Paul Bloom’s article “Against Empathy” on the Boston Review makes an intriguing distinction between empathy and compassion. He argues that empathy can be draining and limiting, whereas compassion is more sustainable and beneficial in the long term.
In his piece, Bloom explains that empathy involves feeling the pain of others as if it were your own, which can be emotionally exhausting. For instance, if a friend’s child drowns, an empathetic reaction would involve experiencing the same sorrow and pain. On the other hand, compassion centers on love and the motivation to help without necessarily sharing the emotional burden.
Bloom also explores the idea of supporting distant causes like fighting starvation. He suggests that one doesn’t need to endure the distress of imagining starvation to feel compelled to help. A compassionate person recognizes the suffering and takes action based on that understanding.
The article cites Buddhist teachings to illustrate the differences further. In Buddhism, there’s “sentimental compassion,” akin to empathy, which can be draining, and “great compassion,” which combines love and concern without emotional exhaustion. This latter form is considered more sustainable and is practiced by enlightened beings known as bodhisattvas, who remain in the cycle of life and death to help others.
Research by Tania Singer and Matthieu Ricard supports Bloom’s thesis. Their studies using fMRI brain scans show that compassion meditation activates different parts of the brain compared to empathy. Ricard described compassion meditation as a warm, positive state, whereas empathy led to emotional exhaustion and distress.
These insights are particularly relevant for those in professions like counseling and therapy, where burnout is common. Singer’s experiments found that empathy training increased negative emotions and risked burnout. In contrast, compassion training led to increased positive emotions and altruism.
Bloom’s argument separates harmful empathetic distress from helpful empathetic awareness. A person lacking in empathy entirely wouldn’t be motivated to help others. Instead, the right kind of empathy—paired with compassion—motivates action without the risk of emotional burnout.
Bloom’s focus isn’t to dismiss empathy entirely but to highlight a specific, detrimental type. His ideas remind us to sustain our capacity to help others without becoming overwhelmed. This balance of empathy and compassion is not only practical but essential for long-term well-being and effective altruism.