Societal lack of Empathy

[_Some Schmo]

by the way, Jersey Girl, this is a really interesting topic. I've never thought this much about the development of empathy.

[_The CCC]

Whatever his military accomplishments General Jackson was a slave owning traitor. That counts BIG in my book.

It was the South's second war of Independence. If the south had won, he'd be viewed similar to George Washington, also a slave owner and traitor to England.

War can do both and sometimes in the same person.

I agree. But that contradicts the "science" in honorentheos's article.

Yes a lot if not most of the founding fathers owned slaves. That doesn't excuse their slavery though. Even Thomas Jefferson saw the contradiction. He just didn't know how to resolve the contradiction and still form a separate country. Yes the founders were traitors to England. They would have been hung if caught.

Just part of the price you pay when conducting a failed rebellion. "If we don't hang together we'll surely hang separately".
Benjamin Franklin

Paradoxically no southern political leader was executed for the southern rebellion.

[_Jersey Girl]

Notice the phrase you used, "I know what it's like". That's the key to empathy. It's called perspective taking.

I think "I know what it's like" is helpful, but I don't think it's necessary to have empathy. I've never had an unwanted pregnancy, for instance, but I can certainly empathize with a woman's desire to choose how to handle it. I've never been an African American, but I can empathize with the fear they must have when pulled over by a cop.

I don't think you have to have had the experience yourself. I think you just need to be able to draw on an experience in your own life that might be similar and feel what it must feel like to be in their shoes. There's effort involved in attempting to feel someone else's experience.

The statements that I underlined are perspective taking.

I'll give you an early childhood example. Adults push young children to share. To share their toys, to share their food, etc.

The truth is and I'll say it as the voice of the child, "I need to know what it's like to have it or own it, before I can know why you want it."

That is why, in the ECE environment, we have at least 3 of everything. So that when a child tries to take a piece of equipment out of the hands of another child (thinking 3 year olds here), we can say "It's in her hands, she is using it. Is there another one?"

:-)

What has always been a source of gratification for me, is when I see the 4 or 4.5 year old using the same techniques that were taught to them. "Is there another one?" "Let's see if we can find another one."

Or when they're out of "one", to say, "It's in my hands, I'm using it. When I'm done, I'll bring it to you."

And all the words I've said to them, come from them to another child as they develop prosocial behaviors.

The hall mark of low or lack of empathy is the absence of prosocial behaviors in human beings.

Just read today's headlines and you'll see it in black and white.

[_Jersey Girl]

Jersey Girl:

Empathy is not a nature v nurture debate. But as the process of combining both. Below about 2 years old we're pretty selfish creatures. As parents and siblings play a greater role empathy is developed. Then usually at about 5 years old children are exposed to the effects of religion, if not a particular religion. All the worlds great religion have as a foundation some variant of the Golden Rule. In western thought it is do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and in eastern thought it is don't do unto other as you wouldn't have them do unto you. This is the beginning of empathy. Without getting into a dissertation about empathy I'll say empathy is a process of defining ourselves as others see see us. No one can be totally empathetic. We all have biological needs that if not met we die, rather gruesomely. So it is a balancing act.

I disagree with you on some of what you've written, but I lack the time to address it at the moment. I will say this much, you are missing the bonding and attachment process that begins in infancy and moves forward, long before we know anything about what the "Golden Rule" or religion might have to offer us.

I'll try to come back to this later.

[_Tator]

Do you think of empathy as a learned trait?

I think it's a complex process that begins with bonding and attachment in infancy, and is nurtured in human beings. Yes, I think it is a learned trait and one that has to do with your interactions with others the day you are born.

I had lack of bonding and big time detachment when they cut my foreskin off my baby penis the day I was born. I will never be the same. What kind of empathy did I learn that day?

[_The CCC]

Jersey Girl:

Empathy is not a nature v nurture debate. But as the process of combining both. Below about 2 years old we're pretty selfish creatures. As parents and siblings play a greater role empathy is developed. Then usually at about 5 years old children are exposed to the effects of religion, if not a particular religion. All the worlds great religion have as a foundation some variant of the Golden Rule. In western thought it is do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and in eastern thought it is don't do unto other as you wouldn't have them do unto you. This is the beginning of empathy. Without getting into a dissertation about empathy I'll say empathy is a process of defining ourselves as others see see us. No one can be totally empathetic. We all have biological needs that if not met we die, rather gruesomely. So it is a balancing act.

I disagree with you on some of what you've written, but I lack the time to address it at the moment. I will say this much, you are missing the bonding and attachment process that begins in infancy and moves forward, long before we know anything about what the "Golden Rule" or religion might have to offer us.

I'll try to come back to this later.

No problem. Hope to see your response soon.

[_Jersey Girl]

I'll say empathy is a process of defining ourselves as others see see us. No one can be totally empathetic. We all have biological needs that if not met we die, rather gruesomely. So it is a balancing act.

Back.

I'd like you to say more about your above statement "empathy is a process of defining ourselves as others see us."

I've never heard that before.

[_The CCC]

I'll say empathy is a process of defining ourselves as others see see us. No one can be totally empathetic. We all have biological needs that if not met we die, rather gruesomely. So it is a balancing act.

Back.

I'd like you to say more about your above statement "empathy is a process of defining ourselves as others see us."

I've never heard that before.

Sorry about the delay.

What I means is that people tend to reflect what they see in others. It is a kind of human see human do type thing. Empathy is holding up that mirror to ourselves to see what we do as seen by other people.

[_Jersey Girl]

Back.

I'd like you to say more about your above statement "empathy is a process of defining ourselves as others see us."

I've never heard that before.

Sorry about the delay.

What I means is that people tend to reflect what they see in others. It is a kind of human see human do type thing. Empathy is holding up that mirror to ourselves to see what we do as seen by other people.

What is your basis for that? Can you name a developmental theorist that supports that?

[_Jersey Girl]

The CCC,

I'm not going to beat around the bush. Empathy has not a thing to do with how others see is. Empathy is the ability to understand the feelings of others, to take on their perspective.

I can't think of one developmental theorist who would describe it as you have done in your above. If you can, I should like you to provide a link to their theoretical commentary.