Although I think most of what Michael Slote asserts in his article "Sentimentalist moral education" is correct, I worry about three important ideas that are conspicuous by their absence. The first is the possibility that human emotions and feelings are inherently cognitive, which is never considered in his psychological account of empathy. The second is that his metaethical claim that "our very understanding of moral terms and moral principles rests on a foundation of empathy" fails to recognize the culture-specific character of the very concept of morality. My third misgiving is that Slote overstates the now-standard distinction between the ethics of care and the ethics of principles, which I argue is a matter of emphasis, not opposition, especially in the context of moral education. (Contains 1 note.)