Investigating the possibility and requirements of using "blame" as an education moral method

Authors

1 Associate Professor faculty of Theology and Religious Studies, Shahid Beheshti University

2 sbu

10.22081/jare.2024.68003.1873

Abstract

In order to raise awareness and to correct the wrong behaviors, various educational methods are used: preaching, warning, explanation, punishment, etc. One of the ways of reacting to people's mistakes is "blame". Contradictory consequences have been proposed, from completely negative and destructive effects to positive and corrective ones;. But this type of exposure has received less attention as an educational method. In this research, the cognitive, emotional and behavioral components of blame have been analyzed, and then, the conditions in which it is possible for blame to have a corrective function have been studied. According to the findings, the basic component of blame is cognitive component. This means that during the blame, the belief and judgment of the blamer is transferred to the wrongdoer, and a common understanding is created between the parties about the violated normative value, its importance, the necessity of compensation, etc. The emotional component of blame has more subtleties and considerations, and depending on the intention and purpose of the blamer, there may be a range of negative and hostile feelings such as: anger, hatred, resentment, and humiliation, to feelings that are less stinging and annoying and more about creating the feeling of guilt and regret (educational blame) is concentrated in the guilty person. Also, in this research, it is clear that it is possible that by observing the seven conditions, erring person in a way that he has a constructive and education ahead of him. The eight conditions are explained and discussed in this article.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and Growth in Personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  2. Boyd, J. (2007). Blame and Blameworthiness. Princeton University. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
  3. Craig, S., Graesser, A., Sullins, J. & Gholson, B. (2010). “Affect and learning: An exploratory look into the role of affect in learning with AutoTutor”. Journal of Educational Media, Vol. 29, Issue 3, p. 241-250.
  4. Duff, R. A. (1986). Trials and punishments. Cambridge University Press.
  5. Ekman, P. (1992). “An argument for basic emotions”. Cognition and Emotion, 6(3-4), p. 169–200.
  6. Fricker, M. (2016). “What’s the point of blame? A paradigm-based explanation”. Nous, 50(1), p. 165–183.
  7. Havis, L. (2022). Improving First- and Second-Year Student Writing Using a Metacognitive and Integrated-Assessment Approach. Journal of Response to Writing, 8(1), p. 4–42.
  8. Hieronymi, P. (2004). “The force and fairness of blame”. Philosophical Perspectives, 18, p. 115–148.
  9. Hofmann, S. G. ( 2016). Emotion in therapy from science. New York: the Guilford press.
  10. Izard, C. E. (1992). “Basic emotions, relations among emotions and emotion-cognition relations”. Psychological Review, 99, p. 561–565.
  11. Lane, R. E. (2000). “Moral Blame and Causal Explanation”. Journal of Applied Philosophy, Vol. 17, No. 1, p. 45-58.
  12. Pickard, H. (2013). “Irrational Blame”. Analysis, October 1; 73(4), 613-626.
  13. Ricco, R.B. & Overton, W. F. (2011). “Dual systems Competence Procedural processing: A relational developmental systems approach to reasoning”. Developmental Review, 31, p. 119-150.
  14. Scanlon, T. (2008). Moral Dimensions. Harvard University Press; Cambridge, Mass.
  15. Sher, G. (2006). In Praise of Blame. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  16. Shiota, M. N. & Kalat, J. W. ( 2007). Emotion. Australia: Thomson Wadsworth.
  17. Simion, M. (2021). “Blame as performance”. Syntheses, 199, p. 7595–7614.
  18. Sliwa, P. (2021). Reverse-engineering blame. Philosophical Perspectives.
  19. Smith, A. M. (2013). “Moral blame and moral protest”. Coates and Tognazzini, 2013, p. 27–48.
  20. Swanson, L. H. & Hill, G. (1993). Metacognitive Aspects of Moral Reasoning and Behavior. Adolescence, 28, p. 711-725.
  21. Trujillo, G. & Tanner, K. D. (2017). Considering the Role of Affect in Learning: Monitoring Students' Self-Efficacy, Sense of Belonging, and Science Identity. Life Sciences Education, Vol. 13, No. 1.
  22. Veenman, M. V. J.; Wilhelm, P. & Beishuizen, J. J. (2004). “The relation between intellectual and metacognitive skillsfrom a developmental perspective”. Learning and Instruction, 14, p. 89-109.
  23. Wallace, J. (2011). Dispassionate opprobrium: on blame and the reactive sentiments. In: Wallace, J., et al., (eds.). Reasons and Recognition: Essays on the Philosophy of T. M. Scanlon. Oxford University Press; Oxford, p. 348-372.

 

 

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 06 December 2023
  • Revise Date: 02 January 2024
  • Accept Date: 01 February 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics