In Defense of Empathy: A response to Prinz

Abstracta 8 (2):31-51 (2015)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
A prevailing view in moral psychology holds that empathy and sympathy play key roles in morality and in prosocial and altruistic actions. Recently, Jesse Prinz (2011a, 2011b) has challenged this view and has argued that empathy does not play a foundational or causal role in morality. He suggests that in fact the presence of empathetic emotions is harmful to morality. Prinz rejects all theories that connect empathy and morality as a constitutional, epistemological, developmental, motivational, or normative necessity. I consider two of Prinz’s theses: the thesis that empathy is not necessary for moral development, and the thesis that empathy should be avoided as a guide for morality. Based on recent research in moral psychology, I argue that empathy plays a crucial role in development of moral agency. I also argue that empathy is desirable as a moral emotion.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
PASIDO-4
Upload history
First archival date: 2015-11-21
Latest version: 2 (2016-02-07)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2014-07-15

Total views
1,704 ( #2,278 of 2,454,490 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
85 ( #7,539 of 2,454,490 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.