What is another word for loss of face?

Pronunciation: [lˈɒs ɒv fˈe͡ɪs] (IPA)

The phrase "loss of face" refers to the embarrassment or shame a person experiences when they fail to meet a social expectation or suffer a public defeat. There are several synonyms for this phrase, including humiliation, disgrace, dismay, or mortification. When an individual experiences loss of face, they may feel diminished, degraded, or embarrassed in front of others. This type of social loss can be caused by a variety of factors, including personal failure, social rejection, or social bias. Regardless of the cause, experiencing loss of face can be a painful and challenging experience that can impact an individual's self-esteem and sense of worth.

What are the hypernyms for Loss of face?

A hypernym is a word with a broad meaning that encompasses more specific words called hyponyms.

What are the opposite words for loss of face?

The antonyms for "loss of face" could include words such as dignity, self-respect, honor, reputation, and prestige. These words convey a sense of positive qualities that one can maintain even in the face of defeat, failure, or embarrassment. For example, someone who handles a difficult situation with grace and integrity might be said to have preserved their dignity or honor. Conversely, someone who becomes defensive or vindictive in the same situation might be said to have suffered a loss of face. Antonyms for loss of face are important because they can help individuals focus on positive outcomes and maintain their self-esteem even during challenging times.

What are the antonyms for Loss of face?

Famous quotes with Loss of face

  • The most important thing in an argument, next to being right, is to leave an escape hatch for your opponent, so that he can gracefully swing over to your side without too much apparent loss of face.
    Sydney J. Harris
  • The most important thing in an argument, next to being right, is to leave an escape hatch for your opponent, so that he can gracefully swing over to your side without too much apparent loss of face.
    Sydney J. Harris
  • [I]f you want to about faith, and offer a reasoned (and reason-responsive) defense of faith as an extra category of belief worthy of special consideration, I'm eager to [participate]. I certainly grant the existence of the phenomenon of faith; what I want to see is a reasoned ground for taking faith as a , and not, say, just as a way people comfort themselves and each other (a worthy function that I do take seriously). But you must not expect me to go along with your defense of faith as a path to truth if at any point you appeal to the very dispensation you are supposedly trying to justify. Before you appeal to faith when reason has you backed into a corner, think about whether you really want to abandon reason when reason is on your side. You are sightseeing with a loved one in a foreign land, and your loved one is brutally murdered in front of your eyes. At the trial it turns out that in this land friends of the accused may be called as witnesses for the defense, testifying about their faith in his innocence. You watch the parade of his moist-eyed friends, obviously sincere, proudly proclaiming their undying faith in the innocence of the man you saw commit the terrible deed. The judge listens intently and respectfully, obviously more moved by this outpouring than by all the evidence presented by the prosecution. Is this not a nightmare? Would you be willing to live in such a land? Or would you be willing to be operated on by a surgeon you tells you that whenever a little voice in him tells him to disregard his medical training, he listens to the little voice? I know it passes in polite company to let people have it both ways, and under most circumstances I wholeheartedly cooperate with this benign agreement. But we're seriously trying to get at the truth here, and if you think that this common but unspoken understanding about faith is anything better than socially useful obfuscation to avoid mutual embarrassment and loss of face, you have either seen much more deeply into the issue that any philosopher ever has (for none has ever come up with a good defense of this) or you are kidding yourself.
    Daniel Dennett

Word of the Day

multitasker
The word "multitasker" usually refers to someone who can perform different tasks simultaneously. However, there are several antonyms for this word, which describe the opposite type...