Varieties and Vices of Praise

A very common account of blame holds that ordinary blame is communicative. In this chapter I apply that account to praise. I argue that ordinary praise is a recognition and admiration of the other person’s efforts, that involves a request for acknowledgement and recognition of that attitude in return. The fact that praise is a communicative act explains why it can be morally problematic. First, obviously, it can have real effects in the world. But praise can go wrong in other ways too. There are two kinds of praise, and they have different standing conditions. If someone attempts peer praise when they are not a peer, they do not have standing to praise. If someone attempts teacher praise when they are not a teacher, they do not have standing to praise. The most common explanation for people attempting praise without standing is that they do not have the proper respect for the person they are praising: they apply prejudicial stereotypes. This picture explains two important features of oppressive praise. It explains why condescending praise – praise that is offered as a result of low expectations – is not accompanied by rewards. This sort of praise is an attempt at teacher praise, and teacher praise, because it focusses on effort, does not generally correlate with rewards. The picture also explains why being praised in a condescending way is especially insulting. Praise is a communication that asks for acceptance, so in engaging in praise, the praiser is doing something intrusive.