Escape Goat: The Transference of Guilt and the Origins of Scapegoating

By Sarah Marin

The APA Dictionary of Psychology defines scapegoating as “the process of directing aggression or blame toward another individual or group as a way of coping with guilt, frustration, or conflict.” Merriam-Webster similarly describes a scapegoat as “one that bears the blame for others.” Across definitions, a consistent theme emerges: scapegoating functions as a mechanism for avoiding responsibility and shifting accountability onto someone else. I was familiar with this term through personal reading, but my studies in psychology and social psychology clarified its role both as a self-defense mechanism at the individual level and as a social phenomenon in group dynamics. Yet it was ultimately through personal experiences that I was thrust into a new and transformative understanding of what it means to embody this concept.

This term dates back to the Bible and is first mentioned in Leviticus 16, which describes the ancient Jewish ritual of Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement), considered the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. During this ceremony, a goat symbolically carries the sins of the community and is then sent into the wilderness to remove the people’s guilt. Two goats are chosen by the high priest: one for sacrifice and one for confession. The high priest lays his hands on the goat’s head and confesses over it all the sins of the people of Israel, symbolically transferring their guilt onto the animal. The goat is then sent into the wilderness, carrying the community’s wrongdoing away. The word “scapegoat” itself comes from William Tyndale’s 1530 English translation of the Bible, in which he rendered the Hebrew term as “escape goat.”

Fast forward to the twentieth century, when René Girard, a French historian and philosopher, developed the concept of the scapegoat mechanism. According to Girard, when a collective group experiences conflict or chaos, they often select a “victim” to blame for the disorder affecting the group. Typically, the scapegoat is seen as outside the group, vulnerable, and different—perceived as the cause of the group’s internal tension. Once identified as the source of the chaos, the group may attempt to eliminate or punish the scapegoat in order to restore a sense of harmony and unity within the community.

Sigmund Freud does not explicitly reference the scapegoat theory, but its foundations can be seen in psychoanalytic concepts, particularly defense mechanisms and projection. Rather than confronting personal failures or accepting responsibility, individuals may displace or project their own accountability onto others. Similarly, Carl Jung argued that people project aspects of themselves when they refuse to acknowledge their unwanted traits, often seeing those traits in someone else instead of within themselves. 

Across history and psychology, scapegoating shows a consistent pattern: humans often transfer guilt and blame onto others to avoid facing their own responsibility. From the biblical ritual in Leviticus 16, to Girard’s scapegoat mechanism, to the projections described by Freud and Jung, the act of blaming serves both social and personal functions. Understanding this process has transformed how I see relationships and group dynamics, revealing the subtle ways responsibility can be displaced. Recognizing scapegoating is a reminder of the importance of self-awareness, accountability, and ethical action in both personal and collective life. By understanding how guilt and blame are transferred, we can resist the pull of the “escape goat” and choose responsibility, compassion, and integrity over unfair accusation.