| This is a good question. I imagine there is at least a 2x2 matrix of humiliation: on one axis, there's intention (did A intend to humiliate B, or was it inadvertent?). On the other axis, there's public versus private: is the person humiliated in a way that other people will know and remember? There may be more axes, but those are the big ones, to me. It seems like it's fairly uncontroversial to say that someone who inadvertently inflicts a private humiliation known only to the humiliated deserves the least amount of blame, while someone who intentionally humiliates someone in public deserves the most. For example, an inadvertent, private humiliation might be that you and I are talking privately, and you make a joke about my alma mater, which I care a lot about. You didn't mean it personally: you didn't even know I went there, let alone that I was sensitive about it. No one else hears you say this, and two minutes later you've forgotten about it. On the other hand, I take it to heart, and carry a grudge for years. Most people would say you're not really at fault at all. You could have been more circumspect, but I'm the one who needs to lighten up. On the other hand, if you and your partner are at the beach, and I come up to you and kick sand in your face, and everybody around you laughs, that's a public humiliation, and I'm 100% responsible for it. These feel like different situations, and the distinctions between them just aren't captured by the single word 'humiliation'. Perhaps these more precise words exist in English, and we just don't use them very well, but it feels like if we did then this confusion wouldn't even arise. It's like having 50 different words for snow, because snow is such a large part of your culture. Our vocabulary for talking about humiliation is limited. On the other hand, I'm not sure I want to live in a culture that has 50 different words for humiliation! |