Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read.
Start by marking “Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion” as Want to Read:
Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion
Enlarge cover
Rate this book
Clear rating
Open Preview

Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion

by
3.59  ·  Rating details ·  3,751 ratings  ·  545 reviews
New York Post Best Book of 2016

We often think of our capacity to experience the suffering of others as the ultimate source of goodness. Many of our wisest policy-makers, activists, scientists, and philosophers agree that the only problem with empathy is that we don’t have enough of it.

Nothing could be farther from the truth, argues Yale researcher Paul Bloom. In AGAINST EM
...more
Hardcover, 285 pages
Published December 6th 2016 by Ecco
More Details... Edit Details

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Reader Q&A

To ask other readers questions about Against Empathy, please sign up.

Be the first to ask a question about Against Empathy

Community Reviews

Showing 1-30
Average rating 3.59  · 
Rating details
 ·  3,751 ratings  ·  545 reviews


More filters
 | 
Sort order
Start your review of Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion
Darwin8u
Apr 20, 2017 rated it liked it
Shelves: 2017
"Empathy is what makes us human; it's what makes us both subjects and objects of moral concern. Empathy betrays us only when we take it as a moral guide."
- Paul Bloom, Against Empathy

description

I'm a sucker for pop psychology or moral philosophy or moral politics books. Kinda my jam. I'm also a fan of books that flip certain general assumptions about what is an absolute good. I remember first reading a book called In Defense of Elitism years ago after my freshman year in college. It was a catchy title, and
...more
Trevor
Jan 21, 2020 rated it it was ok
I’ve been on an odd sort of journey with this book. First of all, I came to it as a bit of a convert. You see, I’ve been doing research at work into intercultural understanding and multiculturalism, and a lot of the theory around that starts from the premise that for students to become interculturally understanding they first need to learn empathy. This hardly seems controversial – I mean, we have all read To Kill a Mockingbird, and so walking a mile in my shoes seems to be pretty good advice. B ...more
Joachim Stoop
Feb 05, 2017 rated it liked it
This was not a very clear, graspable, usable book.
There are lots of valid points here and he uses a flood of empirical data.
But while he says he hates endless discussions about connotations, I found the explanation and meaning of the title all about linguistic nuance. I actually find the title a bit of a sales pitch.
'Against empathy'. Yes, but fom page one he defends himself against possible misunderstandings. He based this entire book on possible critique against his title, instead of just maki
...more
Leo Walsh
Jun 06, 2017 rated it it was ok
I first stumbled on Yale developmental psychologist Paul Bloom reading a New Yorker editorial called The Baby In the Well: The case against empathy . It was an interesting dissection of empathy. Not because it's bad, but because it forces people into crappy decisions.

For instance, people across America felt the mourning Sandy Hook parents’ pain as they followed media coverage of the mass murder in horror. Understandable. Dead kids suck, and if you cannot feel a grieving parent's pain, you ai
...more
Moshe Hoffman
Dec 15, 2016 rated it really liked it
"Against Empathy" does a nice job summarizing all the limitations of empathy, and our altruistic drives more generally, such as being nicer to our kin and neighbors, and being especially prone to newsworthy suffering and insensitive to numbers, scale, and efficacy. Paul rightly points out that our logical arguments and conscious deliberation often lead us toward more utilitarian considerations that are a better way to do good. In the process he reviews a ton of interesting experiments and anecdo ...more
Holly
Apr 17, 2017 rated it really liked it
Shelves: 2017-reads
Bloom is not really against empathy as in kindness, compassion, other-regard. He's against a kind of empathy that is short-sighted, selfish (as in simple self-regard), that stops us from thinking and using our moral conscience. When he discusses compassion it's in the context of "cognitive empathy" and not "affective empathy." He quotes Adam Smith a lot.

I wished for more emphasis on how empathy depends on a certain selfish or self-regarding feeling. I had this sense a lot while reading Leslie J
...more
Khush
Mar 23, 2018 rated it did not like it

I heard a lot about this book. In fact, a friend of mine suggested that I should read this book. The title itself is quite titillating.

As I began to read this book, I found it quite irritating. Half through the book, the writer is still busy explaining what he means by empathy. It is not an easy case to make for 'against empathy,' he tried but I did not find him convincing. Very often, in the book, I felt that he was supporting, and very mildly suggesting, something dangerous that human beings s
...more
Ceil
Dec 17, 2016 rated it it was ok
Shelves: culture
Really wanted to like this book, having long suspected that "I feel your pain" is part of an anti-logic, anti-rational trend that glorifies individual feelings above all. Aside from setting up some useful distinctions (empathy v compassion, etc.), the author muses at length on examples of linguistic legerdemain around the concept. Nothing particularly useful here. ...more
Blair
Hmm, I thought I would enjoy this more than I did – or at least that I would be more stimulated by it than I was. It takes balls to title your book Against Empathy, but that's somewhat undermined by the fact that the author spends so much time reiterating a) what he means by empathy and b) that he is in fact very much pro-kindness and compassion. Bloom's definition of 'empathy' is the practice of feeling for a person/group by trying to feel their pain, i.e. putting yourself 'in someone else's sh ...more
Sandra
Dec 01, 2018 rated it it was ok
Paul Bloom puts empathy in a jar and attempts to dissect it. It does not work, not outside the evolutionary context. We are in 2018, not 1958.

This is a magazine article, fluffed up to a length of a book.
Charlene
Absolutely BRILLIANT! This is a must read for anyone interested in things like:
decision-making
empathy
ingroup/outgroup dynamics
policy making
social constructs
inequality
logic v. emotional regulation on a grand scale

Why out of 293 Goodreads reviews does this book only have a 3.75? I can't say for sure, especially since I have not taken the time to read all the negative reviews, but I suspect they come from people who pride themselves on being "a good person", because they identify as an empathetic
...more
Jennifer
Jan 23, 2017 rated it really liked it
I saw the title of this book and I had to read it. I mean, who could be opposed to empathy? Does he want us to stop being nice to each other?

The subtitle of the book offers a clue: Bloom would prefer us to be compassionate in more rational ways. When we 'put ourselves in others' shoes,' which is what many mean by the term empathy, it can lead to some irrational, even horrifying results. Whether it's making feel-good donations rather than researching to see where our charitable contributions woul
...more
Nicky
Oct 22, 2018 rated it it was amazing
Reviewed for The Bibliophibian.

“Against empathy? How could anyone be against empathy?”

That was probably my first reaction too, because I and the people around me are all focused on being good to other people, and empathy seems to offer a way to do that. It seems to offer us insight, so we know the right things to say and do. But Paul Bloom’s contention is that empathy doesn’t always lead us in the right direction: he reminds the reader that empathy is what makes us focus on one sick child whose
...more
Wayland Smith
Oct 25, 2017 rated it it was ok
The author makes some interesting arguments about how empathy can lead public policy, and personal decisions, astray. It's written a bit dryly, and he goes through a few contortions with some of his logic at times. The short version is he more or less seems to think people should be a bit more Vulcan, and he's really big into that "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one" expression. It's an exercise in philosophy which made a few interesting points, but overall I had to push a bit t ...more
Amirography
This book offers a great argument against what we think of as empathy in psychology: the ability to feel what others feel.
Though the book was written by a prominent child psychologist I failed to find anything about psychology that I did not know already. Also the author failed to offer any explanation about why empathy came to be from evolutionary perspective. So I can say that this book was mostly a philosophical, ethical arguement against the use of empathy as our moral compass.
The writing st
...more
fromcouchtomoon
Feb 12, 2017 rated it really liked it
Interesting argument, but misleading title, as it's not empathy he's railing against, but small-mindedness. Packaged to be provocative without being as provocative as claimed. ...more
Kris
Oct 23, 2020 rated it liked it
Shelves: audiobooks, politics
I'm much more a "think with your head, not with your heart" person, so this was right up my alley.

I was surprised at the (mostly) balanced discussion Bloom held here. He focuses more on the social-science and psych aspects, rather than specific political agendas. He makes the very logical observation that people care more about their immediate family and friends, rather than society at large. Therefore, one must be careful before using feelings to make policy decisions.

So why the three stars? No
...more
Blair
Nov 30, 2018 rated it did not like it
Gibberish.

Sure, if you randomly open the book anywhere the story being told will make sense. Try to combine these stories into a coherent message, and all you get is an ever shifting definition of empathy that amounts to “something that leads to bad choices”. So we make poor decisions when we rely only on emotion. Who knew?

At best, we can treat this work like the I Ching to inspire conversation. As a whole, it is gibberish.
Диана
This book is defeating a straw man.
Author is presenting a couple of reasons to think that what he calls empathy - feeling exactly what another person feels - is not always leading us to perform the best action, is not always good for the empathiser, and is not at the core of morality. But no one of the thinkers who have argued for the benefits of empathy actually claim the views Bloom is against, and few if any thinkers out there would define empathy in his limited way. The rhetoric of this book
...more
Ryan
Jan 25, 2017 rated it really liked it
I once gave a presentation entitled something like "Generating Empathetic Responses Through Cognitive Role Taking in Writing." I asked my audience, all teachers like me, how many of us assumed developing empathy in others was a good thing. All hands rose.

I agreed with my audience that empathy is pretty much a great thing.

I still remember those times when I powerfully felt the wrongness of something by immersing myself in a situation through writing. Somehow, merely thinking abstractly and conclu
...more
Bookworm
Jan 22, 2017 rated it did not like it
Author has a case...unfortunately it's buried. I was perfectly open to reading Bloom's dissertation that there is *too much* empathy, rather than the need for more. This seemed highly relevant to recent events, plus as a general rule: why is it that certain events get far more attention and time when others don't? Does empathy affect our judgment too much? 
 
Unfortunately, Bloom's message is completely muddled and buried in what seems like a word salad. He goes off too long and too many times on
...more
Daniel
Feb 26, 2017 rated it it was amazing
This is one of those rare books that challenge my assumption about morality and it is great. Empathy is the ability for us to feel what others feel. It has recently been touted as the most important attribute for successful and moral lives. It turns out that it is probably false.

Empathy is:
1. Narrow minded (we feel more for people who are like us, attractive etc)
2. Innumerate (we don't feel more sad if 5000 people suffer vs 1 person. Indeed it may be that we feel more for one person who is spot
...more
Erica
Jan 24, 2017 rated it liked it
I'm not entirely sure what to make of this book. It definitely generated some good conversation and has given me a lot to talk about. But I think it would have been effectively done as an essay. In many places it seemed to just be going around in circles.
The key issue at hand is the role of empathy in moral judgments, not overall in relationships, storytelling, etc. As long as you keep that frame of reference very clearly in mind while you read, I think you can get something out of it.
...more
Samuel
Jan 23, 2017 rated it it was ok  ·  review of another edition
Shelves: 2017
Full of interesting content and discussion but the only problem was that his arguments, though grounded in sound reason and fact fell short in impact. I was left at the end of each chapter rather dissapointed that his arguments didn't have enough grit and bravado to both feel wholesome in its explaintory power and have that badass feel of being a contrarian. ...more
Leo Robertson
Mar 10, 2019 rated it it was amazing
I think this book changed my brain for the better.
Uhtred
May 03, 2020 rated it liked it  ·  review of another edition
This book struck me for the title: for years we have been surrounded by messages that enhance empathy, which offer it as a solution to all social, corporate and condominium problems. So, a Yale scholar who analyzes empathy from a scientific-psychological and not simplistic-goodistic point of view, immediately attracted me. Bloom's thesis is rather counter-current, given that he tries to demonstrate that empathy, understood as "putting yourself in the shoes of others" is a bad adviser if you want ...more
Mark Henderson
Jan 18, 2017 rated it it was ok
Thesis is straightforward enough and the author himself suggests a better title in the first chapter: "Potential misapplications of empathy" (maybe an overzealous publisher is to blame here). He certainly didn't need 300 pages to make the point. Short read though it was, one can get his general point from one of many substantially smaller internet articles. ...more
F.
Feb 14, 2020 rated it really liked it  ·  review of another edition
The case against empathy and for compassion is well argued and engagingly told. Some sections feel a little unfinished and the thread lost. But overall a very good book.
Britta
Apr 09, 2019 rated it it was ok
I really wanted to like Against Empathy, because I have recently come to believe that we too often use empathy as a means to keep people from taking responsibility for unsavory actions, and I also believe that not taking responsibility for actions comes at a price. I've seen this working in schools--teachers and parents with too much empathy don't give children the opportunity to learn from their mistakes, which is a disservice to their development and growth. Bloom's argument against empathy is ...more
Michael Austin
Feb 23, 2019 rated it really liked it
Shelves: read-in-2019
Being against empathy, Paul Bloom acknowledge at the beginning of his book Against Empathy is roughly the same as being against kittens. This is because most people see empathy is an ultimate good, so, when you say you are against it, you end up sounding like you are against love and compassion and morality and everything else that separates us from Hannibal Lector (who makes an appearance in the book too). Empathy is hard to be against because most people have too broad a definition of it.

He is
...more
« previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 next »
topics  posts  views  last activity   
Bryn Mawr School ...: Against Empathy 1 2 Jul 02, 2018 01:41PM  

Readers also enjoyed

  • The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone
  • Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them
  • The Enigma of Reason
  • How to Have Impossible Conversations: A Very Practical Guide
  • The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 21st-Century American Politics with an 18th-Century Brain
  • Ethics in the Real World: 86 Brief Essays on Things that Matter
  • The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion
  • The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values
  • Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All
  • Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst
  • Kuoleman ja unohtamisen aikakirjat
  • Tee itsestäsi mestariajattelija
  • Free Will
  • Conscious: A Brief Guide to the Fundamental Mystery of the Mind
  • Apollo's Arrow: The Profound and Enduring Impact of Coronavirus on the Way We Live
  • Lying
  • Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress
  • Rationality: From AI to Zombies
See similar books…
431 followers
Paul Bloom is the Brooks and Suzanne Ragen Professor of Psychology and Cognitive Science at Yale University. His research explores how children and adults understand the physical and social world, with special focus on morality, religion, fiction, and art. He has published more than a hundred scientific articles in journals such as Science and Nature, and his popular writing has appeared in the Ne ...more

News & Interviews

Kazuo Ishiguro insists he’s an optimist about technology.  “I'm not one of these people who thinks it's going to come and destroy us,” he...
228 likes · 24 comments
“The Old Testament tells us to love our neighbors, the New Testament to love our enemies. The moral rationale seems to be: Love your neighbors and enemies; that way you won’t kill them. But frankly, I don’t love my neighbors, to say nothing of my enemies. Better, then, is the following idea: Don’t kill your neighbors or enemies, even if you don’t love them. . . . What really has expanded is not so much a circle of empathy as a circle of rights—a commitment that other living things, no matter how distant or dissimilar, be safe from harm and exploitation. And” 3 likes
“When empathy makes us feel pain, the reaction is often a desire to escape. Jonathan Glover tells of a woman who lived near the death camps in Nazi Germany and who could easily see atrocities from her house, such as prisoners being shot and left to die. She wrote an angry letter: “One is often an unwilling witness to such outrages. I am anyway sickly and such a sight makes such a demand on my nerves that in the long run I cannot bear this. I request that it be arranged that such inhuman deeds be discontinued, or else be done where one does not see it.” She was definitely suffering from seeing the treatment of the prisoners, but it didn’t motivate her to want to save them: She would be satisfied if she could have this suffering continue out of her sight.” 3 likes
More quotes…