Thomas Erikson - Surrounded By Idiots (Penguin, 2019) ***

A gift from my daughter, possibly because I'm always complaining about the idiocy of people in politics, journalism, industry, unions, social services, in shops, public transport, sports, on the street or just anywhere. 

I am not sure if the gesture is an insult, a real attempt to educate me, or a joke, or possibly some of all this together. 

Erikson's book is an approach to classify people based on their temperament, giving colours to the four major categories. In reality all four are present in all of us, but not to the same degree, and the categories may differ depending on the context. 

I am not a behavioural scientist so it's hard to assess the value of Erikson's analysis, but I have come across it during my career in industry, and I am usually red/yellow/blue/green. The fine thing about Erikson's book is that he also describes how each behavioural type is seen by the others. The real value is to understand that you have to communicate in a very different way to people depending on their type. From a management perspective, your team should be in balance, with the different types present. 

No single colour is either positive or negative. They can be both as the picture below describes. 

I can only recommend that you do it for yourself. It will give you great insights into who you are and how you behave towards other people, and how they potentially see you. 

Paul Bloom - Against Empathy (The Blodley Head, 2017) **

I like the title. It's controversial and it invites you start reading. Why on earth would a psychologist be against empathy? Furthermore, the subtitle speaks about "the case for rational compassion". That sounds like a programme.

But now in truth, what is Bloom's point?

First, that empathy is important in human relationships and in everyday life. He keeps insisting on this, and he keeps repeating this, obviously fearing that people will think he is against empathy in all its forms. He is very much against the whole list of books that are currently being published about the importance of empathy as if that were the solution to all our problems. Clearly, it is not.

Second, that empathy is a poor guide for moral decision-making, because the emotional aspect of empathy should not override the rational decision that will benefit society and people in a better way.

That's basically it. Luckily he writes well and many of his arguments are well-documented and substantiated. Bloom helps to refine the definition of empathy and make the distinction between emotional empathy and cognitive empathy.

On the negative side, the book is very repetitive, with a very loose structure, indications that was written hastily. I also wonder why the subtitle appears on the cover. The "case for rational compassion" is not really made, and definitely not substantiated with facts or figures. A major lack is the exploration of how empathy, indignation and a sense of injustice move people to act to improve things for others. It is easy to claim that cognitive empathy and rational compassion are to be preferred. The unanswered question is whether these are sufficiently energising to get people out of their chairs. My gut feeling is that emotional drive is still to be preferred over cognitive choices. But I may be wrong.