Twelfth Global Studies Conference

Abstract

Yale psychologist, Paul Bloom, is making a case against empathy when it comes to ethical deliberation and action. According to Bloom, emotional empathy has a dark side because it causes an in-group bias that leads to parochialism and racism. Our helping behavior is selectively aimed at those like us, and, as a result, blinds us to the suffering in distant global settings. In arriving at his position, Bloom provides support from Buddhist philosophy and practice that make his argument even more relevant to multicultural and global dialogue. This paper offers response to Blooms criticisms by unveiling the limits of cognitive approach that he recommends. Evidence from studies in neuroscience demonstrate that cognition and emotions are inseparable and both could lead to bias. Furthermore, Bloom’s interpretation of Buddhist thought and practice is questioned. Instead, I propose an alternative interpretation of Buddhist philosophy and meditation that might provide valuable resources for less biased pro-social action. Based on recent findings, I conclude that Buddhist-derived, secular forms of mindfulness and compassion meditations might offer helpful strategies in countering racial and in-group bias when helping others as well as lessen exhaustion and burnout in prosocial work.