He makes a good point.
However, I think it should also be acknowledged that liberals can take empathy too far: for example, isn't extreme identity politics a matter of demanding that empathy extends to never questioning the views or actions of someone because you aren't inside their skin? Or even (in the case of silly cultural appropriation extremists) claiming that authors should empathise with the pain they are causing if they even try to write (ironically, empathetically) from the other's perspective?
Currently, I think it clear that there is a fashion for too much empathy in the matter of transgender activism; there sometimes is in response to hedonistic behaviour be it sexual or with drugs. I think it became politically important in race issues when Labor under Hawke became paralysed with inability to call out some aboriginal activism as fabricated. In short, a liberal overemphasis on empathy can be a way of arguing against anyone ever being able to make a legitimate moral argument about behaviour.
Like lots of things in life, the deployment of empathy needs to fall within a happy medium - your judgement is going to be way off if you have trouble using it at all, or if you overuse it as a way of denying the very ability to judge.
That's how I see it, anyway...
Like lots of things in life, the deployment of empathy needs to fall within a happy medium - your judgement is going to be way off if you have trouble using it at all, or if you overuse it as a way of denying the very ability to judge.
ReplyDeleteSpot on Steve. I think the Labor Party does have a problem with that. It is now almost impossible to criticize identity groups. The attitude is that when such groups demonstrate bad behavior it is because of the discrimination they have experienced or because society made them do it.
As an example consider cultural appropriation. It only works one way. Imagine if we started demanding that aborigines must walk everywhere because using cars is cultural appropriation.