As a PhD student in psychology with a focus on research in justice, I have found that humans have psychologically evolved to prefer just situations over unjust ones. Whether its allocation of resources or equal opportunity, the preference is the same with decades of research supporting this discovery. In anthropology, Robert Trivers published work on reciprocal altruism suggesting that natural selection in certain circumstances may favor those that act in good faith in their interactions with others, and make people especially more perturbed by those that choose to cheat or take others’ kindness for granted. In psychology, Melvin Lerner published his work on justice motive and just world belief, suggesting human beings prefer to believe that people that do good things get good things and those that do bad things, receive bad things. And today, research among cognitive scientists suggests that babies as young as 5-months can show preference for puppets that share or promote fairness versus those that do not when watching puppet shows.
Humans of all backgrounds have an innate desire to see people get what they deserve by merit. But instead of uplifting those we are able to experience working hard or sharing their talent, we instead devote large amounts of time attempting to call out those we believe are cheaters, like Trivers suggested in his 1971 paper. What is remarkable about this behavior is that we are often very unsuccessful at exposing cheaters that we deem to be similar to ourselves or a part of the communities we identify with. People in their words and actions espouse a belief in meritocracy, or a societal order in which people are rewarded based on their ability and work. However, we don’t live in a meritocracy. We live in a world that regularly sustains injustice. The real question is, why do we choose to pretend that our world is fair and what makes some more willing to recognize inequality than others?
Inequality and unfair treatment of people similar to ourselves is unsettling. It tells us that the fate met by someone who is simply unlucky can be ours as well. Choosing to believe in equal opportunity and fairness, even when it is clearly not there, helps alleviate our own worries about being unfairly victimized. But it is not conducive to living in the society many of us hope to live in. By continuously looking to blame the less fortunate for events out of their control, we miss what I believe is a need for change. So how do we break this cycle?
We desperately need to take time to evaluate the systems we live in and if our values are truly supported by the rewards and punishments in our society. Do the hardest workers really receive the greatest compensation? Do we reward those in fortunate circumstances more often than those that endure difficult ones? Do we really believe in equal opportunity and fairness in our institutions? A deeper dive into each of these questions can reveal whether fairness and justice exist in our society, or if we are simply justifying the system we live in out of fear we could face the same abuse and injustice others are subjected to undeservingly.
Further Reading
Bloom, P. (2014). Just babies: The origins of good and evil. Crown.
Hamlin, J. K., & Wynn, K. (2011). Young infants prefer prosocial to antisocial others. Cognitive development, 26(1), 30-39.
Trivers, R. L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. The Quarterly review of biology, 46(1), 35-57.
This was a great read. I often don’t know what to believe when it comes to good and bad intention. I know for me, it’s out of love or understanding. As for others (around me), I can only hope it’s the same until proven otherwise. Which indicates uncertainty is just as bad as knowing someone isn’t being genuine.