Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
In “The Baby in the Well” and “The Bad Things We Do Because of Empathy,” authors Paul Bloom and Fritz Breithaupt offer divergent perspectives on empathy and its impact on human behavior. As a guiding principle for moral decision-making, Bloom argues that empathy can lead to irrational and harmful decisions. On the other hand, Breithaupt argues that empathy can lead to prosocial behavior and encourages a more nuanced understanding of empathy’s role in moral decision-making. This essay will compare and contrast the rhetorical styles of Paul Bloom and Fritz Breithaupt to examine how they present their divergent perspectives on empathy and its impact on human behavior. Through a comparative analysis of their use of ethos, logos, and pathos, this essay will demonstrate how the authors employ distinct rhetorical strategies to engage their audience and advance their arguments.
Bloom and Breithaupt both use ethos to establish their credibility as experts in their respective fields, allowing readers to trust their perspectives and fully engage with their ideas. Bloom, being a professor of psychology at Yale University and a renowned expert on the topic of empathy, demonstrates his credibility through his extensive research and studies that support his claims. He cites data and academic studies to strengthen his argument, making it difficult for readers to challenge his perspective (Bloom). Similarly, Breithaupt, as a professor of Philosophy at the University of Regensburg, leverages his expertise in the field of philosophy to support his argument for the positive impact of empathy on human behavior. He uses his in-depth knowledge and understanding of the topic to present his perspective effectively (Breithaupt 167). Both authors’ use of ethos strengthens their arguments, allowing readers to trust their perspectives and fully engage with their ideas. Through their effective use of ethos, Bloom and Breithaupt demonstrate their expertise, demonstrating why their perspectives are worth considering and engaging with.
Consequently, Bloom argues that empathy can lead to irrational and harmful decisions, while Breithaupt argues that it can lead to prosocial behavior. He suggests that empathy is an emotional response often misguided and can impair judgment, leading to poor decision-making and irrational actions (Bloom). In contrast, Breithaupt argues that empathy can positively and negatively impact human behavior. He asserts that while empathy can lead to harmful actions, it can also foster moral growth and development by encouraging individuals to understand and connect with the emotions and experiences of others (Breithaupt 170). Thus, he suggests that empathy should not be dismissed outright but rather approached with a nuanced understanding of its potential for good and ill.
In terms of logos, both authors present well-supported and logically consistent arguments. Bloom’s argument against empathy as a basis for moral decision-making is rooted in empirical evidence and practical examples. He cites instances where individuals’ emotional responses to a single, compelling case can lead them to ignore larger, systemic issues that impact millions (Bloom). For example, people may donate money to save a single child while neglecting the broader social and political issues that contribute to suffering and poverty on a massive scale. On the other hand, Breithaupt argues in favor of empathy, drawing on a wealth of research in psychology and neuroscience to demonstrate how empathy can inspire prosocial behavior (Breithaupt 171). He cites studies that show how empathy can motivate individuals to act in ways that benefit others, for instance, by volunteering, donating to charity, or advocating for social justice. In this sense, empathy is seen as a powerful force for good, capable of driving individuals to act in the service of others. Both authors present well-crafted arguments supported by evidence and logic and make compelling cases for their positions.
However, the authors’ use of pathos is notably distinct, with Breithaupt intentionally attempting to evoke emotions and Bloom’s writing being more objective and devoid of emotional appeals. Breithaupt uses personal anecdotes and stories to illustrate the positive impact of empathy on human behavior, making it easier for readers to connect with the content on an emotional level (Breithaupt 167). By sharing touching and inspiring examples, Breithaupt effectively appeals to readers’ emotions, showing them the power of empathy to motivate individuals to act in ways that benefit others. In contrast, Bloom’s writing is more objective, grounded in evidence and reason, and lacks the emotional appeals central to Breithaupt’s writing (Bloom). Through this stark contrast, the authors’ distinct approaches to pathos become apparent, highlighting their unique rhetorical strategies to engage their audience and advance their arguments.
In conclusion, Paul Bloom and Fritz Breithaupt offer divergent perspectives on empathy and its impact on human behavior. Both authors effectively establish their credibility as experts in their respective fields by using ethos and presenting well-supported arguments through logos. While Bloom claims that empathy may cause illogical and dangerous choices, Breithaupt argues that it can lead to prosocial behavior and encourages a more nuanced understanding of its role in moral decision-making. The authors’ use of pathos sets them apart, with Breithaupt intentionally attempting to evoke emotions and Bloom’s writing being more objective and devoid of emotional appeals. Through a comparative analysis of their arguments, this essay highlights the similarities and differences in the authors’ perspectives and demonstrates how they use rhetorical strategies to engage their audience and advance their ideas. Furthermore, the essay sheds light on the complex nature of empathy and its potential both for good and ill, emphasizing the need for a nuanced understanding of its role in moral decision-making.
Works Cited
Breithaupt, Fritz. “The Bad Things We Do Because of Empathy.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, vol. 43, no. 2, Informa UK Limited, Apr. 2018, pp. 166–74. Web.
Bloom, Paul. “The Baby in the Well.” The New Yorker, Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.