Empathy

[rambot]

I can't stand the word empathy, actually. I think empathy is a made-up, new age term that — it does a lot of damage.

A quote from Chuck Kirk.


Now I look at this quote and I get seriously confused. I cannot understand why a person would have a problem with empathy.

How would the Good Samaritan Help someone that thinks their terrible without it?

How can Jesus heal someone without it?

In my view, empathy connects us and allow people sympathy to flow more greatly. It creates stronger bonds between strangers.

So help me understand how and WHY empathy is bad.

 

[Freth]

I think it becomes apparent when you look at the definitions of the two.

Empathy: the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.

Sympathy:

1. feelings of pity and sorrow for someone else's misfortune
2. understanding between people; common feeling
   1. support in the form of shared feelings or opinions
   2. agreement with or approval of an opinion or aim; a favorable attitude
   3. relating harmoniously to something else; in keeping
3. the state or fact of responding in a way similar or corresponding to an action elsewhere

 

[bèlla]

Brene Brown explains it well and it’s a common complaint in the church.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

A quote from Chuck Kirk.


Now I look at this quote and I get seriously confused. I cannot understand why a person would have a problem with empathy.

How would the Good Samaritan Help someone that thinks their terrible without it?

How can Jesus heal someone without it?

In my view, empathy connects us and allow people sympathy to flow more greatly. It creates stronger bonds between strangers.

So help me understand how and WHY empathy is bad.

Just ask one the person who disparages the concept of empathy and tells you it is "bad."

When you do, very often you'll hear a different definition of that term from the one many if not most of us are familiar with.

 

[caffeinated hermit]

Just ask one the person who disparages the concept of empathy and tells you it is "bad."

When you do, very often you'll hear a different definition of that term from the one many if not most of us are familiar with.

I think, perhaps, the concern arises because we may feel that empathy asks us to validate others' feelings and opinions, whether or not we agree with those feelings or whether or not they are true.

"You feel like a boy, and that's valid; you are a boy", as opposed to "You feel like a boy, and I hear that, but you're female, dear, and nothing can change that. You're a masculine female, but that doesn't make you anything but a female".

Weeping with those who weep, however, is good. It's good to sit in sorrow with people, sometimes, and just be sad with them.

 

[rambot]

I think, perhaps, the concern arises because we may feel that empathy asks us to validate others' feelings and opinions, whether or not we agree with those feelings or whether or not they are true.

Doesn't it seem odd to suggest that what someone is feeling, is something they are not feeling and then to tell them that?
Sorry that's rhetorical. We don't need another "trans" discussion here on CF so I want to avoid it.

"You feel like a boy, and that's valid; you are a boy", as opposed to "You feel like a boy, and I hear that, but you're female, dear, and nothing can change that. You're a masculine female, but that doesn't make you anything but a female".

Weeping with those who weep, however, is good. It's good to sit in sorrow with people, sometimes, and just be sad with them.

I'm talking about the concept of empathy globally and DEFINITELY not in the context of a gender discussion.

Brene Brown explains it well and it’s a common complaint in the church.

I look forward to watching that later. Thank you.

I read this and assume it's similar:
Dr Brené Brown: Empathy vs Sympathy

 

[bèlla]

I look forward to watching that later. Thank you.

I read this and assume it's similar:
Dr Brené Brown: Empathy vs Sympathy

You’re welcome and it is.

~bella

 

[caffeinated hermit]

@rambot

Merriam-Webster defines empathy as :

The action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another.

I can think of many, many instances where this can be a good thing. Especially if someone is grieving the loss of a person, pet, or has received a really serious diagnosis. But much of left-leaning discourse over the past decade has honed in on "feelings as reality". Yes, this is definitely due, in part, to identity politics and transgender discourse, and this may have been what Charlie had in mind when he dismissed empathy.

Empathy is not bad. It can be a meaningful, deep, loving thing to extend to someone who is hurting. But, in other contexts, it might begin to stand in the way of seriously analyzing the reality or healthiness of someone's thoughts and feelings.

The last decade to 15 years has really, really done a number on how we see one another, how we dialogue, and even how language is used, so...

 

[Nithavela]

I think, perhaps, the concern arises because we may feel that empathy asks us to validate others' feelings and opinions, whether or not we agree with those feelings or whether or not they are true.

"You feel like a boy, and that's valid; you are a boy", as opposed to "You feel like a boy, and I hear that, but you're female, dear, and nothing can change that. You're a masculine female, but that doesn't make you anything but a female".

Weeping with those who weep, however, is good. It's good to sit in sorrow with people, sometimes, and just be sad with them.

It always comes back to transsexuals with you guys, doesn't it?

 

[caffeinated hermit]

One More as per Merriam-Webster:

Sympathy is a feeling of sincere concern for someone who is experiencing something difficult or painful. Empathy involves actively sharing in the person’s emotional experience.

It always comes back to transsexuals with you guys, doesn't it?

Because deep, real, and painful feelings of gender dysphoria are actually a fantastic example of something one might either really wish to affirm and show empathy towards or else not affirm and push back against with concern. It is true that "feelings as reality" has been more of a theme in many circles for years now. Yes, this intersects with transgender discourse, but also with other social and psychological issues, like how people define or experience racism, and how to best approach these issues.

 

[MehGuy]

I believe making blanket statements that all empathy is bad is simplistic and short sighted. Although, I do believe empathy can be problematic. Especially when combined with sadomasochism.

Who is able to endure being empathetic more? Someone high on the sadomasochistic spectrum or someone lower on it? Are the fears of sadomasochistic tainting empathy not warranted?

To be clear, I became wary of empathy ever since I lost my Christian faith 15 some years ago. Realizing about myself and the observation of others that being empathetic often doesn't result in actually helping other people, but instead navel gazing at other's pain. I have my doubts people are being so self sacrificial about it, and instead find something beautiful and loving about being empathetic towards others in pain to varying degrees. So I didn't became critical of empathy for political reasons. Overall I consider myself more left than right. Although the last decade I observed many on the left exhibiting many of the traits I find problematic within some Christian circles.

The concept of a loving God who allows suffering so he can be empathetic with us doesn't sit right with me. Yet many people seem to fail to question this, and how we ourselves might fall into this trap when we empathize with others.

 

[rambot]

Empathy is not bad. It can be a meaningful, deep, loving thing to extend to someone who is hurting. But, in other contexts, it might begin to stand in the way of seriously analyzing the reality or healthiness of someone's thoughts and feelings.

To an extent I'd agree. But I'm not sure the empathy completely suggests we "Abandon" those people in that feeling. I don't really see it as part of the definition.

Of course, the second half of that sentence, suddenly becomes an "us v them judgement battle".
And that is no longer empathy.

 

[caffeinated hermit]

To an extent I'd agree. But I'm not sure the empathy completely suggests we "Abandon" those people in that feeling. I don't really see it as part of the definition.

Perhaps. But I'm not sure that some contemporary, popular understandings of empathy are nuanced enough to disengage them from "validation " or "affirmation". Which is really unfortunate and, again, maybe a casualty of how modern academic language and meaning has impacted the way we all use (and misunderstand and weaponize) words these days.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

A quote from Chuck Kirk.


Now I look at this quote and I get seriously confused. I cannot understand why a person would have a problem with empathy.

How would the Good Samaritan Help someone that thinks their terrible without it?

How can Jesus heal someone without it?

In my view, empathy connects us and allow people sympathy to flow more greatly. It creates stronger bonds between strangers.

So help me understand how and WHY empathy is bad.

Let's keep this real and relevant, and away from the Transgender and LQBTQ side of things. There's so much more over which to test out how we all subjectively handle the concept of empathy and it doesn't have to default to the all too usual quadrants of society.

So let's do this instead: Let's focus on straight people and the extent to which we could or should feel "empathy" for a adulterous spouse. With that in mind, how surprised should I be when I tell my wife that, "Honey, I'm having a severe emotional breakdown and because of that, I have proclivities where I want to commit adultery and not remain beholden and faithful to you."

Now, let's bring in the question: How much empathy, even with the right denotative properties, should I expect to receive from my faithful spouse in a case where I want to commit adultery and have her "understand me" in all of it?

 

[rambot]

Let's keep this real and relevant, and away from the Transgender and LQBTQ side of things. There's so much more over which to test out how we all subjectively handle the concept of empathy and it doesn't have to default to the all too usual quadrants of society.

So let's do this instead: Let's focus on straight people and the extent to which we could or should feel "empathy" for a adulterous spouse. With that in mind, how surprised should I be when I tell my wife that, "Honey, I'm having a severe emotional breakdown and because of that, I have proclivities where I want to commit adultery and not remain beholden and faithful to you."

Now, let's bring in the question: How much empathy, even with the right denotative properties, should I expect to receive from my faithful spouse in a case where I want to commit adultery and have her "understand me" in all of it?

I'm sorry but I've never really considered the idea that the victim should feel empathy to the person who hurt them.


I'm not sure why someone would feel an obligation to feel empathy there.

 

[o_mlly]

Empathy is a passion, ie., a movement of the soul to act. Passions may be disordered, ie., not in conformance to God's will. Our reason, properly informed, regulates emotions allowing us to discern whether the feeling is ordered or disordered.

Empathy for one who is doing evil would move us to intervene. Empathy for one who is doing good would move us to affirm that action as good.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I'm sorry but I've never really considered the idea that the victim should feel empathy to the person who hurt them.


I'm not sure why someone would feel an obligation to feel empathy there.

Essentially, I agree with you. Those who are victims are usually those whom we feel deserve our empathy.

But let's change the scenario a little bit. Let's say now that there are a lot of straight men [we'll ignore the fact that straight women can go awol in a relationship too] out there who might counter that they were having a bona-fide clinical emotional breakdown.

And let's ask now: who is it that will truly empathize with these straight men in how they act out in their private psychological confusion? (Or, how empathetic should we be for someone like the late Hugh Hefner?)

 

[Unqualified]

The writing on this thread is too small. I feel empathy for others. Want to walk a mile in their shoes.
But some people want to pay every bodies way except Christian’s and Jews.. That’s over worked Empathy.

you really want to judge Kirk’s words now after he is dead. He’s not a god, just a man. Here he speaks with an element of truth toward those who have no right or wrong about supporting certain or all people. Add to virtue, knowledge and to knowledge add self control. Use you noodle, I mean really. But if you have no self control about empathy your going to defeat yourself.

 

[rambot]

Essentially, I agree with you. Those who are victims are usually those whom we feel deserve our empathy.

But let's change the scenario a little bit. Let's say now that there are a lot of straight men [we'll ignore the fact that straight women can go awol in a relationship too] out there who might counter that they were having a bona-fide clinical emotional breakdown.

And let's ask now: who is it that will truly empathize with these straight men in how they act out in their private psychological confusion? (Or, how empathetic should we be for someone like the late Hugh Hefner?)

It seems presumptuous to assume it's "confusion".

How about this idea though: It can be more difficult to empathize with men because men are not as...."Great" at sharing and demontrating/emotiong their feelings.

But if someone is having an emotional breakdown, a person can empathize with that...at least to some extent. I've had breakdowns before...not everyone has but if you've had one, you DEFINITELY know..

 

[MehGuy]

I think there can be some common ground to be found here..

Empathy is not inherently bad, but it is also not something that isn't prone to corruption.