Responds to the article" The Limits of Empathy, New York Times  by David Brooks "The problem comes when we try to turn feeling into action. Empathy makes you more aware of other people’s suffering, but it’s not clear it actually motivates you to take moral action or prevents you from taking immoral action"

Shared Google Doc: Empathizing with David Brooks and his “Limits of Empathy”
http://bit.ly/pXDJS5
Shared workspace to work a a response.

October 4, 2011 - The Limits of David Brooks’ “Limits of Empathy” - Jason Marsh

Over the last few days, a lot of people have asked me about David Brooks’ Friday op-ed column in The New York Times on the “limits of empathy.” In it, Brooks argues that empathy is a “sideshow” to moral action. Considering the glut of recent books on empathy—such as Frans de Waal’s The Age of Empathy and Jeremy Rifkin’s The Empathic Civilization—Brooks writes that empathy “has become a way to experience delicious moral emotions without confronting the weaknesses in our nature that prevent us from actually acting upon them.” Empathy, in other words, is little more than a fad. Instead, says Brooks, moral action stems not from empathy but from a “sense of obligation to some religious, military, social or philosophic code...

A considerable amount of research suggests empathy is an important ingredient to moral action, if not the only ingredient.

• Studies more empathy

  • less bullying

  • less racism

  • helping of Jews in holocaust

• Studies sometimes empathy doesn't lead to helping

  • [confusion with sympathy?]

Debunking “The Age of Empathy”?  by Peter Corning, Ph.D. Critics cite contrary evidence. Maybe empathy is not enough.
		"Brooks cites a recent review of the scientific research by philosopher Jesse Prinz, who concluded that "These studies suggest that empathy is not a major player when it comes to moral motivation."  Brooks concurs and echoes the naysayers who have called empathy a "fragile flower" that can easily be crushed by self-concern.  Brooks gives more weight to "a sense of duty" that is dictated by social, moral, religious, or military codes.  He concludes that "empathy is a sideshow."  We need, instead, to debate, reform, enact and "revere" our ethical codes."

Beyond the Limits of Empathy - Miki Kashtan, Ph.D., 
"Can empathy serve as a reliable guide to action? David Brooks, in his recent article "The Limits of Empathy," suggests that empathy is no guarantee that caring action will take place. Participants in Milgram's famous 1950s experiments willingly inflicted what they thought were near-lethal electric shocks despite suffering tremendously. Nazi executors early in the war wept while killing Jews. And yet those strong feelings didn't stop them. Why does this happen? "

Notes:

Moral codes versus empathy?

• Nazis had a very firm moral code.

• fundamentalists have a very firm moral code.

• Empathy can be that moral code as well. (cognitive empathy)