就羞恥的本源來看，孟子認為，人所固有的羞恥之心是來自於天而內在於人的；奧古斯丁則認定，羞恥之心本身來自於人的原罪，它是神—人關係的根本性的斷裂之後的產物。就羞恥的性質來看，孟子認為，羞恥是以善為指向的、具有原初先天內涵的主動性情感，而古希臘與教父哲學基本上在理性—非理性的區分中將羞恥歸入了thumos的範疇中，視之為心靈的動盪。就羞恥的功用來看，孟子與蘇格拉底式的羞恥均是在自己面前的羞恥，它具有否定性的道德蘊涵，使人能夠「毋自欺」或「有所不為」。

A Sino-western comparative discussion is involved in this study of shame. Concerning the origin of shame, Mencius argued that the internal sense of shame was what Tian (Heaven) has given to us and what inherent in the very mind of us, while Augustine believed it was derived from original sin, which made shame a product of the fundamental fracture of the God-Man relationship. As for the nature of shame, Mencius viewed it as a kind of positive emotion, aimed at goodness with its original apriori content. On the other hand, being thought of as turbulence of mind, shame was basically classified among the thumos by Ancient Greek and Patristic Philosophy according to the distinction between reason and non-reason. With regard to functions of shame, shame in front of oneself rather than others to be exact, Mencius and Socrates both interpreted them as morally negative, which means the sense of shame can allow us no self-deception and no self-indulgence.