Contemporary Film and the Empathy Controversy: Part 1

Abstract

This article is written in two parts: Part 1 is a critique of Against Empathy: The Case for Rational Compassion by social psychologist Paul Bloom, and Part 2 is a reading of three U.S. films, produced between 2009 and 2012, that allow me to illustrate what is wrong with Bloom’s claim that we should endeavor to bypass empathy and cultivate more rationally effective forms of care. In Part 1, I introduce the project of both papers; however, my central aim is to mount several arguments against Bloom’s position. I argue that empathy is hard wired and therefore it is impossible to bypass, that Bloom’s own utilitarian ethics is significantly flawed, and that his central claim that empathy privileges those few we know best and who are closest to us is brought into question by the research that Bloom himself cites. However, the most important argument of Part 1—the argument that leads directly into my reading of filmic examples of empathy in Part 2—is that Bloom fails to understand how empathy is shaped by hegemonic ideological representations. This failure to consider in any meaningful way how culture and society shape affective response is a profound, but typical failure in the field of social psychology.