The Interpersonal Consequences of Moral Grandstanding

Moral grandstanding refers to the use of moral talk to gain status. Although moral grandstanding has a negative impact on general discourse, little is known about its interpersonal consequences; in other words, how are grandstanders perceived by others? In three studies (N = 525), we examined how prestige and dominance-based moral grandstanding is associated with a range of interpersonal outcomes (Study 1 and 2: social status, morality, attraction; Study 3: engagement and morality), and how these effects are moderated by perceptions of hypocrisy (Study 2) and shared attitudes (Study 3). Results from these studies indicate that prestige-based moral grandstanding was associated with more positive perceptions of status, morality, and interpersonal attraction compared to dominance-based moral grandstanding.

Would a Virtuous Person Grandstand?

This chapter discusses moral grandstanding from the standpoint of virtue ethics. Three common approaches to virtue ethics are considered. A virtuous person would not grandstand according to the classical conception of virtue, on which virtue is doing the right thing for the right reason. People would be disappointed if they found out that a widely admired, historic speech turned out to be grandstanding. Vanity, the general character trait most closely associated with grandstanding, is not plausibly a virtue according to virtue consequentialism. Finally, grandstanding is an abuse of morality, like the one Nietzsche labels the slave revolt in morals, as grandstanders use moral talk as an underhanded shortcut to satisfy their will to power.

The Social Costs of Grandstanding

This chapter presents some consequentialist considerations against moral grandstanding. Grandstanding contributes to group polarization. Relatedly, grandstanding leads people to hold false beliefs, and to be overconfident about their beliefs. Grandstanding also threatens to undercut the effectiveness of moral talk. It makes people increasingly cynical about moral discourse, and it may cause outrage exhaustion—an insensitivity to expressions of outrage by others, and an inability to muster outrage oneself. When grandstanding becomes too common in public discourse, moderates avoid discussions of morality and politics. In spite of these costs, the possibility that grandstanding may be socially beneficial is also considered.

Grandstanding

People used to hold out great hope for a public square in which individuals put petty disputes aside and engage in rational discussion about important issues. Unfortunately, public discourse today—especially on the internet—is full of adults behaving like poorly socialized children, acting out to show off for people they want to impress. In short, they engage in moral grandstanding, or the use of moral talk for self-promotion. Drawing from work in psychology, economics, and political science, this book develops an explanation of why people grandstand when they talk about morality and politics. Using the tools of moral philosophy, it argues that grandstanding is not just annoying, but morally bad. And finally, it explains what we can do to encourage people to support a public square worth participating in, by avoiding grandstanding.

What to Do About Grandstanding

How can we cut down on grandstanding and all the damage it causes? Drawing from empirical research in psychology, this chapter explains how individuals can avoid grandstanding and help change social norms so others grandstand less, too. People can reduce their grandstanding by altering their situations, forming implementation intentions about how to talk about morality and politics, and satisfying their desires for moral recognition with activities that are more likely to do good. One tempting and obvious way to get others to stop grandstanding is to call them out and criticize them. But this is a bad idea for moral, epistemic, and practical reasons. A more promising route is to change social norms so that grandstanding becomes embarrassing. This can be done by correcting peoples’ beliefs about grandstanding and moral talk, setting a good example in public discourse, and withholding from suspected grandstanders the praise and attention they seek.

Moral Talk Is Not Magic

Moral talk is our primary means of bringing morality to bear on practical problems. It is an incredibly valuable tool for making the world a better place. Moral talk can be used well, but it can also be abused. Instead of using moral talk for morally worthy aims, many use it to humiliate, intimidate, and threaten people they dislike, impress their friends, feel better about themselves, and make people less suspicious of their own misconduct. This chapter introduces one common way of abusing moral talk: moral grandstanding, the use of moral talk for self-promotion.

Grandstanding and Respect

This chapter presents several ways that moral grandstanding can involve a failure to show appropriate respect for persons. Grandstanders often use the putative moral failings of others as opportunities to showcase their own moral qualities. This phenomenon is common in cases of viral outrage and online shaming. Grandstanders also deceive other people by encouraging inaccurate impressions of their own moral credentials, thus gaining trust they do not deserve, and sometimes greater leeway to behave immorally. Grandstanding is also presented as a form of free-riding. If everyone engaged in grandstanding all the time, it would not impress anyone, and moral talk would not work. Grandstanders get the best of both worlds, while others restrain themselves to avoid abusing moral talk.

Children's everyday moral conversation speaks to the emergence of obligation

For Tomasello's proposed ontology of the human sense of moral obligation, observations of early moral language may provide useful evidence complementary to that afforded by experimental research. Extant reports of children's everyday moral talk reveal patterns of participation and content that accord with the proposal and hint at extensions addressing individual differences.

MORAL GRANDSTANDING AS A THREAT TO FREE EXPRESSION

Moral grandstanding, or the use of moral talk for self-promotion, is a threat to free expression. When grandstanding is introduced in a public forum, several ideals of free expression are less likely to be realized. Popular views are less likely to be challenged, people are less free to entertain heterodox ideas, and the cost of changing one’s mind goes up.