Summary Of David Brooks The Limits Of Empathy

David Brooks article “The Limit of Empathy” explains Brooks views on empathy and how it has its limits on making “…the world a better place.” Brooks starts off by talking about how people in society have become so consumed with the idea of empathy that they are trying to make a change in the world and have a better understanding of people and their feelings. He continues by explaining how empathy works scientifically and how it can allow a person to put themselves in another’s shoes. Brooks claims that while empathy allows people to feel for others, it doesn’t motivate them to act towards the situation morally. In fact, he implies that even though our empathy pushes us to behave or act a certain way, we tend to sway towards doing what will …show more content…
Many a southern child has had their "back porch painted red" learning what is right and wrong. Examples of those southern codes are things such as “yes ma’am” and “no sir,” knowing when to mind your P's and Q’s. I believe whole heartedly that these codes exist and I agree with Brooks that they conflict. However, I disagree with the idea that people need to change or make new codes. In the article, Brooks himself states that a person’s code is “...a source of identity.” To which I agree. Brooks also says that the code “...arouses the strongest emotions and attachments.” It is my belief that one’s morals are made up over time and coincide with how their life has developed. You are the sum of your life events. You grow continuously because of the ongoing changes to your life events. Your empathy for a human being is directly affected by your morals. I could say that without morals people may not have empathy. Morals or my code is my direction finder, my center, my chi. I agree that the code is a source of identity, so why should people have to change the code? I agree that morals clash but they can also be a source for good and I also believe that empathy can be a source of good when it comes to these …show more content…
While Bloom and Brooks are in agreeance that empathy is unnecessary, Bloom makes it apparent that there are others that disagree. One of which Bloom states is Martin Hoffman who believes that empathy is where morality derives. I agree that empathy can be harmful or unnecessary in some aspects of life. I believe that without empathy we wouldn’t have morals. A person's morals are created through experience, such as stealing something from someone’s home. If the thief were to feel sorry for taking what was not theirs, to them, it would be wrong. A person must be able to empathize before they can understand right from