You can’t have food, and in result act egocentrically, disadvantaging others and still feel bad about it. Having empathy does not necessitate acting on it.
No you won’t have empathy towards your enemies when you don’t have the luxury to do so.
How many conflicts are going on right now where religion and local society is killing ‘others’ without any mercy?
Do you think those brain washed massses can waste to feel emphatic towards the enemy that is ‘evil’, ‘bad’ or ‘unclean’ and deserved to be killed?
If they would - they freaking would stop all these friggin wars. Morality wins - and morality still not a good thing.
No you won’t have empathy towards your enemies when you don’t have the luxury to do so.
I don’t see how ‘luxury to do so’ should disprove my point.
Regarding the rest:
While I agree with the underlying sentiment, I wouldn’t go so far as to generalize entire population groups and claim they do not feel empathy, even if they kill others.
Also: This is drifting a bit beyond what I wanted to point out, therefore I won’t go into more detail.
You can’t have food, and in result act egocentrically, disadvantaging others and still feel bad about it. Having empathy does not necessitate acting on it.
No you won’t have empathy towards your enemies when you don’t have the luxury to do so.
How many conflicts are going on right now where religion and local society is killing ‘others’ without any mercy?
Do you think those brain washed massses can waste to feel emphatic towards the enemy that is ‘evil’, ‘bad’ or ‘unclean’ and deserved to be killed?
If they would - they freaking would stop all these friggin wars. Morality wins - and morality still not a good thing.
I don’t see how ‘luxury to do so’ should disprove my point.
Regarding the rest:
While I agree with the underlying sentiment, I wouldn’t go so far as to generalize entire population groups and claim they do not feel empathy, even if they kill others. Also: This is drifting a bit beyond what I wanted to point out, therefore I won’t go into more detail.