Can empathy be learned?

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

What I mean is, can someone who is not naturally empathetic learn how to become empathetic?

I kind of think they can learn but only if they see their own deficit and want to learn without seeking any other gains.

What do you think?

Empathy is grounded in the mirror neuron system. I would think that if you have a mirror neuron system, which you should, then you can have empathy. I also think that stress and ego get in the way of empathy, but there are ways to diminish their hold on you, so, in theory, anyone should be able to expand their empathy.

Side note, there was a study released last month that posited that psychopaths did actually have the capacity for empathy, but they were better able to turn it on and off. That's what I always believed.

 

[Ginkgo]

I gotta admit, I love that [MENTION=3325]Mole[/MENTION] is honing in and engaging with a single individual like this.

 

[Coriolis]

How have you responded to literacy?

I use it, like every other tool at my disposal. I rather enjoy it, too.

 

[Giggly]

Let's grunt instead. That's a better way of communicating.

This is something to aspire to:

I am disappoint. There was no grunting.

 

[RaptorWizard]

Can it be learned, sure. Is it natural for me, NO!

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

I am disappoint. There was no grunting.

Fine.

Happy?

 

[Giggly]

Yes, thank you. I'm happy.

 

[Ginkgo]

What I mean is, can someone who is not naturally empathetic learn how to become empathetic?

I kind of think they can learn but only if they see their own deficit and want to learn without seeking any other gains.

What do you think?

I look at it like I look at cognitive functions - you can emulate a function that's outside of your preference range and yield the same outer-consequences, but it's still not the same function it and won't necessarily be bound to an ingrained psychological schema. Therefore, it won't be as reliable, and it will drain you unless you practice it for years on end.

However, I also think empathy isn't necessarily a process in which one feels for another's emotional state. Several misconceptions tend to float around it because peoples' very response to the word tends to be visceral and clouded.

Simply understanding another individuals condition is, in my opinion, sufficient enough to be benevolent towards them. If you're not empathetic, you won't be bound to your own impression of an emotional state to the degree that you feel the urge to mend it. That, in itself, is a personal gain, whether you're finding comfort in your feelings about another regardless of their actual condition, or whether you're unintentionally imposing how they "ought" to feel in a given situation.

I'm going to address the gist of your question without analyzing it too deeply - I don't think there is strong potential for someone's inherent weaknesses to flourish as true strengths. Flexing unused muscles can be beneficial, but it takes consistent dedication to instill a new skill. It may be a Monkey's paw.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

Side note, there was a study released last month that posited that psychopaths did actually have the capacity for empathy, but they were better able to turn it on and off. That's what I always believed.

Is this really empathy though? When a person ‘feels empathy’ essentially as means to get something and they can turn it off the moment it isn’t useful, wtf is that? I know it happens- I’ve dealt with it in people- and it’s convincing, but I have a hard time agreeing that it’s really empathy. If concern for another person’s feelings is entirely about the use value and not for the sake of itself, it’s a very empty form of merely accurately reading someone else’s feelings. It looks exactly like empathy, but there’s still some weird disconnect if it can be turned off like a switch.

****

At the op: at least according to the Buddhist teaching I’ve been reading (which may or may not be representative generally of Buddhism), the way to cultivate empathy is to practice egoless-ness. The capacity to empathize is like any muscle, it needs to be worked on in order to build strength. If we don't pay attention, then it’s just human frailty for ego to come in to protect us- which atrophies the capacity to empathize. Ego is something which acts like a wall between ourselves and others- erected because of insecurity and fear- and the higher/thicker these walls are, the less we are able to truly empathize with others. I agree with this, it seems very true to me.

 

[Red Herring]

Since this is my mother tongue we are talking about:

"Empathy" does not come directly from Ancient Greek, it is a modern creation and a translation into Greek of the German word "Einfühlung" or "Einfühlungsvermögen", i.e. the capacity to "feel into somebody". It started being used about 100 years ago when the texts of German writing thinkers (like Freud) had to be translated into other languages.

 

[Coriolis]

I look at it like I look at cognitive functions - you can emulate a function that's outside of your preference range and yield the same outer-consequences, but it's still not the same function it and won't necessarily be bound to an ingrained psychological schema. Therefore, it won't be as reliable, and it will drain you unless you practice it for years on end.

However, I also think empathy isn't necessarily a process in which one feels for another's emotional state. Several misconceptions tend to float around it because peoples' very response to the word tends to be visceral and clouded.

Simply understanding another individuals condition is, in my opinion, sufficient enough to be benevolent towards them. If you're not empathetic, you won't be bound to your own impression of an emotional state to the degree that you feel the urge to mend it. That, in itself, is a personal gain, whether you're finding comfort in your feelings about another regardless of their actual condition, or whether you're unintentionally imposing how they "ought" to feel in a given situation.

I agree with this, especially the highlighted. I find keeping an emotional distance from trouble situations can actually make it possible to help more effectively. What some people call cognitive empathy suffices for this - understanding that general nature of someone's difficulty without actually internalizing it emotionally.

 

[Evo]

This is super interesting, were there any more tests and or results within this study?.. If so...new thread maybe?


Edit: For this thread.... Can empathy be lost/unlearned?... I do believe it can be learned infact I think most of us do learn it, slowly as we grow... some may be inherent but it's mostly learnt imo. There is debate regarding when is the point of no return...age-wise to be taught empathy if the individual has been deprived/neglected in ways

The only time that you can't learn something new is when you don't want to or when you are mentally incapable...

So no there's not an "age"

There is a time that someone may get to the point in which they have alzheimer's....

Then may not be the best time to teach that person...

Otherwise...why would we NOT learn stuff?

 

[human101]

The only time that you can't learn something new is when you don't want to or when you are mentally incapable...

So no there's not an "age"

There is a time that someone may get to the point in which they have alzheimer's....

Then may not be the best time to teach that person...

Otherwise...why would we NOT learn stuff?

Correct

 

[Mole]

why would we NOT learn stuff?

The fact is there are two types of learning.

There is intuitive learning and counter-intuitive learning.

Intuitive learning is natural, and counter-intuitive learning is unnatural.

For instance, learning to speak our native language at home is intuitive and natural, but learning to read and write is counter-intuitive and unnatural, and we have to be compelled to go to a special institution with specially trained staff to counter-intuitively and unnaturally learn to read and write.

In the same way we learn naturally, intuitively to sympathise, but we learn to empathise counter-intuitively, unnaturally in professional institutions with specially trained staff.

 

[Coriolis]

Otherwise...why would we NOT learn stuff?

Because we prefer to spend our time and energy learning OTHER stuff. The world is full of knowledge and skills, far too much for any one person to learn even a small fraction. We must therefore prioritize our efforts. When it looks like someone doesn't want to learn, often they just don't want to learn the specific thing someone else is focusing on.

 

[ThatsWhatHeSaid]

Is this really empathy though? When a person ‘feels empathy’ essentially as means to get something and they can turn it off the moment it isn’t useful, wtf is that? I know it happens- I’ve dealt with it in people- and it’s convincing, but I have a hard time agreeing that it’s really empathy. If concern for another person’s feelings is entirely about the use value and not for the sake of itself, it’s a very empty form of merely accurately reading someone else’s feelings.

How did you jump from turning something off to using it as a means to an end?

It looks exactly like empathy, but there’s still some weird disconnect if it can be turned off like a switch.

"Some weird disconnect?" If you can turn anger off, does it stop being anger? What about sadness or anxiety? Your reasoning doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Evo]

Because we prefer to spend our time and energy learning OTHER stuff. The world is full of knowledge and skills, far too much for any one person to learn even a small fraction. We must therefore prioritize our efforts. When it looks like someone doesn't want to learn, often they just don't want to learn the specific thing someone else is focusing on.

The fact is there are two types of learning.

There is intuitive learning and counter-intuitive learning.

Intuitive learning is natural, and counter-intuitive learning is unnatural.

For instance, learning to speak our native language at home is intuitive and natural, but learning to read and write is counter-intuitive and unnatural, and we have to be compelled to go to a special institution with specially trained staff to counter-intuitively and unnaturally learn to read and write.

In the same way we learn naturally, intuitively to sympathise, but we learn to empathise counter-intuitively, unnaturally in professional institutions with specially trained staff.

LOL yes to you both! ha ha

I'm just ruthless when it comes to learning...

I believe people should want to learn. And they should learn about whatever they can.

Also ... it took me a while to learn to prioritize that connection is like #1...

If I can do it they can do it.

LMAO...which in it's self is contradicting me having any empathy or compassion..

SEE? I have to actively try to empathize with people...

I don't empathize with people who don't want to learn how to empathize...LMAO

 

[21%]

I think empathy has to be felt. Sure, you can emulate 'empathy', like if you have to work in customer service and have to pretend to care about people for your job, but that is not real empathy.

I think everyone has a natural tendency to empathize with other people. The question is simply how big your circle of 'us' is. For some people it's only the close circle -- family, friends. For others it may be the whole world, and might even extend to other species.

So, to answer the question in the OP: no, I don't think empathy can be consciously learned. You develop empathy through receiving love from other people and bonding.

 

[Z Buck McFate]

How did you jump from turning something off to using it as a means to an end?

Because if psychopaths aren’t capable of guilt or remorse, then why would they ‘switch on’ empathy for any other reason than personal gain?

I just looked up and read about the study. It looks like they can turn it on simply by being asked to turn it on. The bizarre disconnect though is that there’s no conscience tying them to the empathy when that empathy doesn’t feel good. Most people can’t just turn it off. I can imagine instances where empathy shuts off because more information becomes available and changes the circumstances- but most people can’t simply shut empathy off at will. (…Right?)

What I read suggested they might be able to use these findings to figure out how to help psychopaths from causing harm. It’ll be interesting to see if they can actually do that.

I get how what they’re seeing in the results is being called ‘empathy’, per se- but it’s just weird because it isn’t attached to a conscience. It may light up the same parts of the brain, but I'm not sure I'm willing to call it empathy in the most commonly used sense of the word.

 

[Giggly]

I think empathy has to be felt. Sure, you can emulate 'empathy', like if you have to work in customer service and have to pretend to care about people for your job, but that is not real empathy.

I think everyone has a natural tendency to empathize with other people. The question is simply how big your circle of 'us' is. For some people it's only the close circle -- family, friends. For others it may be the whole world, and might even extend to other species.

So, to answer the question in the OP: no, I don't think empathy can be consciously learned. You develop empathy through receiving love from other people and bonding.

Hmm... you may be right.