slider will fix this

[rocketbirdie]

i don't want to lose you. i don't want to lose this

[captain-astors]

"For You." (redraw of that one manga panel from chapter 29)

[autisticrosewilson]

It's not that I hate fanon or that I think fanon is inherently less intelligent or morally wrong, but a LOT of fanon is based in racism, misogyny, and classism that I feel like a lot of you accept without question.

WHY is Duke (Daredevil, son of a god, has never once allowed himself to be defined by anyone's actions but his own) relegated to a background role, only characterized by reacting to the whims of other bats?

Why is Babs - Birds of Prey leader and backbone of the hero society, tells Bruce to fuck off and die 4 times a day and is constantly ruining her relationships by being biased and unhinged - Gotham bound, the mature responsible mom of the group who never argues with Bruce and never gets in trouble?

Why is Dick, both a tactical genius and master manipulator, a himbo only appreciated for his sex appeal? Especially when he is both Romani (group of people demonized and condemned as hypersexual by their nature alone) and an SA victim.

WHY is Damian "feral" and "uncivilized" despite being raised as a literal prince? Half of you treat him like a sociopath with no hope of redemption for an unfunny three second joke and the other half of you go full throttle into Bruce's white savior bullshit so that Damian can be "redeemed". Y'know when you're not villainizing Talia and acting like Dick is his other parent, actually.

WHY is Stephanie - extremely intelligent detective who can't stand Bruce and has a living mother she loves - lumped in as another member of the Batfam, a blonde ditz who only cares about prank wars and emotionally supporting Tim?

WHY is Cass - intelligent, a grown adult, suicidal perfectionist - emotionally intelligent, primarily existing to support the characters around her, immediately accepting of everyone she meets regardless of her own morals?

Why is Bruce the golden standard? Enough so that though everyone in the fandom could agree that he's an emotionally unstable wreck, being considered "the most like him" is seen as a compliment and not the HIGHEST insult? Everyone would agree if I said that Bruce purposely self sabotages his relationship half the time and the other half he simply does things without caring about the emotional impact it will have on people because he has to be the smartest in the room, but if I said that makes him a shit partner and emotionally abusive parent the fandom would bend over backwards to argue with me.

Why is Tim "the best Robin" when Dick Grayson invented the mantle, it is impossible for someone to embody the spirit of Robin better than him because he made it and he created what being Robin means. Maybe Tim is the best in Bruce's eyes, but what Robin means and who has the right to give it over was a significant thing they argued about. Tim the high school drop out, and yet also somehow the smartest? Tim "the most like Bruce" except no he's not, that's Cass. Poor neglected, abused, victimized little Timmy (the rich boy at the elite boarding school with loving albeit busy parents and almost every instance of him being victimized by another character has either been racist bullshit - The Al Ghuls and Rose Wilson- or a complete 180 for the character that made no sense when examined through the lens of prior characterization - Jason for instance.)

Almost every fanon trope that gets passed around like gospel seems to deliberately push POC characters and women into the background and strip them of interesting complex traits and stories, usually for the purpose of fitting them all into bite sized incorrect quote character types and uncomplicated narrative roles that are not only completely divergent from canon, but primarily exist to prop up the two rich white boys.

Also the insistence that Bruce, a 20 year old at the time, should actually be excused for how much he mentally and emotionally fucked Dick up because really they're more like siblings! While deciding that Dick at the same age was actually the perfect candidate to be Damian's new parent/guardian...have you lost the fucking plot you don't even make sense to yourselves.

Okay I lied at the beginning, I do hate fanon. You guys are so uncritical about the media you consume it is BEYOND just letting people enjoy things and have fun. I guess it's one thing if you KNOW this stuff isn't canon and UNDERSTAND why these tropes are problematic and you engage with it as such, it's fine read and write what you want, but just spreading the same nonsense around and parading it around as "better than canon" (version of the character so bland and boring you've somehow made the old white men at DC look like geniuses in the art of representation) is just infuriating.

[eggseabutters]

A god’s taste

[stagefoureddiediaz]

The Helena diaz of it all has me fascinated. I’ve said for a long while that Eddie’s real issues are his mommy issues and this episode just cemented for me that we’re gonna explore that and deal with it.

Because it’s Helena who forced Eddie to grow up to fast - because her husband wasn’t around much - so she pushed Eddie into de facto parent and husband role ls - selfishly filling her needs and ignoring the damage it was doing to her son (it is a form of abuse in my book).

Eddie then had the audacity to fall in love with and marry Shannon and get her pregnant. It’s why Helena was always so off with Shannon - she was punishing her. She is also punishing Eddie for all of this and his refusal to return to El Paso only cemented further her bitterness and resentment.

Now she does have Ramon back she doesn’t need Eddie any longer to fill that role so she is still punishing him and part of that is tied into her glee over now getting to parent Christopher - something she has always been intent on doing the doppelgänger just gave her the opportunity- as well as allowing her to further punish her son and his love of Shannon.

Her barbed comments about building a pool were all about showing what she can provide Christopher - how she is parenting him better than Eddie - it’s part of her mind games - making Eddie feel like more of a failure as a parent to his son.

The reality of course is that the reverse is true - Helena’s parenting is all superficial, flash and showy - it isn’t the hard day to day parenting when things get tough and you have to be the bad guy. While Eddie has made mistakes, there is nothing superficial, flash, or showy about his parenting. It’s why bucks comments about Eddie being a great dad are so important.

Eddie feel like a failure right now and that he is entirely to blame for everything. But in reality, while he does bear a bit of the responsibility, the truth of the matter is that he needs to learn and deal with the fact that all of it actually stems from Helena and her abuse of her young son - Shannon never stood a chance just like Eddie never has.

[lorebird]

In which Ford struggles so badly to relate to other people that he wonders if he’s really human at all. The more isolated he becomes, the harder it is to reconcile with his own humanity.

[fraternum-momentum]

do u have a design for pure sydney? i feel like i only see u draw them corrupted (valid)

‼️WARNING‼️ OLD UGLY ASS ART 😭 but the right one is more recent u can look at that

i do ! actually my first dol fanart has pure syd in it but its from last year so i privated it bc uglyyyyy 💀 but yeah im not a huge p!syd fan bc theyre theyre more shy and submissive in my head and im a whitney enjoyer so you can probably understand my personal taste from that

[gingermintpepper]

There are many things people expect from one called 'God of Blood'. Always, the first thought is the blood of war, the blood of violence, the blood of the weak shed for the goals of the strong. Ares doesn't think of the blood of battle at all. When he thinks of blood, he envisions the many tied knots of blood bonds and bonds forged in the blood of battle. Blood sons and blood daughters, blood brothers and battle sisters, blood oaths and blood vengeance - he watches over them all and keeps close each one of these bonds.

One cannot begrudge his displeasure then when he realises he cannot tell Leto's offspring apart just by looking at them.

It was easier when it was just Artemis. Dark hair curled about her shoulders, a fierce mien whenever Father summons her to the mountain, a scattering of bones and blood shed whenever she was disturbed; the eldest child of Leto was a wild thing, sharp toothed with sharper claws always at the ready. There's whispers of her being a twin, of her other half being made to crawl on their belly as penance for their sin of god-slaying but Ares pays it little mind. What twins look alike among their number? Even dog litters are born distinct with all their unique markings inlaid in their fur. Artemis' twin too would be much more than their sister's mirror image.

Pouring over his list now, he wishes anything about Phoebus Apollo was that simple.

Mirror image did not begin to describe it. The twins were the same height, the same build, had the same colour and texture hair, ate the same raw food and drank the same amount of nectar. There was no difference in how they dressed, no difference in the company they kept, no variance in the weapons they used. There are some days Ares still cannot believe Phoebus will grow into a man and not some nymph with the way his ears have that slender point. He watches them now, sitting together beneath a shady palm and stringing their bows in an uncanny unison and curses because he still cannot tell them apart. What use is his skill in knowing blood when they both have the same damn blood running through their veins? What bond is there to sense when they are tied so tightly together, Ares can scarcely tell brother from sister?

He sighs. Unadorned and completely alone, the only way to know who is who is to speak to them. He'll have to find more ways to tell them apart from a distance. Surely they cannot stay this similar all the rest of their immortal lives.

[blarrghe]

I also really like dorian's kind of similar plot re: culture and family clashes due to essentially homophobia but really a more complex identity issue that doesn't fit within his rigid society. I don't not like that narrative. I've played around in that plot a whole lot actually, it pulls a certain very relatable heartstring. but I think the way it's presented with Taash felt a lot more like someone else's narrative pasted over their character, like the Qun as a culture was a secondary backdrop piece to a story that would be told anyway, and really better fits someone else. I don't want to make assumptions about the writer because I do think people are capable and largely should be allowed to write about experiences that aren't their own or that are influenced by cultures that aren't their own. but while Dorian remains staunchly Tevinter, reclaiming his identity and fighting for his place in his society, Taash's framing seems to imply that if a rigid culture won't have you, you need to identify outside of it entirely.

To me, this is a narrative I see most often from people whose experience with an identity crisis happened within modern (American) Christianity, where the cultural background is really only the kind of consumerist western secular Christianity we're all stuck with. Often, leaving the church is akin to leaving a cult, and dropping the philosophies and beliefs of your upbringing is a necessary part of accepting your own identity. To portray the Qun this way, which is an incredibly rigid society with very clear collectivist philosophies, does almost work, because there is a black and white frame at play from within that culture. Even though it's got clear ethnic roots, leaving the Qun makes you not Qunari in a very clear-cut way.

However, Taash and their mother specifically introduce the concept of deep cultural roots, ritual practices, and a personal connection to the heritage of the Qun even from outside its governance, which added a depth to that issue we hadn't yet seen. And then I as Rook get to be the one to say to Taash -- be an individual, actually. Who cares what anyone thinks? For a game that's really trying to talk like my counselling psychology textbooks, that's really not how you're supposed to address someone who clearly does still care about their cultural roots and the collective. And I don't know that I need to address Taash like a trained therapist who respects their respect for their mother, I can say "fuck your mom and her worldview" if I want, and many people might, I don't mind my non-Qunari character getting the option to have a bias and not understand the Qun, but that adopting that stance is the only way that Taash can be who they are feels telling of the bias this entire game is written with.

Additionally, the Qun being so preoccupied with role and purpose in previous lore actually gave it a kind of flexibility that feels entirely forgotten -- in Qunari philosophy, if you feel that you "are" something you are not "supposed" to be, then in gist it turns out that you are that thing. We see this in how elves are drawn to it because their aptitudes will be respected over their race, and in the discussion Bull gives us about how Krem's birth sex wouldn't matter in the Qun because he meets the criteria of male warrior first ("the Shadow Dragons have some fancy term for it", Taash tells me. Didn't the Qunari have one too? In fact, theirs is the only term I remember hearing.) There's a sense that place in the Qun is determined by essentially what the Qun sees your soul as being. How they would deal with a soul that's in two places at once or isn't one thing or another is an interesting question. Unfortunately it feels a lot like retconning to say "they just wouldn't answer it and would make you try to fit what you were born looking like". The Qun is this really interesting ultra-rational set of minimally spiritual governing philosophies that is flawed because by that very nature it is also oppressive, because people don't work on ultra rationalism and complete collectivism, and any iteration of a top-down governing body forcing order in a society begets corruption. It leaves a lot of room for potential stories about learning to break away and follow your own path without losing your respect for the better (egalitarian) principles that raised you. But Taash's isn't that story.

I do think an identity struggle narrative where someone has to figure out how to refuse to fit into something they're not is a compelling one, and one the Qun has given us before, but that's been in its flaws as being a deterministic society that doesn't allow for a lot of independent ambition. That looks different, I think, from what felt a lot more like run-of-the-mill (western) sexism. What exactly does the Qun say a woman should be? The Qun has previously presented as almost entirely sex-egalitarian. A nuturing person is a tammassarin, etc. And living outside the Qun while still attempting to keep its values and rituals alive shouldn't look, I think, like your mom insisting you be a girl even though you don't feel like one. What is a girl to Taash's mom? And why is it dresses? I'm just not really buying it in this context, even though its a relatable story that pulls a good heartstring, and may in fact be a very relatable thing to many nonwhite people or nonchristian cultures that do display gender essentialism and homophobia. gender essentialism and homophobia isn't just a white christian thing (though it was often the product of colonialism, that doesn't mean it hasn't taken on significantly entwined cultural precedence from there within nonchristian or nonwhite cultures), but combating it with fierce individualism and a rejection of culture and worldview...kinda is.

And it is disappointing, because the illustration of those feelings and the kindness of a likeminded response that you are able to give (if you play nonbinary as I do at least, but I assume even if not) is so novel and so heartfelt and so touchingly sweet. I think the personal discussion over these feelings and the insecurity, anger, and confusion that they come packaged with when your community doesn't allow for them is incredibly needed right now. I really like Taash's character, and I like their conflict with their mother. I just don't think it fits the context it's been put in, and I don't think its resolution is cognizant of its own worldbuilding, and that feeling of being slapped on does the whole thing a disservice.

And the part I don't think I have the time to get into right now, but which bears at least touching on, is that the cultures given these narratives of cult-adjacency and fighting for personal freedom are never the one that is very obviously based on Christianity/Catholicism and is the dominant one of the world. Tevinter is Andrastian, yes, but Dorian's homophobia narrative isn't religiously motivated, it's an issue of class and expectation. this is fine. but it becomes a lot more questionable when all the rigidity and homophobia in the world only happens to brown people or their cultural stand-ins. and when it happens, both times, in a way that is honestly very white.

[ongoing-catastrophe]

didnt want to outright state "i'm asexual" at a family and friends dinner in my small little town (we're headed in the direction of gay rights but people are still a bit confused by bisexuality, so i dont think they're quite ready for me) which means that when i was talking with a family friend who (semi-recently) got married and obviously fucking regrets it, i got stuck in a conversation that was mostly

her: "you should date"

me : "cool i'm not really into dating"

her : "dont marry the first person you're in a relationship with. i did that"

me : "i mean my parents did that and they're fine"

her: "dating was the best part of my life"

me : "thats cool, some people enjoy dating. not my cup of tea tho"

her: "ok but it really opens up your mind. you should try to date"

just on a loop for like 20 minutes and oh my god honey please just divorce you husband and dont try to live vicariously through me. please.

[forestfullofberries]

EUEHEUGHUOHGROUGHOUNNNGH🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺😭😭😭😭

[bogdreamz]

whatever it was. you hate how you came to love it. admirable lunatic

[dirtytransmasc]

I refuse to go into more detail, but, I will no longer hold my tongue. my biggest gripe with this fandom is the way a majority of it erases Lo'ak's actual trauma and struggles (with his identity, his father/family, his clan, etc), and essentially gives him Spider's traumas/struggles in some idealized form (whether for over the top and oversimplified "hurt/comfort" scenarios, or max woobification), while absolutely dragging and/or ignoring Spider's entire character and the realistic depictions of those traumas and what that does to a kid.

like I can't exactly put words to it or go into a deep analytical post, but I've been thinking about it, and some other stuff I've seen online have been making me think about it.

stop doing a disservice to both of my boys. they both have such interesting and complex stories and you're ruining it!!!

[nerdyenby]

Kids deserve to be annoying. Let children exist without fear of how they’re perceived. Teenagers are gonna be cringe, it’s the natural order of things. Let them know if they’re doing something legitimate harmful, but otherwise just let them be.