Case against empathy - Page 9

Noel7 · ‎03-09-2010

@Juniebugz wrote:
@skuggles wrote:
@Noel7 wrote:
This is an interesting comment from an article in Psych Today:

Compassion (‘suffering with’) is more engaged than simple empathy, and is associated with an active desire to alleviate the suffering of its object. With empathy, I share your emotions; with compassion I not only share your emotions but also elevate them into a universal and transcending experience. Compassion, which builds upon empathy, is one of the main motivators of altruism.

Maslow put altruism at the top of man's hierarchy of needs. I see it there, too.

In his later years, Maslow explored a further dimension of needs, while criticizing his own vision on self-actualization. The self only finds its actualization in giving itself to some higher goal outside oneself, in altruism and spirituality.

Abraham Maslow

@Noel7 Interesting point. I'll throw a monkey wrench in to say that I do not believe that there is true altruism, except for some rare exceptions. So Maslow's theory could easily get lost in the enormity and depth of slightly differing theories looking at this from different perspectives.

Interesting @skuggles & @Noel7.

I believe altruism is defined as selfless........ how many people are fully selfless?

********************************************

@Juniebugz

I don't see that one would have to be fully selfless. We can care about and for others and still enjoy a full life. Unless one is drawn to becoming a monk or the like.

Noel7 · ‎03-09-2010

@dooBdoo wrote:
@skuggles wrote:
I found this and it may be helpful to some, because there is clearly a difference between compassion and empathy as OP said in her opening.

"Psychological perspective
Although the concepts of empathy and compassion have existed for many centuries, their scientific study is relatively young. The term empathy has its origins in the Greek word ‘empatheia’ (passion), which is composed of ‘en’ (in) and ‘pathos’ (feeling). The term empathy was introduced into the English language following the German notion of ‘Einfühlung’ (feeling into), which originally described resonance with works of art and only later was used to describe the resonance between human beings. The term compassion is derived from the Latin origins ‘com’ (with/together) and ‘pati’ (to suffer); it was introduced into the English language through the French word compassion. In spite of the philosophical interest for empathy and the fundamental role that compassion plays in most religions and secular ethics, it was not until the late 20th century that researchers from social and developmental psychology started to study these phenomena scientifically.

According to this line of psychological research, an empathic response to suffering can result in two kinds of reactions: empathic distress, which is also referred to as personal distress; and compassion, which is also referred to as empathic concern or sympathy (Figure 1).

For simplicity, we will refer to empathic distress and compassion when speaking about these two different families of emotions. While empathy refers to our general capacity to resonate with others’ emotional states irrespective of their valence — positive or negative — empathic distress refers to a strong aversive and self-oriented response to the suffering of others, accompanied by the desire to withdraw from a situation in order to protect oneself from excessive negative feelings. Compassion, on the other hand, is conceived as a feeling of concern for another person’s suffering which is accompanied by the motivation to help. By consequence, it is associated with approach and prosocial motivation."

This is straight out of a scholarly article http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982214007702

Fascinating, @skuggles! If I read it correctly, the authors of this article feel that empathy has either a positive or negative result, and compassion is actually the positive result... so we have to have empathy in order to feel compassion. To me, that would be a case for empathy, as long as we don't react with empathetic distress. Great food for thought. A compelling thread and I'll look forward to seeing other perspectives.

**********************************

I think you got right to the heart of it @dooBdoo

jubilant · ‎06-10-2010

I am not wanting to split hairs here but I have always seen empathy as a good thing. I would rather give empathy than overdo sympathy. To me... it is too much sympathy that tends to cripple or enable. Overdoing sympathy is feeling sorry for someone to the point you are no longer helping them but actually delaying the healing process. There is a place for it, of course. Empathy, imo, doesn't do that. I guess what I am saying is that it is sympathy that leads to enabling.

Greeneyedlady21 · ‎01-06-2015

@jubilant I think you make a good point. Too much sympathy without rational and objective thought can be crippling and enabling. I just think of some situations of people I know where that is definitely the case.

As far as empathy, I believe lack of empathy is the root of so many problems in this world. Humanity completely detached from the humanity of others. It's easy to become detached and you have to fight against that, if that is your choice.

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

esmeraldagooch · ‎03-10-2010

Most of my extra funds are given to ME and funding our retirement. If I choose to give any out it has to be important not just a whim. The foundation has to have little over head giving most of the money where it actually helps the cause. Tax money taken from me funds things I have no control over and many times people I would never have given funding to, and NO I don't like that.

Isobel Archer · ‎04-04-2015

@skuggles wrote:
I found this and it may be helpful to some, because there is clearly a difference between compassion and empathy as OP said in her opening.

"Psychological perspective
Although the concepts of empathy and compassion have existed for many centuries, their scientific study is relatively young. The term empathy has its origins in the Greek word ‘empatheia’ (passion), which is composed of ‘en’ (in) and ‘pathos’ (feeling). The term empathy was introduced into the English language following the German notion of ‘Einfühlung’ (feeling into), which originally described resonance with works of art and only later was used to describe the resonance between human beings. The term compassion is derived from the Latin origins ‘com’ (with/together) and ‘pati’ (to suffer); it was introduced into the English language through the French word compassion. In spite of the philosophical interest for empathy and the fundamental role that compassion plays in most religions and secular ethics, it was not until the late 20th century that researchers from social and developmental psychology started to study these phenomena scientifically.
According to this line of psychological research, an empathic response to suffering can result in two kinds of reactions: empathic distress, which is also referred to as personal distress; and compassion, which is also referred to as empathic concern or sympathy (Figure 1). For simplicity, we will refer to empathic distress and compassion when speaking about these two different families of emotions. While empathy refers to our general capacity to resonate with others’ emotional states irrespective of their valence — positive or negative — empathic distress refers to a strong aversive and self-oriented response to the suffering of others, accompanied by the desire to withdraw from a situation in order to protect oneself from excessive negative feelings. Compassion, on the other hand, is conceived as a feeling of concern for another person’s suffering which is accompanied by the motivation to help. By consequence, it is associated with approach and prosocial motivation."

This is straight out of a scholarly article http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982214007702

Thanks for this. Earlier today I posted an NYT review of his book along with a summary of his background - he's a professor of psychology and cognitive science at Yale and also co-editor in chief of the scientific journal Behaviorial and Brain Sciences.

Apparently someone objected to this as I see the post has been deleted.

Anyway, while I think the discussion of his definitions is fine - I do find it - shall I say - less than compassionate or empathatic for those who claim they are the same thing - to insist as some have that his definitions are "wrong" or "sociapathic" - which is what prompted my earlier sarcastic response - for which I apologize.

jubilant · ‎06-10-2010

@Greeneyedlady21 wrote:
@jubilant I think you make a good point. Too much sympathy without rational and objective thought can be crippling and enabling. I just think of some situations of people I know where that is definitely the case.

As far as empathy, I believe lack of empathy is the root of so many problems in this world. Humanity completely detached from the humanity of others. It's easy to become detached and you have to fight against that, if that is your choice.

********** Thank you. You said it so much better. I don't see empathy as being about problem solving. To me it is more in the line of "understanding". Sympathy kind of mirrors the other persons feelings. It trys to pick up on what their feelings are....but you really can't know that for sure. I also think we have too many words in the English language that mirror each other!

YorkieonmyPillow · ‎01-13-2013

Some Ayn Rand quotes:

The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.

The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.

A creative man is motivated by the desire to achieve, not by the desire to beat others.

Hmmmmm.....I would agree with the above. Not saying I embrace her entire philosophy...

terrier3 · ‎03-10-2010

@Noel7 wrote:
Bloom is on the wrong track.

Empathy is the ability to understand the feelings of others. There are facial recognition tests for that. It in no way means giving away the store.

It seems to me Bloom is a typical Ayn Rand sociopath who shouldn't have called it empathy since he has no idea about the meaning of the word.

To understand what someone is feeling does not demand response.

KUDOS @Noel7!

I cannot understand people who want to give short shrift to the emotions that make us compassionate and caring, both as individuals and as a society.

I will always err on the side of charity.

How people and news outlets feel compelled to mock great humanitarians like Gates and Buffet - it totally baffles me.