Abstract

In Coalescent Argumentation, Michael Gilbert comes closest to the ethical with the idea and role empathy plays within his scheme. Empathy is an act of will which one need never do. Rather than from need, it stems from a desire for the other pe rson. I would call this desire ethical. However, Gilbert understands empathy in cognitive terms. I am interested in seeing just what kinds of difference a more ethical interpretation of empathy would yield. Here I will be drawing on contemporary conti nental and feminist work.