The overall sentiment is true, and important. "Sparing the wolf is shallow, not deep empathy." But as we have covered here, and Grim covered in some detail, empathy is not the word Musk is looking for. The simple word "kindness" would have been better, and in line with the advice to use a simple word rather than a complicated one. That someone as smart as Musk uses "empathy" in that manner tells me that it is already well on its way to being a mere mild synonym for kindness, fellow-feeling, goodness. It's a shame when a useful word with distinct meaning gets watered down to a vague approval. We have plenty of those already.
Other words will rise to take the place of the weak ones.
16 comments:
Yes, the problem with empathy is that you are inserting your own ego into a thing you are observing at a distance. Not understanding more than you do about the actual situation, you think you understand everything because you feel however you do about your own observations.
So if you are observing the suffering of the wolf, and empathizing with the wolf you are observing, that's what you are doing. The fact that an artist has arranged a display of the wolf's suffering for you often escapes the observer; the fact that this leads them to their entire conclusion about the right and wrong of the matter, a conclusion made in ignorance of the real facts and relations, is entirely overwritten by the strength of the empathic emotions felt.
"The attack by these Jedi murderers left me scarred and deformed..." -- Darth Sidious
While I think Grim is right to the extent that, indeed, in particular disciplinary contexts that is what empathy means, I think it means other things in other contexts.
A quick look at common dictionaries shows the most common meaning of empathy is simply understanding the emotions, experiences, etc., of others. That first meaning has nothing to do with projecting one's own emotions onto others or onto works of art, although that is the second most common meaning.
From https://www.thefreedictionary.com/empathy:
em·pa·thy (ĕm′pə-thē)
n.
1. The ability to identify with or understand the perspective, experiences, or motivations of another individual and to comprehend and share another individual's emotional state. See Synonyms at pity.
2. The projection of one's own feelings or thoughts onto something else, such as an object in a work of art or a character in a novel or film.
[en- + -pathy (translation of German Einfühlung).]
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition.
And the Atlantic is on to us (or so they think, but they haven't read Grim).
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/the-conservative-attack-on-empathy/ar-AA1HHvMc?cvid=a97ab0124fc9416b943d3de4cd628667&ei=9
"Five years ago, Elon Musk told Joe Rogan during a podcast taping that “the fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy, the empathy exploit.” By that time, the idea that people in the West are too concerned with the pain of others to adequately advocate for their own best interests was already a well-established conservative idea. Instead of thinking and acting rationally, the theory goes, they’re moved to make emotional decisions that compromise their well-being and that of their home country. In this line of thought, empathetic approaches to politics favor liberal beliefs. An apparent opposition between thought and feeling has long vexed conservatives, leading the right-wing commentator Ben Shapiro to famously declare that “facts don’t care about your feelings.”"
Etc.
"...although that is the second most common meaning."
It is, in fact, the original meaning. Words change meanings over time, but the etymology of the word continues to have power. I think of how Tolkien was able to retrieve that power in his own art, even with words like "warg" that had fallen completely out of use but that still have the right structure to mean what he wanted them to mean to an English speaker.
What I mean by 'structure' is also etymological. When we look at etymology we find roots that go back sometimes through four or five languages to a root that has always meant something since the earliest records, and that we project has meant something since Proto-Indo-European. That doesn't affect the conscious meaning, but it can affect the subconscious mind.
By the way, I did go to the dictionary to affirm all of that; only I went to the Oxford English Dictionary. I put up a photo of the entry for "empathy" in the post; but the one for "sympathy," a much older word with a deeper history, was far too long to capture in a single photo.
That is very much the opinion of the philosopher and author Owen Barfield, whose Poetic Diction in 1928 contained the idea that all words carried their meaning history within them, though sometimes only barely discernibly
Sure, Grim. I'm not disputing any of that. I just wanted to point out that the term has a more common meaning that is not about projecting one's emotions and doesn't fall into the problems you mentioned. I'd never heard meaning 2 until you posted about it.
Etymology is interesting and can be quite helpful. The problem with etymology is that sometimes words radically change meanings and the past meanings are not carried forward. I don't know about Barfield, but there is only so much information a word can carry.
So what am I talking about? It seems to me that Musk used the term empathy in accord w/ definition 1, the most common definition. But, AVI and Grim, you both seem to object to this and insist that only definition 2 is valid. That's why I posted about the definitions -- I don't see a problem with him using the word that way because that's how most people do. Or maybe I've just misunderstood your point.
@Thomas Doubting -- years ago, long before I gave any serious thought to word meanings, etymology, or to much of anything... I wondered why we needed empathy... and thought perhaps it just meant "stronger, well-expressed sympathy. There's a HUGE difference in acknowledging and understanding of suffering and projecting one's own feelings onto (or into) another's feelings. It wasn't until I was dealing with a serious injury to my son that I realized that "I feel your pain" was an insult. NO YOU DON'T and you CAN'T. And that's OK. I don't want you too. I also don't want you to make me feel that I should feel grief as you define it. Sympathy acknowledges that you know I'm hurting and you wish I wasn't... Empathy requires me to feel your pain for me. I ain't going there.
Thomas, I have considerable agreement for everyday speech, which is what Musk was likely engaging in. But it was just a little too serious a subject, he is too large a figure, the concept a little too vague in a worrisome direction to let pass. If someone were to use it that way at a party, in a waiting line, or in the narthex I would not bristle. But in a sermon, as an instruction, or in a book, I might squint and might even say something. And as Donna B says, when giving actual comfort it has some danger.
And mostly, I wanted to note that in fifty years the distinction will no longer be noted, as the language is trending to vague positivity now.
"language is trending to vague positivity"
That's very depressing.
I suspect that the average person couldn't, and therefore doesn't, distinguish between empathy and sympathy. I think we started this with a study that in fact defined empathy as a species of sympathy. (You are usually allowed to define your terms formally, for scientific or philosophical purposes, and although it isn't helpful if you choose to define them in ways that defy their usual meaning it is allowed. Immanuel Kant was a particularly egregious offender.)
Nevertheless, it is of great importance to learn to recognize the difference. Empathy -- according to the original meaning -- is one of the most potent weapons currently employed. You may be sure that while you did not know the difference, those who are seeking to use information to dominate debates and narratives they shape know it perfectly well.
I'm not insisting on the concept to try to hold people to the old ways that they no longer remember. I'm raising it so emphatically because I want to teach people to learn the difference that they don't know. This is a very important thing to learn to recognize. This is a conjurer's trick that is used to control you, you and everyone. It is vital to learn to recognize it.
Hi, Donna. The main point I've been going on about is that the most common definition of empathy does NOT include projecting one's own feelings onto another. Let me add that both empathy and sympathy include sharing another's emotion, so "I feel your pain" could be used with both.
My own attachment to definition 1 (the non-projecting definition) is from my years as an EMT. It was important for me to recognize and have some understanding of the emotional states of my patients, family members, bystanders, etc. That's what I meant by empathy: recognizing and understanding someone else's emotional state. Not projecting, not sharing.
From definition 1, I can see that most people do mean sharing the emotional state, so I should have used a better term, but in any case, that's what I meant.
Thanks for the explanation. So, would you, like Grim below, argue that we should narrow our usage of the term? That seems reasonable.
Interesting. I'll have to go back to your original post and look at it in that light.
BTW, Gad Saad has a book coming out called Suicidal Empathy that might be relevant.
@Thomas Doubting -- your explanation about experiences as an EMT make sense and as I've unfortunately had to make use of EMTs occasionally -- I appreciate that most do recognize both the physical and emotional pain of finding myself in need of their services.
Post a Comment