By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Nem said:
o_O.Q said:

 

the point i'm making is that empathy is not something that applies across the board

 

meaning that we are selective subconsciously (and consciously) about who or what we are empathetic towards... which means that its misguided to use empathy as some form of measure for morality

 

here's another example, lets say i'm poor and i have a sick wife i have to provide for and i stab and rob an innocent person in order to provide for her... in that situation i'm being preferential towards my kin over someone outside of my preferred social grouping

 

this is very easy to understand, i honestly don't see why you don't get it... the empathy argument really does not work for morality

Of course we are selective.

What does this prove? We are a tribal species. We will empathise with those we consider a tribe of. Wich is why i used the tribe word in particular.

It's misguided? It's not misguided, its a survival tool. Of course we have the ability to have reflexive thought, so we can fight that urge if we so wish and extend it to everyone. That is our choice. Some people feel more towards another than others. As i said, this isnt an on/off switch. If we don't feel risk for our existance we can extend that empathy towards others if we so choose.

If you look here, you will see how it works with the pyramid of necessities:
https://mariaavilablog.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/sin-tc3adtulo.png

 

do you not see how that selectivity with regards to empathy kind of destroys its utility with regards to what people would consider morality to be?