Punishment isn’t about the common good: it’s about spite

Abstract

Punishment is often assumed to have evolved for the greater good, promoting cooperation by penalizing cheaters. However, punishment also has detrimental social consequences, such as the oppression of minorities and the enforcement of harmful norms. An alternative hypothesis is that punishment originated from spite, a behavior that harms both the actor and the recipient but provides a relative fitness advantage. Spite is observed in various species, from bacteria to primates, and functions by creating a level playing field where harming others can benefit the actor. If punishment evolved from spite, its initial function was not to promote cooperation but rather to inflict harm, which could then be co-opted for other purposes, including both prosocial and antisocial norms. Examples of spite-like behavior in other species include the production of toxins in bacteria and the policing of egg-laying in honey bees. The ultimatum game illustrates that seemingly fair behavior might also be motivated by spite rather than altruism. Players frequently reject unfair offers even though it results in no gain for themselves, suggesting a motivation to harm others who receive more than themselves. Thus, the evolution of punishment might have multiple explanations, with spite being a potential precursor that later became associated with cooperation. – AI-generated abstract.