Punishment scales with the unfairness of the wrongdoing, not with deterrence needs

Evidence

The mutualistic account of punishment makes specific predictions. Indeed, to the extent that punishment is about restoring fairness, the more unfair the wrongdoing, the bigger the punishment should be. Anthropological observations have extensively shown that, in keeping with this prediction, the level of compensation in stateless societies is directly proportional to the harm done to the victim: For example, the wrongdoer owes more to the victim if he has killed a family member or eloped with a wife than if he has stolen animals or destroyed crops — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 103

Categorization

• XREF: Connects directly to the reader’s Big God / fumi-e analysis: the Japanese authorities’ escalating punishments for apostasy map onto mutualistic retribution calibrated to unfairness of the transgression. — connects to: Proportionate punishment mirrors distributive justice in reverse. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 90; Punishment functions as negative redistribution to correct prior unfair gains — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 175; Third-party punishment scales with how far selfish transfers fall short of fairness norms. — Ernst Fehr, Third-Party Punishment and Social Norms, 30 (+10 more)

Related

• Society punishes impropriety more harshly than inhumanity (similarity 0.85)
• Punishment functions as negative redistribution to correct prior unfair gains (similarity 0.85)
• Proportionate punishment mirrors distributive justice in reverse. (similarity 0.85)
• People punish free-riders partly to correct inequality, not only to enforce cooperation. (similarity 0.83)
• A punisher’s own gains do not reduce punishment of unrelated violators. (similarity 0.83)
• Antisocial punishment is driven by low contributors’ sense of unfair treatment. (similarity 0.82)
• Some punishment in public goods games is retributive justice-seeking, not cooperation enforcement. (similarity 0.81)
• People spend their own money to punish and reward strangers with no future benefit. (similarity 0.81)
• Directly harmed victims punish more strongly than unaffected third parties. (similarity 0.80)
• Contributions carry implicit fairness judgments that trigger blame and counter-blame. (similarity 0.80)
• Third parties punish inequality even when it does not directly involve them. (similarity 0.79)
• Researchers distinguish punishment by a harmed party from punishment by an unaffected third party. (similarity 0.79)
• Punishing high contributors can erase the cooperative benefits of punishment. (similarity 0.79)
• Moralistic punishment of defectors is itself a costly reputational signal. (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Third-party punishment scales with how far selfish transfers fall short of fairness norms. #corroborates (0.92) — Ernst Fehr, Third-Party Punishment and Social Norms, 30
• Some punishment in public goods games is retributive justice-seeking, not cooperation enforcement. #corroborates (0.88) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 185
• Punishment functions as negative redistribution to correct prior unfair gains #expands (0.85) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 175
• Punishment shifted from sovereign vengeance to ensuring no crime goes unpunished #complicates (0.80)
• A punisher’s own gains do not reduce punishment of unrelated violators. #complicates (0.78) — Ernst Fehr, Third-Party Punishment and Social Norms, 109