3 ms·

Ammon Bundy is the example they use? Ammon Bundy supports migrants because he's a rancher and wants cheap labor on his ranch. He wants taxpayers to bear the cos

Ammon Bundy is the example they use? Ammon Bundy supports migrants because he's a rancher and wants cheap labor on his ranch. He wants taxpayers to bear the cost so he can privately profit. That's why people are suspicious about "empathy," it's usually a way of manipulating your emotions so that other people can profit.

TimTheTinker 7y ago
Wow, skeptical comments like this strongly reinforce the article's point. To question whether empathy is helpful and suspect the motives of those who are promoting it? Ammon Bundy is a fellow human being with struggles of his own - isn't that enough? It doesn't mean you have to agree with his choices (you can even call them morally wrong). Empathy is merely a concern for fellow human beings, not emotional manipulation, despite the fact that some people attempt to manipulate others.
- chongli 7y ago
  Empathy is a concern for some fellow human beings, not all. I think you'll find that most people draw the lines of empathy around the identity group to which they belong and exclude from empathy those their group has identified as the "other." Empathy is an evolutionary tool for promoting group cohesiveness. It's not likely to extend to all human beings, unless we make contact with a hostile alien civilization.
  - TimTheTinker 7y ago
    > Empathy is a concern for some fellow human beings, not all. > Empathy is an evolutionary tool for promoting group cohesiveness. Empathy is an emotional attitude we can choose to extend to others. The fact that some people don't feel empathy towards everyone else doesn't mean that's morally right. Evolution has nothing to do with our moral choices, and it's no excuse either. Extending kindness and dignity to others is far more effective at creating social good than hoping (or waiting until) aliens show up. If you insist on a pure-naturalistic philosophy (which I do not, but hear me out), consider human society as an emergent property with attributes of its own that are irreducible to natural (or evolutionary, or whatever) causes. As long as we can choose the right as individuals, we carry a moral obligation to do so.
    - chongli 7y ago
      Empathy is an emotional attitude we can choose to extend to others. The fact that some people don't feel empathy towards everyone else doesn't mean that's morally right. You're entering dangerous territory here. It's not a well-accepted fact that empathy is something you can choose to extend to everyone. On the contrary, there's ample evidence to suggest that we cannot extend it to everyone [1]. To then ascribe moral character to a function which is biologically limited is to run afoul of the ethical principle that ought implies can [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassion_fatigue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassion_fatigue [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ought_implies_can https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ought_implies_can
      - TimTheTinker 7y ago
        Compassion fatigue notwithstanding, it absolutely is possible to believe that all human beings are worthy of dignity, respect, and empathy. To have decided ahead of time that everyone is worthy of empathy is most of the battle. Yes, we all have limited emotional resources. Millions of murdered people doesn’t move us like it ought to. But love and empathy are like muscles — practicing them improves our capacity to do so. It also helps to be emotionally healthy and in healthy, loving relationships. (And if I may say so, knowing and being loved/forgiven by God provides a wellspring of emotional life that nothing else can; I’m a Christian.)

TimTheTinker 7y ago

Wow, skeptical comments like this strongly reinforce the article's point. To question whether empathy is helpful and suspect the motives of those who are promoting it? Ammon Bundy is a fellow human being with struggles of his own - isn't that enough? It doesn't mean you have to agree with his choices (you can even call them morally wrong). Empathy is merely a concern for fellow human beings, not emotional manipulation, despite the fact that some people attempt to manipulate others.

chongli 7y ago
Empathy is a concern for some fellow human beings, not all. I think you'll find that most people draw the lines of empathy around the identity group to which they belong and exclude from empathy those their group has identified as the "other." Empathy is an evolutionary tool for promoting group cohesiveness. It's not likely to extend to all human beings, unless we make contact with a hostile alien civilization.
- TimTheTinker 7y ago
  > Empathy is a concern for some fellow human beings, not all. > Empathy is an evolutionary tool for promoting group cohesiveness. Empathy is an emotional attitude we can choose to extend to others. The fact that some people don't feel empathy towards everyone else doesn't mean that's morally right. Evolution has nothing to do with our moral choices, and it's no excuse either. Extending kindness and dignity to others is far more effective at creating social good than hoping (or waiting until) aliens show up. If you insist on a pure-naturalistic philosophy (which I do not, but hear me out), consider human society as an emergent property with attributes of its own that are irreducible to natural (or evolutionary, or whatever) causes. As long as we can choose the right as individuals, we carry a moral obligation to do so.
  - chongli 7y ago
    Empathy is an emotional attitude we can choose to extend to others. The fact that some people don't feel empathy towards everyone else doesn't mean that's morally right. You're entering dangerous territory here. It's not a well-accepted fact that empathy is something you can choose to extend to everyone. On the contrary, there's ample evidence to suggest that we cannot extend it to everyone [1]. To then ascribe moral character to a function which is biologically limited is to run afoul of the ethical principle that ought implies can [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassion_fatigue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassion_fatigue [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ought_implies_can https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ought_implies_can
    - TimTheTinker 7y ago
      Compassion fatigue notwithstanding, it absolutely is possible to believe that all human beings are worthy of dignity, respect, and empathy. To have decided ahead of time that everyone is worthy of empathy is most of the battle. Yes, we all have limited emotional resources. Millions of murdered people doesn’t move us like it ought to. But love and empathy are like muscles — practicing them improves our capacity to do so. It also helps to be emotionally healthy and in healthy, loving relationships. (And if I may say so, knowing and being loved/forgiven by God provides a wellspring of emotional life that nothing else can; I’m a Christian.)