Why Can't We All Just Get Along? Empathy, Agonism and Deliberation
Year: 2009
Type: preprint
Abstract: President Barack Obama’s claim to want a Supreme Court nominee who displayed empathy was the subject of derision from some of his critics and even some of his supporters abandoned the idea. In contrast, I believe that empathy is important not only in a Supreme Court justice but for democracy itself. To make this case, I investigate the history of the concept of empathy from its origins in 19th Century German aesthetic philosophy, identifying the three key components of emotion, projection and understanding. The confusion surrounding empathy today arises from its use by later scholars in the psychoanalytic and social psychological tradition. As an alternative, I adapt a multi-dimensional model called the Process Model of Empathy. Empirical research demonstrates that the process of empathy can help individuals overcome various biases and affect outgroup evaluations. I then apply these findings to an analysis of Chantal Mouffe’s theory of agonistic pluralism, making two claims. First, agonistic pluralism cannot function without putting the process of empathy at its heart, and second, this implies that agonistic pluralism places too much emphasis on conflict. As an alternative, some combination of agonism and deliberation may be preferable, though whatever theory remains persuasive, the process of empathy must play a central role in our democracy.
Source: SSRN Electronic Journal
Author: Michael E. Morrell
Institution: University of Connecticut
Language: English
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W1608635439