In this article, psychologist Paul Bloom expresses his concerns with the idea of empathy. One of his main points is empathy is a narrow subject. He compares it to spotlights “that only illuminate what they are pointed at, so empathy reflects our biases”(Bloom 1). With this claim, Bloom uses examples of how too much empathy can provide more stress on the individual receiving the empathy (he uses the Sandy Hook shootings as an example). I think he is right to a certain point, but we have to recognize that school shootings are national tragedies no matter where they happen and with an outpouring of love and support we can aid families of victims. We do have to pay more attention to other deaths such as his example of kids dying in Chicago, but that has more to do with systemic racism and sociological factors rather than empathy itself. Another main point of Bloom is we cannot empathize with more than one person at the same time. I do agree with this statement, however, we can empathize with communities (who happen to be more than one person). One final main point he makes is “Empathy is particularly insensitive to consequences that apply statistically rather than to specific individuals”(Bloom 2). I disagree with this statement. It elicits a strong reaction for me. I feel as though the example he gives (a girl becoming sick from a vaccine) is not true/accurate to my experience. It will not make me change my ideas about vaccination or remove it from existence. His ideas have some meaning to them, but the claims he makes simply, in my opinion, are not true in most cases.