Short note on David Brooks’ editorial column of today’s *NYT* on the superficiality of empathy, which he is willing, the great expert that he is, to explain by the presence of mirror neurons in our brains. Diafoirus in Molière’s *Le malade imaginaire* didn’t know yet about these *neuronii specularii*. How convenient for Brooks that empathy doesn’t work too well, because it is apparently dropping, according to this U of Michigan study. That drop kind of shocked the moralist in Brooks, apparently, as he told us in his previous paper. He recovered in a couple days and saw a way he could cut his losses. Since empathy doesn’t really trigger behavioral changes, Brooks calls for a return to moral codes. The equivalent of abandoning leveraging and going back to old fashioned pay as you go. Here is his conclusion:
>The code isn’t just a set of rules. It’s a source of identity. It’s pursued with joy. It arouses the strongest emotions and attachments. Empathy is a sideshow. If you want to make the world a better place, help people debate, understand, reform, revere and enact their codes. Accept that codes conflict.

Ah, the joys of modern kantism without Kant. I am not too surprised to see Brooks defending codes (he mentions religious, military, social or philosophic codes), although I don’t understand how this call of his fits with the capitalism he systematically defends. Modern capitalism really doesn’t want any of those annoying, restrictive codes and positively needs to see them destroyed, though it keeps exploiting (for a while longer at least) the beliefs of those who still go by them.

There are people who have little choice but to live by very demanding moral codes. An example of the power of such codes can be found in an article in *Le Monde Diplomatique* of September 2011 which describes the shameless exploitation of women from the Philippines (among others) by rich households the world over. The article focusses on Hong Kong. The Filipino foreign domestic workers in Hong Kong are paid the equivalent of about 500 euros per month + whatever is necessary to have them doing the service on the spot (little room, etc.), work 6/7 days, shouldn’t count their hours of course (10, 12 a day?), must make their employers happy at all times, etc… Many of those workers live by very conservative codes, Christian often. Salt of the earth. No empathy on the part of their employers, or only of the fake kind, according to the article. Capitalism apparently needs to exploit them to the fullest, including their sense of moral values, but also needs them to be voracious consumers of goods, because the economic machinery must continue and grow.

What does Brooks recommend in their case? To stick to their moral codes?