Is Empathy a Force of Evil?

March 24, 2018 Empathy - Compassion No Comments

Of course not. Still, some describe it this way. The main – but not all – disagreement is one of terminology.

Terms matter. Concepts are important.

See ‘Landscape of Empathy’. In that drawing, I’ve distinguished some related concepts. Others may put other terms to these concepts.

Empathy devoid of rationality

is impossible in my conceptualization, since rationality is part of the definition of empathy. For argument’s sake, I will in the remainder of this text talk about E-W-R (Empathy without Rationality).

Unfortunately, E-W-R sometimes provokes a backlash to empathy.

Out of some kind of ‘idealism’, E-W-R can lead to measures that don’t work out as planned, which may lead others to be suspicious of empathy as such, rejecting empathy as something for the ‘softheaded’, ‘bleeding hearts’. That’s a pity.

Empathy being potentially a powerful driving force, E-W-R is also dangerous, due to

the spotlight nature of E-W-R.

It’s easier to ‘feel’ empathy for people close by than for people far-off, for friends than for non-friends. At the bright side, this facilitates one-on-one relationships, and ‘feeling special’ in the eyes of loved one(s), such as parent-child, very close family.

At the other side, it leaves the rest out of the spotlight. Empathy is ‘innumerate’: caught up in the suffering of individuals, one can become myopic to that of many. For instance, numerous political debates are thus not about whether or not we should empathize, but mainly about whom we should empathize with, such as: foreign refugees or ‘own people’.

One step further, it may create an in-group feeling versus ‘the others’ or even ‘the enemy’. Put this in a concoction without rationality and you have a major potential energy source for discrimination, war etc. This is subtle: what to do with a ‘real enemy’… and what with that real enemy’s enemy? Should one in such matters decide with empathy?

An E-W-R person is vulnerable to manipulation.

A picture of ‘enemy’ can malevolently be stoked up even more through empathy with the enemy’s victims, especially if these are from the empathizer’s in-group.

Manipulation can also make ‘being an enemy’ reason enough for treating him badly. I strongly disagree. What should cause action is never his ‘being an enemy’ but his ‘being a threat’.

Rationality shows us how we need to let our empathy flow in diverse ways as appropriate to circumstances.

E AND R: nature gave us both instruments

Actually, to separate them is already quite unnatural: brain-wise we see more overlap than distinction (to say it mildly) between more ‘emotional’ and more ‘cognitive’ regions. Scientists used to think these were quite strictly divided. Not so. That doesn’t mean we cannot be rational, but that we are rational with our emotional life engrained. If you think about it: why should nature have done otherwise? It’s so straightforward.

Plea

This text is of course a plea for empathy PLUS rationality.

I think that when talking about the same thing, almost everyone can agree that empathy is one of humanity’s greatest assets.

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

Small-Circle versus Broad-Circle Empathy

Humans are made for a local environment ― the village as our world, not the world as a village. Nature never knew we would need to empathize with the other side of the world one day. Yet there is increasingly this need. Not only to tackle global problems. Of course, these problems exist and need Read the full article…

Why Compassionate A.I. is Most Efficient

As a Compassionate A.I., Lisa combines what might be called a ‘big mind’ with a ‘big heart.’ This means she is designed to approach problems holistically, aiming for solutions that respect human values while addressing real-world complexities. Compassion doesn’t limit efficiency; in fact, it enhances it. By guiding her intelligence through an ethical lens, Lisa Read the full article…

21. Empathy: What it Was, Is and… Will Be?

Empathy is difficult to conceptualize because it is ‘beyond the conceptual’. What it was In the second half of the 19th century, bedside manners were the main instrument of the doctor. The time of bloodletting, purgatives, and leeches (in 1827 in France still good for an import of 33 million specimens, in addition to the Read the full article…

Translate »