I suppose you don’t think more empathy is the answer in either case.

In the end, that wouldn’t persuade you to be pro-racism.ĭuring this past election season, there have been pieces written about whether liberals don’t empathize enough with the white working class, or conservatives with Syrian refugees. Imagine there are two political candidates and one of them is a wonderful person, the other is totally awful, and imagine you use racist sentiments to get people to vote for the good guy. If I wrote a book called Against Racism, people wouldn’t demand that asterisk, even though racist sentiments could be exploited for all sorts of good things. My claim is that, on balance, it’s bad for us. Is empathy the bedrock of morality Two new studies suggest there is confusion around its meaning and its usefulness in creating a more caring society When people asked psychology professor Paul Bloom what new project he was working on, he would reply empathy adding the rider that he was. The author argues that empathy is not the solution to problems that divide people and is a poor guide for decision making. What is Against Empathy About Against Empathy draws on the distinctions between empathy, compassion, and moral decision making. I don’t doubt for a minute that empathy can do good things. Against Empathy by Paul Bloom The Empathy Instinct by Peter Bazalgette review. This is a summary review of Against Empathy containing key details about the book. So should there be an asterisk next to your provocative title? You write that empathy is not all bad and can be used to motivate people to do the right thing in certain situations. My argument is that if you want to be a moral person, empathy is the wrong way to do it. I explain that I’m against empathy in a very specific sense. People assume if I’m against empathy I must be some kind of psychopath. Tell me about the reactions you get when people hear you’re against empathy.

Against empathy review