This enthusiasm [for empathy] may be misplaced. Empathy has some unfortunate features – it is parochial, narrow-minded and innumerate. We’re often at our best when we’re smart enough not to rely on it.
I argue that we should be kind, we should be compassionate, and we should definitely be reasonable and rational, but that empathy leads us astray.
I think empathy is really important for pleasure.
Empathy zooms you in on an individual and, as a result, it's narrow, it's innumerate, it's racist, it's very biased.
When people want to inspire you to turn against some group of people, they'll often use empathy.
Because of empathy, stories of the suffering of one person could lead us into a war that could kill millions of people.
It's hard to pull apart empathy from compassion. What is really clear is that we innately care for other people at least to some extent.
It has been a period where people have been far nicer to one another in every possible way. I'm not saying it's because we're dropping our empathy that we're nicer to each other, just that the drop doesn't seem to be causing any harm.
I'm really interested in the pleasure we get from stories and the pleasure we get from movies, and certainly the pleasure we get from virtual experiences. My complaint is against empathy as a moral guide. But as a source of pleasure, it can't be beat.
Because of empathy, we care more for, and devote far more resources to, someone who is familiar, from our country or our group, than a stranger.
I think empathy can serve as a moral spark, motivating us to do good things. But anything can be a moral spark.
![This enthusiasm [for empathy] may be misplaced. Empathy has some unfortunate features – it is parochial, narrow-minded and innumerate. We’re often at our best when we’re smart enough not to rely on it.](http://cdn.quoteddaily.com/images/paul-bloom/this-enthusiasm-for-empathy-may-be-misplaced-empathy-has-some-unfortunate-features--it-is-parochial-narrow-minded-and-innumerate.jpg)
