Let's be clear here. Empathy means the ability to feel what another person is feeling. It is the capacity to wear the shoes of another to such a degree that one experiences what the other is experiencing.
If you are going to have an honest discussion about empathy, then the word needs to be used properly, not redefined.
Then let's provide the clearest definition of empathy:
"the ability to understand and share the feelings of another."
That's how dictionary.com defines it.
The APA Dictionary of Psychology defines it:
"understanding a person from their frame of reference rather than one’s own, or vicariously experiencing that person’s feelings, perceptions, and thoughts. Empathy does not, of itself, entail motivation to be of assistance, although it may turn into sympathy or personal distress, which may result in action. In psychotherapy, therapist empathy for the client can be a path to comprehension of the client’s cognitions, affects, motivations, or behaviors."
Just read what you wrote:
"Empathy is just recognizing another person is really human (and therefore those who oppose empathy oppose recognizing humans as human)." You sound like a partisan hack, not someone who is actually interested in the topic of empathy.
You're involved in partisan, political sloganeering, except instead of churning up a slogan you're just lying about the meaning of a word. It's much the same as someone who says, "BLM just means black lives matter, and anyone who opposes BLM does not think black lives matter." Or, "MAGA just means making America great again, and anyone who opposes MAGA does not like America." "Empathy just means recognizing other people are human too, and anyone who opposes empathy is 'xenophobic'."
Here is how I described empathy, full quote:
"
What's crazy to me is that being empathetic just means understanding and recognizing another person is really human, in all the same weird ways I am. I can have empathy for someone even if I don't agree them. I can be empathetic without supporting, agreeing, and even having serious problems with something they say or do. Empathy doesn't mean I can't be critical of someone. Empathy for a person doesn't mean empathy for every possible feeling. I can be completely befuddled and put off and offended and disturbed by what a person says or thinks or does--but in their humanity empathize with them. Empathy is an intrinsic aspect of loving someone and, since I am a Christian, acknowledging the Image of God in another person.
I am unaware of someone arguing that empathy means agreeing and affirming every thought, statement, or act by a person. I am not aware of that being a definition used by anyone.
A call for empathy toward a person is not a demand to agree, but an invitation to consider how you would want to be treated in their shoes; and thus how you ought to regard and act toward and about a person--even when you disagree."
And you are so, apparently, incapable of actually offering a meaningful response to it that you have to condescend to ad hominem attacks. First, attacking my intelligence, and accusing me of being a political hack.
Apparently I've ruffled some feathers with this statement:
"Empathy is just recognizing another person is really human"
This isn't a redefining of empathy. It's framing empathy as a virtue of acknowledging the humanity in another. That's not a redefinition, that's an application of the definition.
julieroys.com
