Moral judgments aren’t explanations

It’s natural to frame human behaviour in terms of good and evil — it provides clarity and emotional satisfaction. Moral judgments appeal to us because they’re simple: they give us someone to blame and an immediate sense of resolution. However, this simplicity often hides what we really need to understand a situation or solve a problem. When we reduce people’s actions to just their moral character, it might feel satisfying but rarely captures what’s actually happening. Even when someone’s actions cause harm, there’s almost always a deeper explanation — whether it’s misaligned incentives, systemic pressures, or straightforward cause and effect.

Consider a basic example: petty theft. It’s easy to label someone who steals as inherently bad, driven by greed or disregard for others. But often, the explanation is much simpler — they’re hungry or lack basic resources. Once you understand this, the solution becomes clearer: addressing hunger and poverty reduces the motivation for theft. While implementing these solutions isn’t always easy, the connection between cause and effect is clear.

Moral judgments have their place — they help guide our principles and shape our values — but they alone can’t solve problems or explain why things happen. Looking for explanations, however, shows us how things work and points toward possible solutions. When we focus less on judging and more on understanding, we can think more clearly and solve problems more effectively.