BY: JESSICA BEUKER
Most people would agree that empathy – the capacity to understand or feel what another is experiencing by placing yourself in their position – is an inherently good quality. After all, the more we empathize with others, the more we behave towards them in a morally significant way. But a number of people are beginning to reject this notion, most notably Paul Bloom, who argues that empathy blinds us from the long term consequences of our actions and that “it’s because of empathy that the world cares so much more about a baby stuck in a well than we do about global warming.”
He has a point. Because empathy allows you to put yourself in an individual’s shoes and feel their pain, we care more about helping that person vs. helping a global cause or large group of people whose suffering we can not understand or identify with. Because of empathy, when we help these individuals who we can relate to, we feel really good. As bloom says, “we get caught up in a moralistic rush.” But he adds that because of this, we “don’t actually pay attention to what the world needs.”
While Bloom’s argument is reasonable, I would have to disagree. Sure, empathy may lead to a skewed idea of activism and helping others. But the other side does not offer a better solution. Without empathy we are not any more likely to care about global issues or focusing on the greater good. When compassion is taken out of the equation, judgment is not necessarily improved. “What drives and sustains the suicide bomber?” asks a Psychology Today article arguing in favour of empathy. “The belief in the purity of his principles, principles that require one to blind oneself to the suffering and carnage of the innocents at his mercy.” Furthermore it was reasoning based on false ideas that led to laws that permitted slavery and burning humans at the stake. Empathy is not the problem.
The problem is how we utilize empathy. Humans are most likely to empathize with people who are similar to us. Empathy works best when we can push past, and use it to find something – anything- that we have in common with another person. Even if that similarity is not visible right on the surface.
Empathy as a core value should not be argued against. Instead any argument against empathy should be related to how it is implemented. Empathy itself is a human response to suffering, and paired with reason and strategy, that response has the ability to do a lot of good.
Check out Paul Bloom’s argument below:
