Are people without much imagination more likely to hurt others?

[Chimerical]

This is just a theory I have. I tend to think that if you have a good imagination, you will have a better idea of the potential consequences of your actions and how other people can be hurt by what you do.

Perhaps I'm equating imagination with empathy...not sure.

I've gradually come to the conclusion that most people don't hurt others out of wickedness or evil intent, but simply because they're thoughtless (and selfish...and perhaps unimaginative). Unfortunately, the way that works out, it ends up being just about as bad as malicious intent.

Thoughts?

Imagination is most likely how torture devices were thought up.

 

[SilkRoad]

I think the (very sensible) consensus is that it's much more about empathy than imagination, since imagination can be used to really evil ends too. Maybe empathy is imaginative sympathy...

 

[Totenkindly]

Perhaps I'm equating imagination with empathy...not sure.

That, although I think imagination aids empathy.

Sometimes people hurt other people because they don't even perceive they are hurting them.

I've gradually come to the conclusion that most people don't hurt others out of wickedness or evil intent, but simply because they're thoughtless (and selfish...and perhaps unimaginative). Unfortunately, the way that works out, it ends up being just about as bad as malicious intent.

Generally, I agree. A large chunk of hurtful behavior seems to me to be a lack of vision, not necessarily a lack of love. However, even if someone perceives another person's perspectives and feelings, they are still left with a choice of how to respond to and incorporate or deny that perspective into their own behavior. So selfishness and cowardice and hubris also play roles here.

I don't think so, because you could equally argue that people with little imagination can easily understand the concrete consequences of their actions (i.e. hurting others).

I tend to filter a lot through my family experiences.

Besides being rather unimaginative, my family is also religious, so they have an ethical system that does not spawn internally, it's learned and imposed OVER the natural ebb and flow of life and (to me) natural psychological growth/health.

I'm in a situation now where they've been hurting me for a long time because their idea of what love and truth is leads them to do things that I find unloving and divisive.

They're very aware of how their behavior might come across... buy they do not care because they believe their religious tenets are correct and thus the "higher good" and "most loving behavior." I'm just collateral damage in a sense, although I suppose they think how they're behaving is good for me too in the long run.

I think the (very sensible) consensus is that it's much more about empathy than imagination, since imagination can be used to really evil ends too. Maybe empathy is imaginative sympathy...

While maybe the words are not technically defined this way, I see sympathy as actually feeling what someone is feeling, while empathy is more about projecting yourself into someone else's shoes. This can trigger some sympathy, but empathy is the more abstracted form of the two.

While feelings are not technically F and imagination is not technically iNtuition, one could generalize and say that sympathy and empathy are both interpersonal forms of sensed connection but going through somewhat different pathways. (It also could explain why the STJs usually get a bad rap for not being particularly sensitive unless they are consciously trying.)