Sympathy vs Empathy. Why is empathy more highly regarded?

[Ginkgo]

Sometimes helping others vent emulates empathy where none is actually needed. Taking action to "fix" a tragedy may be counterproductive for everyone.

I don't think empathy for others, in its truest form, even exists. You'll never be able to enter the microcosm that is another individual to see what their emotional states are. "Empathy" is only an illusion adopted by those who've had similar experiences and think they're on the same page, which they might be, though they're actually reading entirely different books.

Sympathy is a broader "What would most people feel in this situation". It's pretty easy to have a sense of sympathy for someone who've having their limbs sawed off.

I don't think one is superior to the other. They just are.

 

[Resonance]

Sometimes helping others vent emulates empathy where none is actually needed. Taking action to "fix" a tragedy may be counterproductive for everyone.

I don't think empathy for others, in its truest form, even exists. You'll never be able to enter the microcosm that is another individual to see what their emotional states are.

We're all human. All it takes is imagination.

It's harder the weaker the connection, for sure, but it's definitely possible.

 

[Ginkgo]

We're all human. All it takes is imagination.

It's harder the weaker the connection, for sure, but it's definitely possible.

I don't get it.

 

[Elfboy]

sympathy is emotional. it's a feeling of sadness and a compelling urge to do something to help them or comfort the,
empathy is intuitive. it is an understanding of why the person feels the way they do, regardless of how it makes you feel. that being said, empathy often does lead to sympathy.

example: I empathize with someone who beats his wife. I understand that he is stressed out, unaware of personal boundaries , strongly desires external control and is under the belief that his wife is a subordinate. that being said, I certainly don't sympathize with him, I want his ass thrown in jail :yes

 

[Resonance]

I don't get it.

Yes you do, I can tell ;D

sympathy is emotional. it's a feeling of sadness and a compelling urge to do something to help them or comfort the,
empathy is intuitive. it is an understanding of why the person feels the way they do, regardless of how it makes you feel. that being said, empathy often does lead to sympathy.

example: I empathize with someone who beats his wife. I understand that he is stressed out, unaware of personal boundaries , strongly desires external control and is under the belief that his wife is a subordinate. that being said, I certainly don't sympathize with him, I want his ass thrown in jail :yes

hm, I always thought it was the other way around D: actually, I don't know.

 

[Ginkgo]

Yes you do, I can tell ;D

 

[Within]

 

[slowriot]

I've always been confused by the concepts of sympathy and empathy. It seems like society highly praises empathy but doesn't care much for sympathy, which I think is opposite of what it should be. I see the word empathy being used everywhere and how it's so important for people to be empathetic (for instance, health care professionals). If you're not perceived as empathetic, you're shunned off as being "cold". But what about sympathy? I have a strong Fi and am very capable of feeling sympathy for others. I enjoy helping them out, even if I don't understand exactly why they are feeling vulnerable, sad, angry, etc. in a given situation. Of course sometimes I can't think of a way to help even if I want to, so I guess that comes off as cold? Then an empathetic person steps into the spotlight and can make the person feel better without even offering any help (other than understanding). For example, empathy seems to be a highly valued trait in physicians. I mean, sure, it would be nice for the doctor to be able to step in your shoes. But if it's empathy that everyone is after, the doctor doesn't necessarily have to feel an obligation to help you. They could take a "sucks for them" sort of attitude. Wouldn't sympathy be a better trait? Who cares if a doctor can RELATE to how you feel, as long as they feel sad for you and have an urge to help you even though they don't necessarily understand your situation.

So I think sympathy should be more highly regarded since empathy doesn't even entail helping others but rather simply understanding where they are coming from. But I never hear people being praised for being sympathetic, or being told they should strive to become more sympathetic.

I guess what I'm wondering is why it seems that society values empathy so much and sympathy just doesn't matter as much. Empathetic people are more likely to be very selfish, but sympathetic people are more inclined to being selfless, no?

it seems you mess up the meanings. Sympathy is the basis/motivator for empathy. To be empathic you need good listening skills and deeply feel and understand what the person you listen to say. So you could say that empathy is the end result of sympathy.

Empathy is not

- My father just died.

- Oh I know how you feel since I lost a hamster last month.

Empathy is selflessly giving of yourself, because you understand what they need, while sympathy can end as the above example. I find sympathy to be an easy excuse not to do anything and be inert to a situation. But still you need sympathy as a motivator to do something for others (ie. empathy), I agree on that.

 

[Ginkgo]

Jung:

Empathy. An introjection of the object, based on the unconscious projection of subjective contents. (Compare identification.)

Empathy presupposes a subjective attitude of confidence, or trustfulness towards the object. It is a readiness to meet the object halfway, a subjective assimilation that brings about a good understanding between subject and object, or at least simulates it. ["The Type Problem in Aesthetics," CW 6, par. 489.]

In contrast to abstraction, associated with introversion, empathy corresponds to the attitude of extraversion.

The man with the empathetic attitude finds himself . . . in a world that needs his subjective feeling to give it life and soul. He animates it with himself. [ Ibid., par. 492.]

 

[fecaleagle]

sympathy is emotional. it's a feeling of sadness and a compelling urge to do something to help them or comfort the,
empathy is intuitive. it is an understanding of why the person feels the way they do, regardless of how it makes you feel. that being said, empathy often does lead to sympathy.

example: I empathize with someone who beats his wife. I understand that he is stressed out, unaware of personal boundaries , strongly desires external control and is under the belief that his wife is a subordinate. that being said, I certainly don't sympathize with him, I want his ass thrown in jail :yes

Interesting...I never considered empathy in this manner. I cannot bring myself to empathize with the man and it frustrates me deeply that you do haha, but it's hard for me to understand exactly why it bothers me. I can logically tell myself basically what you said, but I don't make any sort of emotional connection and I do not attempt to "understand" him. For instance I would never say "I understand that he is stressed out" like you did. I would think of the motives you mentioned but ONLY if someone asked me to and it is in a detached manner; the impulse to do it naturally just isn't there. I would skip the whole putting myself in his shoes part and I would call him an asshole, tell him I don't care why he did it, and would want him to be punished since he is hurting his wife. So I guess you feel empathy for the husband and sympathy for the wife, but I only feel sympathy for the wife. So it seems like most people do feel sympathy, but only some feel empathy plus sympathy.

Could it be possible for some people to just try to understand why the man did it but care less whether he is punished or not? Like a fellow wife beater and woman hater could feel empathy for the man but think the woman deserves it. But I guess then there still would be sympathy, but directed towards the man?

Thanks but that chart is just an explanation of how the brain arrives at an empathetic response, and a far too much of a rudimentary breakdown of it to be of use to me.

it seems you mess up the meanings. Sympathy is the basis/motivator for empathy. To be empathic you need good listening skills and deeply feel and understand what the person you listen to say. So you could say that empathy is the end result of sympathy.

So you think empathy follows sympathy? Whereas some others have mentioned the opposite. I'm struggling to see how an urge to help someone (sympathy) can come before understanding their situation (empathy). Or are you saying that the definitions are reversed?

 

[slowriot]

So you think empathy follows sympathy? Whereas some others have mentioned the opposite. I'm struggling to see how an urge to help someone (sympathy) can come before understanding their situation (empathy). Or are you saying that the definitions are reversed?

I tried to put this as clearly as possible, so I dont think you need an answer. Lets just say I have sympathy for your lack of understanding

 

[Coriolis]

So you think empathy follows sympathy? Whereas some others have mentioned the opposite. I'm struggling to see how an urge to help someone (sympathy) can come before understanding their situation (empathy). Or are you saying that the definitions are reversed?

Definitions aside, I can see how the highlighted sequence can happen. It all hinges on what kind of understanding is meant. As an example, say a natural disaster occurs, and the news reports mention that there is a need for volunteers with specific skills (e.g. medical, construction, etc.). A person with such skills might understand the nature of the need and recognize that they can help. They may respond out of a general sense of charity, patriotism, or even the desire for a new challenge, or a break from routine. When they arrive at the scene and see firsthand the plight of affected people, however, they may find they connect emotionally with the situation.

It basically comes down to why people help others. I am usually not motivated by an emotional connection to the people receiving help. If that comes, it is usually after I have become involved.

 

[Chiharu]

Okay I think I might be able to answer your question.

So, hypothetically, something bad has happened to a friend/acquaintance of yours. You've never had the same experience.

So A) you feel bad for them. It sucks that they're suffering. You might try to figure out something you can do to help. You feel SYMPATHETIC.

Or, B) You connect with them on the basis of similar feeling you've felt before. (For example, you may never have lost your father, but you've lost someone who meant a lot to you, or you can imagine how it would feel to do so, or you just connect to the sight or mental image of anyone in pain etc.) You UNDERSTAND how they feel. You might be driven to try and figure out something you can do to help because it's what you would want them to do if you were in their place. You EMPATHIZE with them.

Obviously, you most likely feel a combination of both.

Many people would prefer to accept the help of someone who empathizes, rather than sympathizes with them. It doesn't offend their pride as much. An empathetic connection can seem more profound than a sympathetic one... compare accepting financial help from an organization founded by a once-poor man to accepting financial help from a wealthy religious group who has no idea what you're going through. It's true that sympathy seems more selfless in origin, but sympathy often makes the giver feel better rather than the receiver. Sympathy can also more easily lead to self-righteousness, I would think.

 

[Coriolis]

Not sure you are addressing me, but:

If someone close to me is having trouble and I feel bad about it, the feeling usually seems to be my own, and not some reflection of theirs. In other words, if a friend's father died, I would probably not be feeling what it is like to lose someone close, I would be feeling the feeling I associate with "friend in trouble", same as if they lost their job or had a car accident.

As for receiving help, I prefer to receive it with as little emotional content as possible, the minimum I need to get by, and if possible, the chance to "pay it back", either directly or indirectly.

 

[pinkgraffiti]

 

[LittleV]

Although the two terms are referring to different functional modes, sympathy is merely a facet of empathy. It often acts within the realm of ‘empathic concern’— one cannot sympathize without some ability to empathize (empathy is the overall umbrella). Empathy allows for the processing of sympathetic feelings in varying contexts; an empathic person can relate to most others (when needed) due to the combination of affective and cognitive processing. Empaths (of all types) regularly process others’ needs and feelings, even when they are away (esp. INFJ's)… enough to perhaps ‘randomly’ send a message or make a phone call at the most vital of instances.

Btw, I enjoyed the video:

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

It seems that the OP is defining sympathy as a feeling of concern for someone else. To me, if I'm not feeling great, I value this less than I value other reactions. I like either being ale to put it in it's proper context, help preventing me from having these feelings in the future, or a distraction that takes my mind off these feelings. Sympathy, as the OP defines it, as at odds with all of those things. I do place some value on people caring for me, but too often, I feel that there is an expectation or obligation on my part to feel grateful for that. Am I imagining this, or does it actually exist?

This, when it exists, seems self-involved, and is not truly selfless. There's an unspoken undercurrent of "look, pal, your bad attitude is making me feel bad. Let's snap it together for my sake. Oh, and praise me for my selflessness." It rubs me the wrong way.I'm already feeling shitty, and now I have the obligation to help you feel like an awesome person even though you aren't actually doing anything that's helping me?

I sometimes am upset just because others are upset too. I don't think that makes me better or worse or more or less selfless. It just is. Giving people credit for that seems odd, when the only thing people should get credit for is doing things that actually make the other person feel better. If a person was truly considerate of others, they would understand why this should count more than simply not feeling good because they aren't feeling good.

 

[LittleV]

It seems that the OP is defining sympathy as a feeling of concern for someone else. To me, if I'm not feeling great, I value this less than I value other reactions. I like either being ale to put it in it's proper context, help preventing me from having these feelings in the future, or a distraction that takes my mind off these feelings. Sympathy, as the OP defines it, as at odds with all of those things. I do place some value on people caring for me, but too often, I feel that there is an expectation or obligation on my part to feel grateful for that. Am I imagining this, or does it actually exist?

This, when it exists, seems self-involved, and is not truly selfless. There's an unspoken undercurrent of "look, pal, your bad attitude is making me feel bad. Let's snap it together for my sake. Oh, and praise me for my selflessness." It rubs me the wrong way.I'm already feeling shitty, and now I have the obligation to help you feel like an awesome person even though you aren't actually doing anything that's helping me?

I sometimes am upset just because others are upset too. I don't think that makes me better or worse or more or less selfless. It just is. Giving people credit for that seems odd, when the only thing people should get credit for is doing things that actually make the other person feel better. If a person was truly considerate of others, they would understand why this should count more than simply not feeling good because they aren't feeling good.

I see what you mean… and in your case, I’d say that it’s a battle between social intelligence and empathy (or empathic concern, if to be specific). If you’d take empathy out of social intelligence, you’d get some of the most underhanded bullying/instrumental aggression in the social realm… the exact behavior that you had described (Björkqvist, Österman, & Kaukiainen, 2000). Of course, those who mean well may not always help in the best of ways… but if they’d truly want to you feel better: they’d be monitoring your progress and not primarily their emotions. Still, ‘feelers’ need to be validated from time to time, especially if they'd actually lose some resources to help (so they should also know their own limits before trying to help, or know how to remove themselves from being emotionally involved – it can be difficult for Fe-doms in particular). Validation can buffer the loss of emotional resources, essentially, and doesn't often take more than a ‘thank you’ or what have you.

And one could argue that those who’d feel empathic concern are programmed that way, such that they’d enjoy it – making it not inherently altruistic. I’m not going to attempt to answer a philosophical question scientifically, but too much passion without emotional regulation or cognitive control can also be dangerous. Regardless, there will be people who would help at their own expense… and then there will be the other kind.

 

[Mole]

I am being driven mad by the confusion between sympathy and empathy.

So sympathy means to feel the same as, while empathy means to know what another is feeling, but without feeling it oneself.

This makes empathy uniquely helpful to those who are suffering.

Also sympathy comes naturally like learning to speak our native tongue, but empathy must be learnt and practised, like learning to read and write.

 

[LittleV]

They coincide; sympathy is a portion of empathy. Empathy contains both cognitive and affective properties: perspective-taking (understanding another’s state), empathic concern (the desire to relieve another’s pain) and personal distress (feeling another’s pain). Sympathy goes under ‘empathic concern’ because it works in often motivating one to help after noticing another’s distress – but the person may not be experiencing the same emotions. Scholars refer to empathy as the main (elaborate) framework.