Abstract

Backwards-looking interpersonal blame, because ostensibly hurtful, is thought to require a moral justification. For most, this is found in either justice or fairness, moral values whose promotion or respect in these instances are themselves taken to require or consist in desert. Blame, as some say, is unjust unless deserved.

This motto is false, however. I aim to show why by surveying all possible morally “problematic” forms of blame: mere attitudes, mockery, emotional expressions, punishment, and (most generally) sanctions. While some require moral justification of a sort, none require desert, or anything like the metaphysically robust capacities and conditions people in the free will debate have taken them to require.

I reach this conclusion in part by interpreting the results of various behavioral economic games in a new light.