Emphatically unempathetic
I had a lively discussion with my wife today about empathy and compassion where she thinks empathy is an important trait to possess and I strongly disagree as to its importance. In fact, I would go as far as question whether empathy is a positive trait at all.
Well, not positive might be too harsh but at the very best in my mind, empathy falls short of where it needs to be to be useful. And at the worst is actually harmful.
My reasoning is that empathy is an emotional state that attempts to take the perspective or the same feeling as another person. Those that claim to be empathetic work under a very large assumption and that is, that they know another's perspective and how they actually feel.
I have always questioned an individual's ability to truly understand the position of another as even similar people with similar experiences can have completely different world views on a host of important factors. This means that their empathetic position is not based on the reality of the other persona's experience, because it can't be.
This plays out in many circumstances as people rightly claim that someone cannot understand because they haven't lived in the same skin. Empathy is the imagination saying 'I know how they feel' when that is an impossibility based on the experience of the one empathising and has no connection whatsoever to the person feeling it, other than them being a trigger mechanism for an emotional response.
But, the worst part of empathy is that at it's best, it mimics well and that puts both people into the same emotional state of affairs. If one is in the gutter, now there are two. Empathy does not require action and more than likely may hinder it instead as it draws two people into the same poor frame.
Again from my view, compassion is the better state to take as it is an active feeling which means that from a compassionate position, action is required. Yes, one may feel some emotional mirroring of another but I don't think that it is even necessary to still act.
Being compassionate means to be able to recognise that someone is in a vulnerable position and then take the step to help them out of it. This need not require an emotion at all, just the recognition and the value systems required to help.
From my thinking, this circumvents the requirement to be able to be in their shoes or have any understanding of why they feel that way in the beginning at all. From a position of compassion, a rational approach to solving whatever problems there may be can be taken without even having the heartbeat raised, although that is likely quite rare.
People seem to be continually subscribing to the frame that without empathy people won't help but I think that this in itself is causing a lot of conflict and suffering. It means that people in need are unable to get or accept the support of others because the helper can't 'possibly understand' how they feel.
This is another flawed position. One does not need to understand how a person feels in order to help them out of a predicament. One can facilitate the experience of another without having to be in the same group or from the same background. One can discuss possible solutions and problems facing various people or groups without actually needing to be from that group.
The issue I keep seeing reverberated off every social platform and social wall is that people act from emotional positions without having the sensitivity to actually look at the issues themselves. When people do try to approach issues, they are shouted down if they do not come from the same group as they cannot empathize with the problems.
If I am in a bad way, if I am in trouble and need help, I don't want someone to sit in the gutter with me and cry, I want someone that will be activated enough to actually lend me a hand. Empathy in my opinion is the way to make it feel like one is doing something without actually having to do something. Compassion on the other hand is the active way to help without actually needing to feel an emotional connection.
This means the compassionate person is able to help anyone they recognise as suffering rather than just the people who they think are similar enough to themselves that they feel they can emotionally bond with. In my view of the difference between empathy and compassion is that one is practiced, the other felt.
The smallest act of assistance to someone in need always beats even the most perfect mirroring of their emotional state.
Taraz
[ a Steemit original ]
I remember being on the phone with a friend for a couple of hours at a time trying to comfort her. As I hung up. I'd call another friend to help me with the stress I just went through consoling the first friend: empathy.
I also remember recently giving a friend a nice large cooking pot after remembering a random conversation of how she needed one: compassion.
I agree with you that compassion is so much more logical and less stressful.
Aloha!
Yes, it is not that empathy can't be combined with compassion in some form it is just that compassion need not require it in order to act. A random conversation without tears is enough.
True but some like myself haven't learn moderation. Hehe
Empathy does not mean that you and the other individual have to be feeling the same thing at the same time. It merely means that you are able to understand what they are going through and provide comfort in such a way that only someone in the other person's condition would be able to.
At least that's my go of it. Compassion is great, but if you can't empathize to some extent, your compassion may not be able to be well received by the person who is in pain.
Both are important, and I believe that measures of empathy are necessary for most inter-human connection to be successful :)
Compassion is what I receive from my dog after I've had a long day and I'm feeling down in the dumps.
Empathy is what I get from my wife when I explain why I'm feeling how I feel and she provides me with the right series of comforting words.
The compassion from my dog is nice, but takes longer for me to feel better. The empathy gives me the feeling that I'm not alone in my personal plight and provides me with solace that "it's not just me" who has ever felt this way.
Side note: I don't have a dog (although did have a few in the past). I do have a wife.🙂
I like your wife.., she's good to you.
Me too! Haha. Thanks 🙂
Yeah, she is the best. I am extremely lucky and blessed to have her in my life.
Now your (imaginary) dog. You get empathy from your dog not compassion. Well, I don't actually know and this is the problem. Your dog may truly believe that it is showing you empathy and feeling exactly the same as you and doing what is necessary to help and yet, you deny it. Thinking we know the feelings of a dog and its intentions is a little silly. So this is the same issue with believing we can hold the same position as another human.
Your wife (sounds like a saint :D ) may make you feel better about what ever troubles you but it doesn't necessarily help the cause of your troubles. She may have no actual value in helping you problem solve other than helping you feel better about yourself and then perhaps you can fix it but, why are we unable to emotionally make ourselves feel better? And then, now that you are feeling good, what if you are still unable to repair it and need practical help? Depressed again? Does another empathetic pat on the back help?
A compassionate person need not feel anything but can still understand that you feel something and can therefore comfort based on that. Plus, from this position they are also able to better help or find help for you.
I think that people want to feel better, not actually improve the situation. This is why so many people can avoid their problems by immersing themselves in entertainment or vice. eventually though, a crash will come.
I think that this conflation of terms is making people confuse what is actually going on and as society keeps pushing incorrect definitions, people increasingly use two very separate terms interchangeably.
I like it when you drop by because I know you are here to discuss what is actually at hand. As you know, I like to think and write across many areas whether I hold this position in 5 years or tomorrow, who knows.
If I don't say these things, she beats me (just kidding!) Haha. Seriously, she really is the best person for me. I am still trying to figure out how I got this lucky and doing my best to be the type of partner she deserves (or better)!
Thanks :) I like stopping by and chatting with you, too! You tend to bring up interesting topics/perspectives for conversation and I have always enjoyed hearing the perspectives of others and trying to understand more about them.
Haha, I know exactly what you mean. My current perception is not the same as what it was a few years ago (and in some cases I can say minutes ago).
Life is about constantly adjusting to your surroundings (I am pretty sure you posted about that topic recently too!). As part of the adjustment, you need to be open to learning new things and absorbing information about the people around you and how they act/react to their surroundings.
Back on topic a bit.. I feel like I learned in grade school that you couldn't get empathy from a pet? (based on the Webster's definition of the word). It is possible that I am misremembering or that I was taught incorrectly.. just a random thought that popped into my head.
You are fighting my battle for me ;)
Firstly by definition: Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. This means it doesn't require understanding of their actual issue. This is not how most people use the term empathy though is it? It is a conflation of terms perhaps.
Secondly, compassion may not be well received by those in pain. This is correct and it is becoming increasingly so that unless one is identical, they will refuse aid. This is the problem with the reliance on similarity of people (empathy) rather than understanding of the issues.
See my dog argument below.
I think that empathy and compassion natural instinct in humans , Sympathy makes a person help the weak , It is a way of feeling the other
It is also a natural instinct to avoid pain but this has been hijacked by our mind to see mental conflict as something to be avoided. This means people are increasingly unwilling to consider ideas that conflict with their current views. Compassion helps the weak too but does not require emotions. This means that I can help someone on the other side of the world who is experiencing struggles I cannot accurately imagine nor will I ever likely meet.
Compassion helps the stranger, empathy only the perceived friend.
Empathy is necessary but not sufficient. If empathy becomes something like "I know how you feel", then it's just another manifestation of your ego. Compassion needs an emotion, and here I disagree with you. This emotion for me is love, without which nothing would be possible. We may be semantic, but what's important is to practice kindness, forget our ego and try to make this world a better place than how we found it. JMHO :-)
I would say that love is not a feeling at all but an action. If love is a feeling it means it is limited by circumstance which may be okay for 'romantic love' but is that real love?
Interesting point of view and I think I understood your trail of thoughts @tarazkp. I would say that there's a way to reconcile feelings to action and it is by considering that from the feeling and the thinking comes the action. We are what we do, but prior to that our future actions live inside us. On the contrary, if we "feel" without translating this into action, we remain empty and vain (and I think here's your criticism to empathy as opposed to compassion). In another perspective, from a dirty mind cannot intentionally come a good deed. I'm simplifying for the sake of giving the idea. About my idea of love, as per my comment, it's very pragmatic and concrete and not so romantic (I'm for authenticity).
What a great post.
I am 100% in agreement with you, on every point you made.
I give to money to the homeless on the streets - too many times to count.
I don't 'feel their pain'.
I give them some money.
They are in a shittier position than myself, and I have some money to spare. So I help them out in a real, not emotional way.
I don't understand why people confuse the two, tbh.
I wrote a post a few days ago, related to this issue.
'virtue signaling hypocrisy, in action', if you want to read.
(I was told off for putting links in other posts, so I wont link it , i'kkjust give you the title - it's in my blog - unless you want it of course! lol)
Such a good article matey.
No one actually needs to feel to help, they just have to recognise the conditions of suffering and be willing to improve them.
I don't like links from random people I have never seen before but from regulars it is okay. I will have a read later if I can.
The two go hand in hand. They're both attributes of a person that has developed a healthy theory of mind. I think it's best to be able to experience both empathy and compassion, to resonate with another's emotional state as well as be able to take appropriate actions. The resonance instills camaraderie in each. Theory of mind is definitely an interesting subject.
From my view, I do not need to feel comraderie in order to help someone in need. I will lend a hand to my worst enemy with which I share zero values if I think they require assistance. The issues in this world is that people are only willing to help their own 'kind' and that kind is becoming increasingly narrow through fragmentation and identity politics.
I believe that empathy in many cases is a prerequisite to compassion. Empathy is not only understanding how exactly that other person is feeling, and empathy is not only for sad moments, but for the moments of joy too. Person who is lacking empathy will rarely feel joy for somebody else success. While we might be compassionate for two reasons, one being emotional and another rational, empathy is more of an emotional trait of a person. That is probably why you were having a discussion with your wife about it, as women tend to accept and analyse situations more form an emotional point of view while men being more rational thinkers. And since it is a feeling it is really difficult to explain, as it also may be felt in different levels so it is hard for us to grasp what exactly the other person is meaning when talking about empathy. It's just like trying to explain what love is.
I agree on the prerequisite of one to the other. Plus dissecting these concepts in a logical perspective risks to betray the true nature and aim of these movements of the human soul. Com-passion / em-pathy ethimologically share the same ancient greek root, which is pathos, feeling.
So that only proves they have similar background. The rest is just interpretation that we people put into it. And all of us do it in a slightly way so there is a lot of space for misinterpretation. Hence discussion :)