great post. this is probably the same reason i hate people calling me an empath when really i just try very hard to listen and *then* proceed. i also REALLY like the phrasing of "how are you doing?" as well. usually before speaking/offering any type of support i'll ask "how are you coping?" to kind of get a gauge of exactly what was discussed here; if there was a death, what was their relationship w/the person, if there was a crisis, what is their outlook on it, etc., but i actually like "how are you doing" much better so thank you for including that.
Interesting that people think that you are an empath, when in reality you're paying attention to what they themselves could pay attention to, and see what you see.
perhaps people confuse listening skills with being an empath, even. (i also think the term is so thrown around - especially in a broader sense of media, i.e. a public figure making an apology they don't mean directly following an incident only because it got publicity and saying, "i'm such an empath, i would never intend to hurt people," blah blah BS - so i doubt a single group of people could entirely agree on the definition)
Very good advice. Obviously, “How are you doing?” can be said in many ways. Obviously in instances of hardship, loss and grief the inflection shouldn’t be “So...how ya doin’?” But closer to “How are YOU?” with an open - not flat - tone. Your words and tone should show concern and caring for the other person without being dismissive of whom or what was lost. If you had feelings for the one whose gone too then this is a bond you two already have. But even if you’d never met the other - and even if you absolutely despised the ‘lost’ one - you can still show that you care about your friend, sibling, etc. Either way, the best thing to say - at least at the start - is “How are you /YOU doing?”
Thank you for articulating that so well! I've always felt a little disingenuous when talking to people because I generally use cognitive empathy, rather than emotional empathy, to respond to their emotionally-loaded situations. The reality is that even though *they* may be distressed, it doesn't mean *I* am. So if I responded only based on my emotions, I would burn through friendships really quickly.
I know what you mean. With some people, if you aren't as upset as they are they take that to mean that you don't think that they have a reason to be upset in the first place.
I dunno, from the POV of the friend I'd consider it a good thing. At the times I've been really emotional, the best case was to have someone demonstrating that they cared, but being calm and not being dragged down by my own feelings. Often I'll keep things to myself because I don't want the other person to get all emotional. I can't speak for others, but there are definitely some of us out there who appreciate cognitive empathy specifically.
It depends so heavily on the person that you are dealing with. Some people are like you and prefer this approach, but others require you to match their energy or they feel like you aren't really understanding why they are upset. Surely if you knew, you would be upset as well is their thinking.
This is a really interesting article. Cognitive empathy is sometimes described as fake empathy with emotional empathy being described as genuine empathy. I do get the general inference behind these descriptions but similarly, I think that an individual with high levels of cognitive empathy can actually ‘beat’ my emotional empathy in terms of offering support in the right way.
For example, I had a discussion with a narcissist about Prince Harry. The assumption during the conversation was that Meghan Markle is a narcissist. My view, even with an understanding of narcissistic abuse and how it changes the behaviour of the victim, is that Harry has overstepped the mark. I no longer have any sympathy for him. At all. The narcissist using cognitive empathy and with a superior understanding of narcissistic abuse and what it does to the victim, was able to express ‘sympathy’ for Harry and maintain that Harry’s poor behaviour is as a direct result of the influence of the narcissist. As such Harry remains worthy of patience and sympathy.
In this way cognitive empathy appears to outstrip my emotional empathy. I don’t feel sympathy and I can’t bring myself to behave in a sympathetic way. The narcissist with cognitive empathy therefore appears more sympathetic than I do. Is he though? My only concern there is that my view feels genuine, the view expressed by the narcissist less so. I’m not sure I can verbalise properly what I mean by that.
From another angle I would have to disagree in part with the description of how emotional empathy operates. I have definitely seen people assume similar as regards suicide and agree with what you describe they are actually doing in terms of emotional projection. I do think though that there are some people with high levels of emotional empathy that don’t do this. They wait, ascertain the feelings of the friend / relative affected by the suicide before offering anything by way of emotional support.
As another example, I have a friend going through a very hard time currently. Recently out of a relationship with a narcissist. When I see him, I agree I am searching facial expressions, body language, tone, phrasing etc to establish exactly where he’s at emotionally. Why not ask him? I do, and he does his best to tell me, but even he cannot explain clearly exactly how he is feeling or the reasons why. In situations like this I actively reach out emotionally and sometimes I am able to take in exactly how he is feeling. His sadness for example is felt by me as his sadness. I know it belongs to him but it stays with me for hours sometimes days afterwards. A sadness that is his, not mine. It isn’t that I feel sad for him, I do, but that’s my sadness for him, this is altogether different. It isn’t just his sadness I feel, it’s his guilt, self blame, shame and many other emotions that blend together in one hugely painful and almost indiscernible mass. I believe this to be emotional contagion. It doesn’t happen with every individual and in every conversation, nor would I ever want it to, but when it does happen, it’s unmistakeable.
So this article interests me because I very much understand the points being made and they are forceful points as regards the validity of sophisticated cognitive empathy wielded by a non malignant individual. My own experiences though in certain circumstances with certain people, lead me to believe that there is more going on with emotional empathy than is fully understood as of yet.
Apologies for the long comment! Thank you for this article, I enjoyed reading it.
What you describe regarding those with emotional empathy and their more measured response to suicide is an excellent example of emotional and cognitive empathy working hand in hand.
Thank you again for your consideration of my comment. I’m enjoying your blog. It’s quite rare to find a space where opinions and ideas can be shared honestly and constructively. Social media and media in general allows little room for debate, it’s encouraging to find it alive and kicking here!
TS6157. This is a superb follow-up to Athena's article. I have experienced what you describe as "one hugely painful and almost indiscernible mass" and it is unmistakeable. Most often, though, I do not take the time or want that level of discernment. Thank you for your lengthy comment.
Thank you for your reply and I’m glad my comment resonated with you. I find the subject of empathy truly fascinating. I think the subject becomes more emotive when we look at chemical love versus intentional / cognitive love. Love is a tough subject. Many assume that their idea of love and what it means is the only idea of love, often revolving around chemical love. If we look at ideas such as mutual trust and respect, equal consideration of needs, companionship etc, then intentional / cognitive love covers these aspects equally as well as chemical love, so it seems unfair to simply dismiss it as fake or somehow of less value. In some ways there is more value in intentional love because it is so considered.
I would hate to lose my emotional empathy, it’s very much part of who I am, but I can also see very real value in cognitive empathy.
To me, chemical love alone is like using your partner as a source of pleasure alone - or at least focusing on your own. That’s a slippery slope, at best. When one does that, the partner starts to feel used and resentful. If you add the loss or weakening of trust for your partner (since the chance for cheating and abandonment is very real) the show’s over. I’ve never cheated, but I have been cheated on. No one wants that kind of emotional pain. Cheaters, to me, are just looking for the intense high they no longer feel with their partner. They’re the crackheads of love. More often than not, once the cheating itself becomes routine the cheaters see each other and what they did as just plain wrong.
Love the statement “Cheaters are the crackheads of love”. You might well be right. You could look at it two ways. Either they cheat because they want that chemical rush, or they cheat because their emotional empathy for their partner has been eroded. The love and respect they once had for that partner has eroded to a point where they place their own wants far above the combined needs of the partnership. So in some ways the question is, which empathy safeguards love and commitment to a partner more effectively over time?
I think the ‘honeymoon period’ when partners can’t keep their hands off one another, can’t stand to be apart for a day etc is driven by chemical love. Once the relationship progresses beyond that point, it settles and becomes less passionate perhaps but solidifies into something truly meaningful and enduring, then this is a more cognitive / intentional kind of love.
If a long term relationship is rocked by infidelity I think it might be a combination of a failing in the cognitive love for the partner combined with a chemical attraction for the third party. You could argue then that someone who doesn’t experience chemical love / attraction wouldn’t have had their head turned by the third party and would have remained faithful!
I agree that cheaters are after that chemical high and similarly there is a real selfishness about it, which you allude to in your first sentence.
If I’m honest, I think the thing that I find most difficult to accept as regards cognitive empathy alone, is the ability of an individual to walk away and move on easily in the event that the relationship ends. The lack of a sense of loss or regret. It’s also a lack of being ‘needed’.
If the relationship ends, I at least want a bit of hand wringing!! Emotional hand wringing, yes, definitely, that’s definitely required!
Thank you for this wonderful explanation. I agree entirely that with those people with whom it does happen, it's unmistakeable. As someone whose (broken) emotional empathy is patchy, unpredictable, and compromised, I nevertheless agree with you wholeheartedly about its worth in specific situations. This is not to say that Athena is wrong, just inevitably incomplete.
TY for the "long" comment! I am guilty of that too!!
So interesting of your strong feeling of MM and the prince.
Only a month or so ago, I saw her in "Suits' the TV show. Before then I simply didn't know who she was at all. It seems you use them as a way to work out your own feelings and such?
You didn't specifically say but clearly you embody what Athena writes: "You have to be a perpetual student if you want to understand those around you."
Thank you for your reply and for your encouragement. I really appreciate being able to share my thoughts openly here.
Yes, I think a better understanding of people can help us make sense of a lot of what we see in the news as well as helping us better navigate our personal interactions.
Harry and Meghan are very polarising characters and they elicit strong opinion, particularly here in the UK. They are relevant to me personally as I was caught out by a narcissist online. He rocked my world and I was forced to examine both his behaviours and my own. I needed to understand my part in it and be honest with myself about the reasons why I was vulnerable at the time and what I could do to ensure that I’m not vulnerable in the future.
That experience wasn’t pleasant but I have learned a lot as a direct result of it and continue to learn. Thank you again for your kind words Tim.
You are welcome!! Even though it is so hard, to face these things, the process builds us. No matter where we start!!
If you haven't already, it is like a tall person. looking at short people: You realize the flaws of others from your own stronger self. It just "is". Maybe you see that now? You were vulnerable -then, at that time- but not now!!! You just "aren't" anymore! Wow!!! Way to go!!
I do feel stronger now, you’re right. It took a long time for me to fully pick through it all and understand that dynamic clearly. Too long in many respects, but I am definitely taller now than I was then!
The whole experience reawakened my love of learning, so there was a positive gained from it. Narcissism is a broad subject and there is a lot of conflicting information that complicates matters. Similarly, now that I am trying to understand more about ASPD and psychopathy there is so much stigma and false information out there, it’s very difficult to form a clear view. I have been reading past articles that Athena has written, debunking myths and highlighting questionable research. I can totally understand her frustration. Narcissism is probably better understood than psychopathy, there really is a mountain of misinformation when it comes to the latter.
If it isn’t too personal a question, what brought you here Tim?
YES!! now combine your present understanding and your potential which you have began? Where can you now? Anywhere you want? idk. Maybe only you can answer.
As to your personal question, "You have to be a perpetual student if you want to understand those around you."
Until I read Athena, I didn't know there were people who thought my thoughts.
Yes, I see what you mean here. It’s quite a relief sometimes to discover that others see the world in a similar way and enlightening sometimes to discover that they don’t!
Sorry, couldn't resist. This is a great post. A case in point, I didn't actually love my mother. And when she died, what I grieved was that I would never have the mother I hoped she might actually become.
It was. And I didn't even realize that was what I was struggling with until after her death. She was 90 years old at the time and I was 70. The injury that separated us occurred when I was two and a half. So an entire lifetime with a wounded part of me hoping she would "come through at last." And your "cognitive empathy" comment was spot on. Thanks, I appreciate that.
True. OTOH, it wasn't like 99% awful throughout my life. I started various therapy experiences back in my 20's and "made progress" both on this and other toxic stuff from my childhood. It's just that this underlying issue (along with a few others) never got fully resolved -- never even got *recognized* in a way -- until after her death. And OTOH#2, I'm glad I did finally get to a point where I recognized it and resolved it. There's plenty of folks who take these kinds of things to the grave. (And have miserable lives throughout.)
Good grief yes. Two and a half, an age at which kids were presumed to forget. The injury as an infant, and all the brain (mis)development that follows. It seems hard to believe now that not so long ago people were counselled to just put the past behind them and 'get over it'. Like that was ever gonna work.
If the similarity in our situations includes the hope that your father "might come through for you," then I have a suggestion -- based on 20/20 hindsight. My relationship with my father was also ... really really messy and, on one side of the balance scale, toxic. There were actually three sides of this particular balance scale: one pure toxic, one surface good but also a power-messy toxic, and a third truly nurturing. The problem was, the ratios of who was present was mostly the surface good, with altogether too much of pure toxic, and the truly nurturing mostly kind of underground. However, during the last years and especially the last month of my father's life, I think it's quite possible that he and I might have reached through to the truly nurturing -- IF I HAD ACTUALLY SOUGHT THAT OUT. Of course, at the time, I was still so frozen at the thought of doing any reaching out (to anyone) that I didn't do that.
My suggestion to you is: if you feel hope that he might "come through" and become the father you wanted, think about whether that's truly possible (based on something you can see inside his core). If it is, consider whether or not you *might* want to reach out in some way for a conversation. (And of course what the impact would be on you if that went badly, which would be a good reason not to do it.)
OTOH, if you are confident that the balance is toxic and no real hope for having the father you wanted and needed, then hey, "I've got your six" as the saying goes.
Mostly I'm saying this because what kept me "in" the relationships with both my mother and father was that hope. If that hope had gone bye-bye, I would have "moved on" many decades earlier.
Your comments are always full of wisdom and understanding. However, I do not think your ideas necessarily apply to me and my father. He was a teenage concentration camp survivor, and survived the sinking of the ship Cap Arcona, so let's go easy, but he was also an asshole person because it seems some people just are. He was massively emotionally abusive to my mother, which impacted us kids greatly. I have no deathbed hopes. I wished him dead long ago to free my mother. And yet, when he goes to hospital, in his 90s, I am once again phone panicking. Go figure. I am lying about my 'love'. He is almost deaf and almost blind and pity just kicks in. I don't pretend to understand it. I hate the bastard for what he did to ruin my life, and yet, pity kicks in big time. Oh man.
I don’t think your empathy is ‘broken’ or ‘patchy’, certainly not from what you have described here. I think you see your father suffering, old, deaf, almost blind and you have compassion for that. It might not be anything at all to do with the fact this man is your father. Possibly more to do with the fact that you would have compassion for anyone, dying alone in similar circumstances. It sounds like compassion and a sense of decency are driving your behaviours more than any familial bond.
I agree with Wyn, your behaviours say more about you than they do about him. You can only do what you feel is right. You have to look yourself in the mirror once this man is gone, so I think it’s important to stay true to your own values as Wyn said.
Thank you for your kind words. My empathy did get better over the years and I think that's why I appreciate what Athena says about the importance of cognitive empathy. In the past my empathy was very erratic and I look back on times where I just didn't understand and was indifferent to others pain and was self absorbed and I am appalled. But at the same time I know how and why it happened and it was not my fault. But it was my job to fix it.
You are correct, I have to do what I think is the right thing by my values.
I think on some level when we cry for the suffering and mortality of others we are crying for ourselves. The sadness of the human condition.
You’re welcome MC. I’m happy that you managed to retrieve your empathic nature and as regards your father, I hope that you achieve closure, in whatever for that may take.
Thank you! "Full of wisdom and understanding" -- you have made my day ;-)
Indeed, "go figure". Turns out one can have contradictory feelings, even more-or-less simultaneously. In my teens, I hated my dad--but also was desperate to keep him in my life--but was also unable/unwilling to be aware of that "needing him". When a friend suggested that I needed to "cut the knot," ie, the relationship, I dissociated rather than face how I felt in that moment.
What I found so surprising after my parents' deaths was how much unfinished "biz" I still had with each of them. I had thought that "stuff" was mostly settled, and pretty much a couple of decades since settled. That is, I knew I had lingering issues, but the depth of them surprised me. So I think we mostly just don't know what we don't know.
Having pity for someone who, yeah, sounds pretty despicable (understatement?), I think that says more about you and who you are and your values than it says about him. You recognize that he is suffering and feel some compassion for that. Sounds like you are a decent human being and a good friend to have.
In my life, the people who bother me the most are people with a high level of emotional empathy. They always assume I'm feeling things I'm not feeling and try to help me with problems that don't even exist in my life, just because they think the situation I'm in is bad for THEM. And no matter how many times I explain that I'm not bothered by what they think I'm bothered with, they think I'm lying to be nice and get angry when I don't accept their help.
You hit the nail on the head. This was a difficult truth to come face to face with, but thankfully I did. Learning; then the hard part, how to resist offering help with a problem that did not exist for them. The question to that person is paramount -- "how are you doing" -- listening with authentic concern, is a must for true understanding. If we are truly offering support, there are times we cannot fully "walk in their shoes." Perhaps just asking the question is what that person might need.
"Cast away your beliefs about how that should affect a person, and start to ingest the data of the different responses, and why those may be present." Absolutely. Viewing things in terms of how you think it SHOULD be, in general, can cause a lot of problems. FEELING empathy (which is just a firing of neurons based on a neurotypical's interpretation of the situation) and SHOWING empathy (which can be based on cognitive or emotional empathy) are two different things. "How are you doing?" is spot-on. It's not what most people reflexively do (including myself), but it can be made reflexive with practice.
(I mean, some people don't actually care, they just want to say the thing they think they should say for etiquette, not for compassion. I consider asking to be an act of compassion. Personally, my own acts of compassion is inspired by emotional empathy, but those feelings aren't required for behaviors. I mean, if they were, we wouldn't be hearing about it from a psychopath. :) )
Really, the act of asking is useful in a wide variety of situations where emotions run high. Want to get into a political discussion that's not a shouting match? Ask, and listen. When someone makes a general statement they're often thinking about a specific example. And they are more likely to listen to you in return.
Disclaimer: This is not as emotionally gratifying as a shouting match. This is for when you're aiming for a discussion where you're open to learning something, and want to increase the chance they'll learn something from you, even if you both vehemently disagree in the end. If you're instead looking to express yourself, then by all means go for the shouting match, that's what it's for.
this IS strange. But Athena, many of us have family whose go to position is hostility and "shouting". They do seem at the time to be quite pleased with themselves. That is just before they kick "us" out of their house!!! hahaha
They can be. I mean, if you're "destroying the other side with facts and logic." ;) I don't like them though, because they can also be tiring/hurtful/etc, and I just plain don't feel righteous enough.
As an adult, cognitive empathy is something I've been trying to do more. So asking someone how they feel is better than just assuming their emotions. This makes logical sense yet I don't do this because I'm afraid that ASKING someone how they feel would not be deemed as more socially appropriate than just MAGICALLY KNOWING.
So far I have gotten positive results by simply listening and then saying 'yeah, that sucks'. I have also learned to avoid given in to my tendency to give advice when it's not wanted, and to avoid talking about a similar experience of mine because that would be interpreted as making it about me rather than showing sympathy.
I do not understand why the notion of magical understanding is held aloft as something to be congratulated for when in reality, it is far better to pay attention to the individual and where they are at.
I completely agree with you. I have been plagued by miscommunication my entire life. If magical understanding was so effective than therapists would not need to talk about the importance of open and honest communication. For me, I'm mainly just mimicking the people around me. Plus I've been yelled at for voicing concerns so many times that I see any question coming out of my mouth as a risk to set them off.
wow. are you at the point in life you can get a new crowd? Just that you can write these things down and express them make you an attractive person to me. There are tons of people who would want to be friends with you.
Don't worry, I'm not currently in a situation where I'm being yelled at constantly. Me being scared of getting yelled at is a result of childhood trauma which I am currently working through.
Everyone makes the mistake of assuming that other people think the same way they do. Athena wrote about this is previous posts and it is the reason emotional empathy is limited. The thing is, I was raised by an emotionally immature parent who couldn't handle the fact that I thought differently than her. It felt like my emotions had to be 'approved' by her in order to have the right to feel them. She regularly told me how I 'should' and 'shouldn't' feel about certain things, and she would yell if I said something she didn't like (most of it was minor).
What cognitive empathy requires, is first the emotional maturity to understand that other people have a right to their own emotions, and secondly is open and honest communication which requires trust and respect.
Note: If you decide to comment about my mom, know that nothing she ever did was done out of malice. She legitimately relates to the world like this and has gotten better over the years. I just wish she would have some self awareness.
TS6157. My most profound finding is when I began to love with intentional/cognitive love. For me, personally it was far deeper, profound, sincere and "nothing could destroy it, take it away or make it less." Not to say chemical love/emotional love is less, but nothing has touched my soul as has intentional/cognitive love. I became aware of this many years ago; this knowledge took many years to simmer before enabling me to act upon it in beneficial ways, This awareness is something I treasure; I would go so far as to say it is the best gift of my life. Much of what Athena writes resonates with me. Thank you, too, for your reply.
I really enjoyed that article! Cognitive empathy is rarely adressed properly.
What you said about feeling sadness or relief upon the death of a relative reminded me of the story of a family who had a mentally ill son who was basically in vegetative state. When he died, his family felt relief and secondary to that, guilt, because they believed they were supposed to feel only sadness.
I think they were comparing themselves on this general assumption you were supposed to be sad but same assumption disregard each unique life context.
Next time I will remember to ask: "How are you doing?"
It's actually pretty common for families/caretakers to feel relief in situations like that, and then guilt because they think it must mean they didn't care enough, and that's just not true.
A very instructive and enlightening article, and also very very much needed, Athena, one of your best, in fact, in my opinion. Most of the time, what people understand by "emotional empathy" is nothing more than a sentimental and superficial egocentric projection. I would like to propose a sketch of a table or dial with eight concepts or nuances or levels of empathy, not necessarily in the order in which I have written them, and of course it is open for you all to add other new nuances/levels. I did this by understanding empathy in a very broad sense, not so much as a closed concept but rather as a spectrum in terms of attributes, high or low intensity, intimacy/impartiality, cognitive/emotional, etc:
1. COGNITIVE EMPATHY. Knowing (or, feeling and/or expressing interest in knowing) the other’s mental/emotional state (i.e., what someone else is thinking or feeling).
2. MOTOR MIMICRY. Mirroring/mimicking (for whatever reason) the other’s facial expression, posture, attitude, motricity, etc.
3. SYMPATHY, or, emotional contagion, or even something with a touch of science fiction that we may call “tele(m)pathy”. Coming to really feel as the other, (i.e., not only matching emotions, but literally feeling them, as is the case with numerous documented cases of twin siblings, whether or not they are physically close to each other).
4. PROJECTION. Projecting oneself (almost always involuntarily) in the other’s situation or, more specifically, in what one imagines the other’s situation and/or feelings are (or might be) according to one’s assumptions, preconceptions, predispositions, prejudices, etc.
5. PERSPECTIVE-TAKING. Voluntarily playing at imagining (for whatever reason) what/how the other is supposedly thinking/feeling.
6. SIMULATION. Imagining/speculating what/how one would think/feel in the other’s situation.
7. EMPATHIC DISTRESS OR EMPATHIC JOY (and everything in between). Feeling some sort of vicarious (by proxy) distress or joy at witnessing the other’s distress or joyfullness (and everything in between).
8. EMPATHIC CONCERN (rational/cerebral/intellectual compassion). Feeling for, concerned/challenged by, or (for whatever reason), involved in the other who is (allegedly) suffering.
I am NOT skilled to comment on the 8 spectrum points: But-
I really like this you write: "Most of the time, what people understand by "emotional empathy" is nothing more than a sentimental and superficial egocentric projection"
Thank you!!
In most prisons, they do "parole hearings". Often those in charge say the prisoner has not expressed 'sufficient or sincere remorse'.
In light of your post, aren't those comments rather meaningless on their face, but also reflect a arbitrary viciousness on the part of the captors?
Yes and no. If someone sounds fake, or someone treats murder like it is a bit shoplifting, aren't those descriptors accurate? Tricky part is discerning fakeness and downplaying from different volume of expressivity and also coming clear on whether we are seeing the graveness of the offense objectively, or we are sliding into disproportionate retribution and demand murder punishment for minor offense.
Good article, as always. I've lost many people in my life, and every one is different. In each there is some degree of sadness. I think asking how someone is doing is good advice.
However, I think you give more credit to people then they deserve. Most NT's are ruled by their emotions, and most will deny it. It takes someone not only smart but strong, to put aside their personal feelings and really listen to what someone else is feeling, without judgements based on what they think you should feel.
I think it would be great if cognitive empathy was taught to everyone at a very young age as the first response and not as the after thought.
Thanks for this post Athena. I'm an autist so cognitive empathy is a bit of a challenge for me but your posts seem to come around at the right time for me to read them and really take away important thinking points.
great post. this is probably the same reason i hate people calling me an empath when really i just try very hard to listen and *then* proceed. i also REALLY like the phrasing of "how are you doing?" as well. usually before speaking/offering any type of support i'll ask "how are you coping?" to kind of get a gauge of exactly what was discussed here; if there was a death, what was their relationship w/the person, if there was a crisis, what is their outlook on it, etc., but i actually like "how are you doing" much better so thank you for including that.
Interesting that people think that you are an empath, when in reality you're paying attention to what they themselves could pay attention to, and see what you see.
perhaps people confuse listening skills with being an empath, even. (i also think the term is so thrown around - especially in a broader sense of media, i.e. a public figure making an apology they don't mean directly following an incident only because it got publicity and saying, "i'm such an empath, i would never intend to hurt people," blah blah BS - so i doubt a single group of people could entirely agree on the definition)
Yes I agree
Very good advice. Obviously, “How are you doing?” can be said in many ways. Obviously in instances of hardship, loss and grief the inflection shouldn’t be “So...how ya doin’?” But closer to “How are YOU?” with an open - not flat - tone. Your words and tone should show concern and caring for the other person without being dismissive of whom or what was lost. If you had feelings for the one whose gone too then this is a bond you two already have. But even if you’d never met the other - and even if you absolutely despised the ‘lost’ one - you can still show that you care about your friend, sibling, etc. Either way, the best thing to say - at least at the start - is “How are you /YOU doing?”
Yes, precisely
Yes, ideally, but things get messy IRl.
TY Richard. I didn't consider that. I practiced a few times and look forward to try it.
Best wishes and thanks again.
Another good one could be "Do you want to talk about it?".
Thank you for articulating that so well! I've always felt a little disingenuous when talking to people because I generally use cognitive empathy, rather than emotional empathy, to respond to their emotionally-loaded situations. The reality is that even though *they* may be distressed, it doesn't mean *I* am. So if I responded only based on my emotions, I would burn through friendships really quickly.
I know what you mean. With some people, if you aren't as upset as they are they take that to mean that you don't think that they have a reason to be upset in the first place.
I think that might be inevitable. People will take it as a sign that you don't 'get it', which is alienating.
I dunno, from the POV of the friend I'd consider it a good thing. At the times I've been really emotional, the best case was to have someone demonstrating that they cared, but being calm and not being dragged down by my own feelings. Often I'll keep things to myself because I don't want the other person to get all emotional. I can't speak for others, but there are definitely some of us out there who appreciate cognitive empathy specifically.
It depends so heavily on the person that you are dealing with. Some people are like you and prefer this approach, but others require you to match their energy or they feel like you aren't really understanding why they are upset. Surely if you knew, you would be upset as well is their thinking.
This is a really interesting article. Cognitive empathy is sometimes described as fake empathy with emotional empathy being described as genuine empathy. I do get the general inference behind these descriptions but similarly, I think that an individual with high levels of cognitive empathy can actually ‘beat’ my emotional empathy in terms of offering support in the right way.
For example, I had a discussion with a narcissist about Prince Harry. The assumption during the conversation was that Meghan Markle is a narcissist. My view, even with an understanding of narcissistic abuse and how it changes the behaviour of the victim, is that Harry has overstepped the mark. I no longer have any sympathy for him. At all. The narcissist using cognitive empathy and with a superior understanding of narcissistic abuse and what it does to the victim, was able to express ‘sympathy’ for Harry and maintain that Harry’s poor behaviour is as a direct result of the influence of the narcissist. As such Harry remains worthy of patience and sympathy.
In this way cognitive empathy appears to outstrip my emotional empathy. I don’t feel sympathy and I can’t bring myself to behave in a sympathetic way. The narcissist with cognitive empathy therefore appears more sympathetic than I do. Is he though? My only concern there is that my view feels genuine, the view expressed by the narcissist less so. I’m not sure I can verbalise properly what I mean by that.
From another angle I would have to disagree in part with the description of how emotional empathy operates. I have definitely seen people assume similar as regards suicide and agree with what you describe they are actually doing in terms of emotional projection. I do think though that there are some people with high levels of emotional empathy that don’t do this. They wait, ascertain the feelings of the friend / relative affected by the suicide before offering anything by way of emotional support.
As another example, I have a friend going through a very hard time currently. Recently out of a relationship with a narcissist. When I see him, I agree I am searching facial expressions, body language, tone, phrasing etc to establish exactly where he’s at emotionally. Why not ask him? I do, and he does his best to tell me, but even he cannot explain clearly exactly how he is feeling or the reasons why. In situations like this I actively reach out emotionally and sometimes I am able to take in exactly how he is feeling. His sadness for example is felt by me as his sadness. I know it belongs to him but it stays with me for hours sometimes days afterwards. A sadness that is his, not mine. It isn’t that I feel sad for him, I do, but that’s my sadness for him, this is altogether different. It isn’t just his sadness I feel, it’s his guilt, self blame, shame and many other emotions that blend together in one hugely painful and almost indiscernible mass. I believe this to be emotional contagion. It doesn’t happen with every individual and in every conversation, nor would I ever want it to, but when it does happen, it’s unmistakeable.
So this article interests me because I very much understand the points being made and they are forceful points as regards the validity of sophisticated cognitive empathy wielded by a non malignant individual. My own experiences though in certain circumstances with certain people, lead me to believe that there is more going on with emotional empathy than is fully understood as of yet.
Apologies for the long comment! Thank you for this article, I enjoyed reading it.
What you describe regarding those with emotional empathy and their more measured response to suicide is an excellent example of emotional and cognitive empathy working hand in hand.
Athena,
Thank you again for your consideration of my comment. I’m enjoying your blog. It’s quite rare to find a space where opinions and ideas can be shared honestly and constructively. Social media and media in general allows little room for debate, it’s encouraging to find it alive and kicking here!
Social media is predatory by nature
I learn so much from the thoughtful people on this blog.
TS6157. This is a superb follow-up to Athena's article. I have experienced what you describe as "one hugely painful and almost indiscernible mass" and it is unmistakeable. Most often, though, I do not take the time or want that level of discernment. Thank you for your lengthy comment.
Hi NB,
Thank you for your reply and I’m glad my comment resonated with you. I find the subject of empathy truly fascinating. I think the subject becomes more emotive when we look at chemical love versus intentional / cognitive love. Love is a tough subject. Many assume that their idea of love and what it means is the only idea of love, often revolving around chemical love. If we look at ideas such as mutual trust and respect, equal consideration of needs, companionship etc, then intentional / cognitive love covers these aspects equally as well as chemical love, so it seems unfair to simply dismiss it as fake or somehow of less value. In some ways there is more value in intentional love because it is so considered.
I would hate to lose my emotional empathy, it’s very much part of who I am, but I can also see very real value in cognitive empathy.
To me, chemical love alone is like using your partner as a source of pleasure alone - or at least focusing on your own. That’s a slippery slope, at best. When one does that, the partner starts to feel used and resentful. If you add the loss or weakening of trust for your partner (since the chance for cheating and abandonment is very real) the show’s over. I’ve never cheated, but I have been cheated on. No one wants that kind of emotional pain. Cheaters, to me, are just looking for the intense high they no longer feel with their partner. They’re the crackheads of love. More often than not, once the cheating itself becomes routine the cheaters see each other and what they did as just plain wrong.
Love the statement “Cheaters are the crackheads of love”. You might well be right. You could look at it two ways. Either they cheat because they want that chemical rush, or they cheat because their emotional empathy for their partner has been eroded. The love and respect they once had for that partner has eroded to a point where they place their own wants far above the combined needs of the partnership. So in some ways the question is, which empathy safeguards love and commitment to a partner more effectively over time?
I think the ‘honeymoon period’ when partners can’t keep their hands off one another, can’t stand to be apart for a day etc is driven by chemical love. Once the relationship progresses beyond that point, it settles and becomes less passionate perhaps but solidifies into something truly meaningful and enduring, then this is a more cognitive / intentional kind of love.
If a long term relationship is rocked by infidelity I think it might be a combination of a failing in the cognitive love for the partner combined with a chemical attraction for the third party. You could argue then that someone who doesn’t experience chemical love / attraction wouldn’t have had their head turned by the third party and would have remained faithful!
I agree that cheaters are after that chemical high and similarly there is a real selfishness about it, which you allude to in your first sentence.
If I’m honest, I think the thing that I find most difficult to accept as regards cognitive empathy alone, is the ability of an individual to walk away and move on easily in the event that the relationship ends. The lack of a sense of loss or regret. It’s also a lack of being ‘needed’.
If the relationship ends, I at least want a bit of hand wringing!! Emotional hand wringing, yes, definitely, that’s definitely required!
Yep.
Thank you for this wonderful explanation. I agree entirely that with those people with whom it does happen, it's unmistakeable. As someone whose (broken) emotional empathy is patchy, unpredictable, and compromised, I nevertheless agree with you wholeheartedly about its worth in specific situations. This is not to say that Athena is wrong, just inevitably incomplete.
TY for the "long" comment! I am guilty of that too!!
So interesting of your strong feeling of MM and the prince.
Only a month or so ago, I saw her in "Suits' the TV show. Before then I simply didn't know who she was at all. It seems you use them as a way to work out your own feelings and such?
You didn't specifically say but clearly you embody what Athena writes: "You have to be a perpetual student if you want to understand those around you."
Way to go!!
Hello Tim,
Thank you for your reply and for your encouragement. I really appreciate being able to share my thoughts openly here.
Yes, I think a better understanding of people can help us make sense of a lot of what we see in the news as well as helping us better navigate our personal interactions.
Harry and Meghan are very polarising characters and they elicit strong opinion, particularly here in the UK. They are relevant to me personally as I was caught out by a narcissist online. He rocked my world and I was forced to examine both his behaviours and my own. I needed to understand my part in it and be honest with myself about the reasons why I was vulnerable at the time and what I could do to ensure that I’m not vulnerable in the future.
That experience wasn’t pleasant but I have learned a lot as a direct result of it and continue to learn. Thank you again for your kind words Tim.
You are welcome!! Even though it is so hard, to face these things, the process builds us. No matter where we start!!
If you haven't already, it is like a tall person. looking at short people: You realize the flaws of others from your own stronger self. It just "is". Maybe you see that now? You were vulnerable -then, at that time- but not now!!! You just "aren't" anymore! Wow!!! Way to go!!
I do feel stronger now, you’re right. It took a long time for me to fully pick through it all and understand that dynamic clearly. Too long in many respects, but I am definitely taller now than I was then!
The whole experience reawakened my love of learning, so there was a positive gained from it. Narcissism is a broad subject and there is a lot of conflicting information that complicates matters. Similarly, now that I am trying to understand more about ASPD and psychopathy there is so much stigma and false information out there, it’s very difficult to form a clear view. I have been reading past articles that Athena has written, debunking myths and highlighting questionable research. I can totally understand her frustration. Narcissism is probably better understood than psychopathy, there really is a mountain of misinformation when it comes to the latter.
If it isn’t too personal a question, what brought you here Tim?
YES!! now combine your present understanding and your potential which you have began? Where can you now? Anywhere you want? idk. Maybe only you can answer.
As to your personal question, "You have to be a perpetual student if you want to understand those around you."
Until I read Athena, I didn't know there were people who thought my thoughts.
Hi Tim,
Yes, I see what you mean here. It’s quite a relief sometimes to discover that others see the world in a similar way and enlightening sometimes to discover that they don’t!
florbow, florbow, let's hear it for florbow!!!
;-)
Sorry, couldn't resist. This is a great post. A case in point, I didn't actually love my mother. And when she died, what I grieved was that I would never have the mother I hoped she might actually become.
That must have been a difficult thing to come to terms with.
It was. And I didn't even realize that was what I was struggling with until after her death. She was 90 years old at the time and I was 70. The injury that separated us occurred when I was two and a half. So an entire lifetime with a wounded part of me hoping she would "come through at last." And your "cognitive empathy" comment was spot on. Thanks, I appreciate that.
That is quite unfortunate.
True. OTOH, it wasn't like 99% awful throughout my life. I started various therapy experiences back in my 20's and "made progress" both on this and other toxic stuff from my childhood. It's just that this underlying issue (along with a few others) never got fully resolved -- never even got *recognized* in a way -- until after her death. And OTOH#2, I'm glad I did finally get to a point where I recognized it and resolved it. There's plenty of folks who take these kinds of things to the grave. (And have miserable lives throughout.)
Good grief yes. Two and a half, an age at which kids were presumed to forget. The injury as an infant, and all the brain (mis)development that follows. It seems hard to believe now that not so long ago people were counselled to just put the past behind them and 'get over it'. Like that was ever gonna work.
Indeed. "just get over it" does not work.
That's how it is for me and my father, and I am already preparing. The grief will be selfish and for me.
If the similarity in our situations includes the hope that your father "might come through for you," then I have a suggestion -- based on 20/20 hindsight. My relationship with my father was also ... really really messy and, on one side of the balance scale, toxic. There were actually three sides of this particular balance scale: one pure toxic, one surface good but also a power-messy toxic, and a third truly nurturing. The problem was, the ratios of who was present was mostly the surface good, with altogether too much of pure toxic, and the truly nurturing mostly kind of underground. However, during the last years and especially the last month of my father's life, I think it's quite possible that he and I might have reached through to the truly nurturing -- IF I HAD ACTUALLY SOUGHT THAT OUT. Of course, at the time, I was still so frozen at the thought of doing any reaching out (to anyone) that I didn't do that.
My suggestion to you is: if you feel hope that he might "come through" and become the father you wanted, think about whether that's truly possible (based on something you can see inside his core). If it is, consider whether or not you *might* want to reach out in some way for a conversation. (And of course what the impact would be on you if that went badly, which would be a good reason not to do it.)
OTOH, if you are confident that the balance is toxic and no real hope for having the father you wanted and needed, then hey, "I've got your six" as the saying goes.
Mostly I'm saying this because what kept me "in" the relationships with both my mother and father was that hope. If that hope had gone bye-bye, I would have "moved on" many decades earlier.
Your comments are always full of wisdom and understanding. However, I do not think your ideas necessarily apply to me and my father. He was a teenage concentration camp survivor, and survived the sinking of the ship Cap Arcona, so let's go easy, but he was also an asshole person because it seems some people just are. He was massively emotionally abusive to my mother, which impacted us kids greatly. I have no deathbed hopes. I wished him dead long ago to free my mother. And yet, when he goes to hospital, in his 90s, I am once again phone panicking. Go figure. I am lying about my 'love'. He is almost deaf and almost blind and pity just kicks in. I don't pretend to understand it. I hate the bastard for what he did to ruin my life, and yet, pity kicks in big time. Oh man.
Hi MC,
I don’t think your empathy is ‘broken’ or ‘patchy’, certainly not from what you have described here. I think you see your father suffering, old, deaf, almost blind and you have compassion for that. It might not be anything at all to do with the fact this man is your father. Possibly more to do with the fact that you would have compassion for anyone, dying alone in similar circumstances. It sounds like compassion and a sense of decency are driving your behaviours more than any familial bond.
I agree with Wyn, your behaviours say more about you than they do about him. You can only do what you feel is right. You have to look yourself in the mirror once this man is gone, so I think it’s important to stay true to your own values as Wyn said.
Thank you for your kind words. My empathy did get better over the years and I think that's why I appreciate what Athena says about the importance of cognitive empathy. In the past my empathy was very erratic and I look back on times where I just didn't understand and was indifferent to others pain and was self absorbed and I am appalled. But at the same time I know how and why it happened and it was not my fault. But it was my job to fix it.
You are correct, I have to do what I think is the right thing by my values.
I think on some level when we cry for the suffering and mortality of others we are crying for ourselves. The sadness of the human condition.
You’re welcome MC. I’m happy that you managed to retrieve your empathic nature and as regards your father, I hope that you achieve closure, in whatever for that may take.
Thank you! "Full of wisdom and understanding" -- you have made my day ;-)
Indeed, "go figure". Turns out one can have contradictory feelings, even more-or-less simultaneously. In my teens, I hated my dad--but also was desperate to keep him in my life--but was also unable/unwilling to be aware of that "needing him". When a friend suggested that I needed to "cut the knot," ie, the relationship, I dissociated rather than face how I felt in that moment.
What I found so surprising after my parents' deaths was how much unfinished "biz" I still had with each of them. I had thought that "stuff" was mostly settled, and pretty much a couple of decades since settled. That is, I knew I had lingering issues, but the depth of them surprised me. So I think we mostly just don't know what we don't know.
Having pity for someone who, yeah, sounds pretty despicable (understatement?), I think that says more about you and who you are and your values than it says about him. You recognize that he is suffering and feel some compassion for that. Sounds like you are a decent human being and a good friend to have.
In my life, the people who bother me the most are people with a high level of emotional empathy. They always assume I'm feeling things I'm not feeling and try to help me with problems that don't even exist in my life, just because they think the situation I'm in is bad for THEM. And no matter how many times I explain that I'm not bothered by what they think I'm bothered with, they think I'm lying to be nice and get angry when I don't accept their help.
I know just what you mean, and it can be quite tiresome
People... that's why I keep to myself.
You hit the nail on the head. This was a difficult truth to come face to face with, but thankfully I did. Learning; then the hard part, how to resist offering help with a problem that did not exist for them. The question to that person is paramount -- "how are you doing" -- listening with authentic concern, is a must for true understanding. If we are truly offering support, there are times we cannot fully "walk in their shoes." Perhaps just asking the question is what that person might need.
"Cast away your beliefs about how that should affect a person, and start to ingest the data of the different responses, and why those may be present." Absolutely. Viewing things in terms of how you think it SHOULD be, in general, can cause a lot of problems. FEELING empathy (which is just a firing of neurons based on a neurotypical's interpretation of the situation) and SHOWING empathy (which can be based on cognitive or emotional empathy) are two different things. "How are you doing?" is spot-on. It's not what most people reflexively do (including myself), but it can be made reflexive with practice.
(I mean, some people don't actually care, they just want to say the thing they think they should say for etiquette, not for compassion. I consider asking to be an act of compassion. Personally, my own acts of compassion is inspired by emotional empathy, but those feelings aren't required for behaviors. I mean, if they were, we wouldn't be hearing about it from a psychopath. :) )
Really, the act of asking is useful in a wide variety of situations where emotions run high. Want to get into a political discussion that's not a shouting match? Ask, and listen. When someone makes a general statement they're often thinking about a specific example. And they are more likely to listen to you in return.
Disclaimer: This is not as emotionally gratifying as a shouting match. This is for when you're aiming for a discussion where you're open to learning something, and want to increase the chance they'll learn something from you, even if you both vehemently disagree in the end. If you're instead looking to express yourself, then by all means go for the shouting match, that's what it's for.
Are shouting matches emotionally gratifying? That's strange to me.
this IS strange. But Athena, many of us have family whose go to position is hostility and "shouting". They do seem at the time to be quite pleased with themselves. That is just before they kick "us" out of their house!!! hahaha
They can be. I mean, if you're "destroying the other side with facts and logic." ;) I don't like them though, because they can also be tiring/hurtful/etc, and I just plain don't feel righteous enough.
Makes sense.
Mostly they are a bad move but sometimes they can move things forward,
As an adult, cognitive empathy is something I've been trying to do more. So asking someone how they feel is better than just assuming their emotions. This makes logical sense yet I don't do this because I'm afraid that ASKING someone how they feel would not be deemed as more socially appropriate than just MAGICALLY KNOWING.
So far I have gotten positive results by simply listening and then saying 'yeah, that sucks'. I have also learned to avoid given in to my tendency to give advice when it's not wanted, and to avoid talking about a similar experience of mine because that would be interpreted as making it about me rather than showing sympathy.
I do not understand why the notion of magical understanding is held aloft as something to be congratulated for when in reality, it is far better to pay attention to the individual and where they are at.
I completely agree with you. I have been plagued by miscommunication my entire life. If magical understanding was so effective than therapists would not need to talk about the importance of open and honest communication. For me, I'm mainly just mimicking the people around me. Plus I've been yelled at for voicing concerns so many times that I see any question coming out of my mouth as a risk to set them off.
Just do what you consider appropriate .
Other people's reactions belong to them.
Stay true to yourself.
P S... walk away from those that are aggressive towards you.
wow. are you at the point in life you can get a new crowd? Just that you can write these things down and express them make you an attractive person to me. There are tons of people who would want to be friends with you.
Don't worry, I'm not currently in a situation where I'm being yelled at constantly. Me being scared of getting yelled at is a result of childhood trauma which I am currently working through.
Everyone makes the mistake of assuming that other people think the same way they do. Athena wrote about this is previous posts and it is the reason emotional empathy is limited. The thing is, I was raised by an emotionally immature parent who couldn't handle the fact that I thought differently than her. It felt like my emotions had to be 'approved' by her in order to have the right to feel them. She regularly told me how I 'should' and 'shouldn't' feel about certain things, and she would yell if I said something she didn't like (most of it was minor).
What cognitive empathy requires, is first the emotional maturity to understand that other people have a right to their own emotions, and secondly is open and honest communication which requires trust and respect.
Note: If you decide to comment about my mom, know that nothing she ever did was done out of malice. She legitimately relates to the world like this and has gotten better over the years. I just wish she would have some self awareness.
Trying to ♡ your post but seem unable to do so.
Ah, there is goes!
It's not magical, but it can serve very well in that time period before people mature intellectually and better stuff can take over.
Wow: Ellie you sound like a really good person!! Good for you!! Very insightful things you write.
I long ago picked up one asking "How are you doing?" for situations like that. At worst they'll tell you but that's alright
Also at best they'll tell you.
I agree with you both, depending on the situation.
Quite true, depending on the situation.
TS6157. My most profound finding is when I began to love with intentional/cognitive love. For me, personally it was far deeper, profound, sincere and "nothing could destroy it, take it away or make it less." Not to say chemical love/emotional love is less, but nothing has touched my soul as has intentional/cognitive love. I became aware of this many years ago; this knowledge took many years to simmer before enabling me to act upon it in beneficial ways, This awareness is something I treasure; I would go so far as to say it is the best gift of my life. Much of what Athena writes resonates with me. Thank you, too, for your reply.
NB,
It’s encouraging to read how impactful you have found this additional understanding. You have provided me with food for thought, thank you.
When I was 28, my father died from a frontal lobe tumor, aka glioblastoma
Our relationship ended kinda healed, though not really
Relief + a huge weight leaving forever = how I felt following his death, even prior the funeral .
I really enjoyed that article! Cognitive empathy is rarely adressed properly.
What you said about feeling sadness or relief upon the death of a relative reminded me of the story of a family who had a mentally ill son who was basically in vegetative state. When he died, his family felt relief and secondary to that, guilt, because they believed they were supposed to feel only sadness.
I think they were comparing themselves on this general assumption you were supposed to be sad but same assumption disregard each unique life context.
Next time I will remember to ask: "How are you doing?"
That's unfortunate for that family. They shouldn't feel guilty for being relieved.
It's actually pretty common for families/caretakers to feel relief in situations like that, and then guilt because they think it must mean they didn't care enough, and that's just not true.
Agreed
So basically I must practice imagining being in someone else's shoes and become more aware over time?
Yes, but also you have to have a working understanding of those shoes so you can truly see their perspective.
Yes, which takes a bit of listening and imagining and practice, quite true.
Well, not just imagining, but asking/finding out what the other person's shoes are actually walking through. And yes. Practicing that.
You learn a lot just by asking. Just practice asking, and imagining will follow naturally.
Yes, quite true.
Ditto Athena's comment - quite true.
A very instructive and enlightening article, and also very very much needed, Athena, one of your best, in fact, in my opinion. Most of the time, what people understand by "emotional empathy" is nothing more than a sentimental and superficial egocentric projection. I would like to propose a sketch of a table or dial with eight concepts or nuances or levels of empathy, not necessarily in the order in which I have written them, and of course it is open for you all to add other new nuances/levels. I did this by understanding empathy in a very broad sense, not so much as a closed concept but rather as a spectrum in terms of attributes, high or low intensity, intimacy/impartiality, cognitive/emotional, etc:
1. COGNITIVE EMPATHY. Knowing (or, feeling and/or expressing interest in knowing) the other’s mental/emotional state (i.e., what someone else is thinking or feeling).
2. MOTOR MIMICRY. Mirroring/mimicking (for whatever reason) the other’s facial expression, posture, attitude, motricity, etc.
3. SYMPATHY, or, emotional contagion, or even something with a touch of science fiction that we may call “tele(m)pathy”. Coming to really feel as the other, (i.e., not only matching emotions, but literally feeling them, as is the case with numerous documented cases of twin siblings, whether or not they are physically close to each other).
4. PROJECTION. Projecting oneself (almost always involuntarily) in the other’s situation or, more specifically, in what one imagines the other’s situation and/or feelings are (or might be) according to one’s assumptions, preconceptions, predispositions, prejudices, etc.
5. PERSPECTIVE-TAKING. Voluntarily playing at imagining (for whatever reason) what/how the other is supposedly thinking/feeling.
6. SIMULATION. Imagining/speculating what/how one would think/feel in the other’s situation.
7. EMPATHIC DISTRESS OR EMPATHIC JOY (and everything in between). Feeling some sort of vicarious (by proxy) distress or joy at witnessing the other’s distress or joyfullness (and everything in between).
8. EMPATHIC CONCERN (rational/cerebral/intellectual compassion). Feeling for, concerned/challenged by, or (for whatever reason), involved in the other who is (allegedly) suffering.
This is an interesting list
I am NOT skilled to comment on the 8 spectrum points: But-
I really like this you write: "Most of the time, what people understand by "emotional empathy" is nothing more than a sentimental and superficial egocentric projection"
Thank you!!
In most prisons, they do "parole hearings". Often those in charge say the prisoner has not expressed 'sufficient or sincere remorse'.
In light of your post, aren't those comments rather meaningless on their face, but also reflect a arbitrary viciousness on the part of the captors?
Yes and no. If someone sounds fake, or someone treats murder like it is a bit shoplifting, aren't those descriptors accurate? Tricky part is discerning fakeness and downplaying from different volume of expressivity and also coming clear on whether we are seeing the graveness of the offense objectively, or we are sliding into disproportionate retribution and demand murder punishment for minor offense.
Good article, as always. I've lost many people in my life, and every one is different. In each there is some degree of sadness. I think asking how someone is doing is good advice.
However, I think you give more credit to people then they deserve. Most NT's are ruled by their emotions, and most will deny it. It takes someone not only smart but strong, to put aside their personal feelings and really listen to what someone else is feeling, without judgements based on what they think you should feel.
I think it would be great if cognitive empathy was taught to everyone at a very young age as the first response and not as the after thought.
I do think that practicing it is a good idea.
I agree
Thanks for this post Athena. I'm an autist so cognitive empathy is a bit of a challenge for me but your posts seem to come around at the right time for me to read them and really take away important thinking points.
Thank you again for this.
I am glad that they are useful to you