Reputation for plagiarism

Plagiarism is certainly worthy of disdain when it constitutes actual theft — collecting payment that the original creator would have received — but why do we also tend to take a dim view of instances of plagiarism where there is no discernible material harm?

Plagiarism is in the news. It played a role in the resignation of Harvard president Claudine Gay, as significant portions of her academic output were allegedly copied from other papers, and all of a sudden everyone and their dog are looking for evidence of plagiarism in academia, journalism and beyond. Clearly, plagiarism that involves copying someone else’s work without permission and passing it as one’s own deprives the originator from rightful revenue, and this is widely disapproved, both on legal and moral grounds. But we also seem to despise plagiarism when nobody is actually being harmed — for example when, in a social setting, someone falsely passes of a joke they were told by a friend as their own. Why might that be?

Reputation, a possession more precious than money?

Our ideas contribute to our reputation, and a good reputation is of great importance for the social beings we are. It…