In the three sections that we read for class, the main focus was the effect of empathy on the reader. More specifically what type of story/narrative needs empathy and what the best way to use it is. For some writings, empathy is incredibly important in getting the point across and getting readers to feel the way they need to feel to fully grasp the story and all the content. But is empathy a good skill to use in legal and law writings or will it sway people in the wrong direction?

If too much empathy and feeling is found in a legal writing, it can be considered influential and biased and give off the wrong image. For instance, when giving testimony or final words in the court room, just the right amount of feeling will get empathy from the jury which will sway results from one side to the other. By telling a story with enough emotion that it emotionally and physically changed the person, could easily make someone believe that one person is innocent when they are not and vice versa. But further out, if the transcript or a review of a case has too much empathy, it might be considered that the writing or writer believed more in one side then the other, which can negatively influence the reader.

This theory can apply to legal systems outside of the court like getting support and votes on certain laws or politics. If you can get the right people to feel enough emotions then you can get them to support almost anything whether it worthy or not. A person feeling strongly a certain way towards a certain thing will most likely get them to further act on it. It is essentially mind control, but with emotion.