Do We Really Need More Empathy?

Hello again everyone!

After about nearly two months since I shared what I've learned from Mastery by Robert Green, I'm back again to share what I've learned from Against Empathy by Paul Bloom!

Context: I picked up this book in October of 2017 when I was on a second date with someone and we had decided to visit the Strand Bookstore in NYC. They turned out to be far more experienced in literature than I ever as, which I still find to this day really admirable. I still haven't met anyone that was so well-read and such an avid reader (except for my mother). While things didn't really work out between us, we do still talk occasionally here and there. We were on the lower levels of the bookstore in the psychology section was a book whose spine titled Against Empathy stood out to me.

Since I was just starting graduate school for mental health counseling, seeing this book was like seeing a book titled You're A Idiot: Here's Why. Hold the truth bombs, please.

Since conducting therapy is so much about being empathic to your clients, it was mind-boggling to see a title that would suggest otherwise. However, this book sat on my shelves for a good three years before being picked up and finished. Luckily, much of what I learned from this book is still applicable today (thank goodness).

As a disclaimer, I am not going to spill everything that I've learned from this book, though these are the most effective lessons that I wanted to talk about. I would encourage you to read the book yourself, as it may have an effect on you that is different from mine! I'll attach a link at the end for your convenience.

Without further ado, here are five things I learned from Against Empathy by Paul Bloom:

LESSON 1: EMPATHY IS MYOPIC

For a book titled Against Empathy, I didn't think he would go as hard as he did as to the many downsides of empathy. Here's what they are:

1. Empathy is a spotlight that focuses on certain people in the present moment
2. Empathy causes us to care more about those individuals beneath the spotlight
3. Empathy does not allow us to recognize the suffering of others who we do not empathize with
4. Empathy is biased, and thus reflects our own biases
5. Empathy compels us to take action in the present moment, disregarding possible terrible future results or any cost-beneficial decisions for the future
6. Empathy is capable of inciting violence
7. Empathy ignores statistical data and primarily tugs at our emotions to make us act
8. Empathy cannot allow you to empathize with more than two people at the same time who are going through different difficulties and circumstances

It is important to mention here that Bloom not only makes a case for being against empathy, but he also makes a case for being more compassionately rational. This book is filled to the brim with examples to convey these ideas. At the end of the day, Bloom still suggests that we all continue to be nice to each other, be a good person, and do the right thing, but to do so in the perspective of rationalism and moral good. Some example scenarios where you can do good things without the need for empathy are:

1. Save a child who is drowning in shallow waters (you can empathize with their suffering, but you could also know that it's simply wrong to let a child drown when you can save them)
2. Taking care of the environment (there is no target of empathy, it's just simply not conducive to destroy the environment you live in)
3. Don't steal, don't lie, don't hurt others (it's morally wrong to do this in general)
4. Console a frightened child of a barking dog (you do not share the same fear of barking dogs as the child does)

Some anecdotal stories that Bloom shared of individuals who committed uncommonly good acts:

1. Jason Baldwin, a man falsely imprisoned for many years, was noted for being able to forgive those who had imprisoned him not because of empathy, but because of his faith in Christ
2. Zell Kravinsky, who had given nearly $50 million to charity, opted to give up one his kidneys to a stranger in need. His rationale wasn't because he empathized with the stranger who was in need of a kidney, but because of the mathematical probability of dying through a kidney donation. The chances of dying from giving up a kidney for donation are 1/3000 (or ~0.03%).

If you ever think about scenarios where you acted out of empathy, take a quick moment to sit back and think: could there have been better ways to handle my situation that were more effective, do not escalate or worsen my situation, and/or were cost-effective? It's certainly difficult, and may even seem ridiculous, but it can work.

LESSON 2: EMPATHY IS A RESULT

When I say this, I'm referring to the order of feelings and thoughts that come before you wind up feeling empathy for someone. In this book, Bloom explains that empathy isn't something that you feel right away that compels you to act. There are considerations that come into play before empathy becomes the motivating urge. The likelihood of us feeling empathy towards someone or something is modified by the current beliefs we have, expectations of outcomes, internal motivations, and judgments made about a person, place, or situation. With all of these things, our chances of feeling empathy are affected.

For example, if we are playing a game and an opponent has cheated or is vying for victory against us, we are not going to feel much empathy for them during the heat of competition. If someone is in a difficult situation, such as financial struggle, but you learn that the financial struggle is their own fault or their struggle is insignificant, you are unlikely to feel empathy. If your peers happened to achieve sudden great success, you also won't feel empathy for them, as envy would block this feeling to some degree.

In the book, Bloom mentions a study where subjects were shown a video of people who were diagnosed with AIDS—however, one group of individuals with AIDS had gotten it through intravenous drug use, and the other group had gotten it through a blood transfusion. Subjects under brain scans felt less empathy towards the drug users, and more empathy towards the transfusion recipients. Referring back to the first lesson, much of the reactions that we have towards others reflect our internal biases towards certain individuals. We internally create an "Us and Them" type of mindset, and more often than not, if the person is identified as Them, we are less likely to be empathic. Internally we make constant decisions about who deserves our attention, who to be concerned over, and who matters, and from there decide who will feel our empathy. This is applicable from trivial to life-altering decisions, such as how we treat fans of rival sports teams, to whether we choose to keep or let go of the ones we love.

The topic of whether or not we feel empathy towards different people easily treads on the topic of bias, and also begs the question if person with low empathy is bad, and if a person with high empathy is good.

It's not easily distinguishable. A person who is low in empathy may walk past someone who is homeless, but may go out of their way to help in soup kitchens, donate to trustworthy foundations that shelter the homeless, and vote consciously in favor of resources to help the homeless get back on their feet, whether through housing, healthcare, or necessities. A person who is high in empathy may feel a great deal of stress from encountering a homeless person, and may try to avoid the homeless person altogether, such as walking on the opposite side of the street or choose a completely different route.

It's an odd phenomenon, as many would think that just feeling more empathy for individuals may compel us to act well. Another study that Bloom mentions is when subjects were told a story of a terminally ill child waiting in line with other terminally ill children waiting for treatment. When subjects were informed of the story behind one terminally ill child, the subjects had the option to move that child ahead of the line. Now, on a logical scale, it would be unfair to move any of the children ahead of the other, but because of the compelling story told to the subjects, they were more inclined to move them around. Here, empathy can cause us to do unfair things.

Against Empathy had just so many examples to portray the different ways in which empathy goads us to do things that logically wouldn't make much sense.

Empathy is also susceptible to bias, most specifically Darwinian bias (favoring our friends, family, and in-group members over different, opposing, out-group members) and attention bias (focusing on what is new and appealing, and growing insensitive to same old things). Making a concerted effort to step away from empathy "traps" gives an opportunity to rely on cost-beneficial and principles approaches, which can lead to more fair and impartial decisions, even if it may be harmful in the short-term.

LESSON 3: HOW TO BE LESS BIASED

Considering that empathy reflects much of one's biases, it would be ideal not to seek how to be less empathic, but how to be less biased. The first thing to consider when encountering tough problems is to think about how one can do the most good. This is different from immediate or botched good, or temporary fixes that can lead to problems later on.

If, for example, you are on a panel to decide who receives an award, and one of your friends, relatives, or family members is on the list of people to receive said award, it would be best for you to withdraw from that decision. When it comes to a hiring process, one solution can be to reduce candidates to mere "X/Y/Z" so as to prevent any bias (such as concealing name, sex, background, etc.) or to instill diversity requirements so that there is equal representation of each group. Topics around the best practice for hiring can easily get political, but the whole goal of either approach is to give little opportunity for bias to intervene (conscious or unconscious).

If we were to look up how much empathy plays a role in politics in the United States, it's not so easily split between one group being more empathic and one group being less empathic. If you bring up the topic of gun control, you could imagine how one side would be empathically against guns for the safety of others, and the other being empathically in favor of guns for the safety of themselves. Regardless of the amount of empathy, each side has their reasons. If we were to bring up other controversial issues like climate change, one side will probably have little to say.

This book was so good at providing examples in favor of rationalism and cost-effective approaches, that if I were to mention all of the examples it would be an endless list (and I'd probably be whacked with copyright issues, too).

LESSON 4: EMPATHY IN INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS

I want to break this lesson up into three parts consisting of professional, friendship/romantic, and parenting, since much of our relationships tend to dance around one or more of these three kinds of relationships.

In Professional Relationships

In professional relationships (emphasized in helping roles like doctors, nurses, and therapists), having empathy helps the patient feel as though they are being heard and understood. However, as I mentioned before, having too much empathy can wind up being a very crippling experience for the helper. Bloom shares an experience from a surgeon named Christine Montross:

"... if, while listening to the grieving mother's raw and unbearable description of her son's body in the morgue, I were to imagine my own son in his place, I would be incapacitated. My ability to attend to my patient's psychiatric needs would be derailed by my own devastating sorrow. Similarly, if I were brought in by an ambulance to the trauma bay of my local emergency department and required immediate surgery to save my life, I would not want the trauma surgeon on call to pause to empathize with my pain and suffering."

As you can see, a healthy degree of empathy is good, but too much can create obstacles for action to take place. As someone who has played the role of a therapist during his internship along with other licensed therapists, there is much talk about therapists being overly concerned about their clients, well outside their normal working hours. In order to counter this, therapists (myself included) are encouraged to employ understanding and care for their clients in place of empathy. Just because we may not feel empathy for a client does not necessarily mean that we are less capable of providing the best care and treatment specifically tailored to each client.

One of the best ways to really empathize with clients/patients/customers without ever having to vicariously live through their distress is to remain calm and recall times in the past where you have also felt their distressing emotion. In doing so, you can understand almost exactly how they feel, without feeling any of the present stressors at hand. Use your past experiences to empathize, instead of sharing in the distress happening in front of you.

In Friendships And Romantic Relationships

I would like to believe that we want to feel and be loved, cared for, and understood. It's in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. I'd also imagine we would want to be favored more by our friends and loved ones than complete strangers. With that being said, it should be fairly common that our emotions are similarly matched when we share good news and bad news with our friends and family. If I am happy about something, I would hope that my friends, family, and companions are also happy, and if I share something no so great, that they are able to be beside me in my sadness and distress.

However, there are also scenarios where feelings should be different from one another. As Bloom puts it, "people who are in normal relationships have a level of autonomy and independence and in part because if you care for another, you shouldn't always want to mirror that person's mood."

Bloom even uses the words of Cicero, "friendship improves happiness and abates misery, by the doubling of our joy and the dividing of our grief." If I am in a state of panic or great discomfort, I would hope that these feelings are met by a loved one with calmness, and if I am ever feeling out of it, that they can suggest ways to lift my spirits.

You can see that many situations call for different attitudes and approaches. If your friend wins an award, you don't have to feel empathy for them (you didn't win an award, they did); instead, you can feel their joy because you care about them and want them to do well. On the other hand, when your companion feels down, you don't have to be sad with them. You could instead encourage them or remind them of the activities that make them smile because you care about their well-being, not because you also share in the same sadness.

In Parenting

For starters, I am not a parent. But what I do know is that (most) parents love their children. On top of this, when it comes to raising a child, I would imagine that there is a lot of long-term thinking put into play for the greater good of their kid(s). So, if for some reason your child wants to stay up a bit later than usual, you would stick to your beliefs that they should continue to sleep at a consistent hour. This is a necessary component to their growth. Empathizing with your child and allowing them to stay up late may feel good to them and you in the short term (you gave them what they asked for and they stop nagging you), but in the long term you may wind up messing with their sleep schedule, and affecting their growth trajectory.

Another example is if your child wants to eat candy. Long term, an occasional treat here and there can't hurt. I imagine it would make them appreciate these treats more when they do happen. But if you were to keep succumbing to the child's desires, sure, the kid will be happy, but they will be miserable health-wise later on. And eventually, you will lose your role as a parental figure because you consistently submit to their will. Am I saying to rule with an iron fist to your kids? Well, that's up to you (you get a different kind of kid if you do, though). What I am saying, however, is to keep the long-term goals in mind—like their continued growth and health—and let that take precedence over any short-term harm or disagreements. I'm sure they'll thank you for it in the long run.

LESSON 5: EMPATHY OFTEN MOTIVATES VIOLENCE

These days, I have seen memes with photos of two individuals in a happy relationship. One person will be tagged as "me" and the other will be tagged as "somebody's son/daughter." If you've ever heard the song Everything I Wanted by Billie Eilish, she one of the lyrics goes "they called me weak, like I'm not just somebody's daughter." Words like these bring to mind that every person around you is somebody's friend, relative, loved one, or family. I could be alone in this (though I doubt it), but this elicits a great deal of empathy. I myself am someone's best friend, someone's son, someone's brother. The same goes for you. So when someone does wrong by me, it is likely that my friends and family will come to my defense, and very likely the same will happen for you.

But when these folks do come to our defense, their idea of "defending" you can vary. Some may throw hands, some may expose over social media, some may fight back with their words, and some may tend to your pain. Empathy for the ones we care about is that knee-jerk reaction that compels us to rush to the aid of the ones we care about.

Now, I thought that the upcoming suggestion would be to feel less empathy, but it's a little bit more nuanced than that. What I learned is to be more conscientious of what empathy is trying to make me do. If someone speaks poorly of my best friend, I may respond by openly making assumptions about the person speaking slander. But instead of making assumptions, I could calmly speak up in my friend's defense or pick apart the argument at hand. Do something that really makes a difference. Empathy is one of those things that can tug at our emotions and make us react on a whim, rather than approach the problem with some thought. If you can exhaust the options that won't escalate a situation, but make it very clear where you stand, it may be best.

—————

A (Brief) Personal Reflection

My background is primarily in psychology, and reading through this book has overall taught me that "more empathy" isn't always the answer. The amount of pitfalls to employing empathy leads to a lot more quick fixes than long-term solutions. Even I have to admit that I would want to err on the side solving someone's problems immediately, than to do short-term harm first for a greater good in the long run. I've worked as a tour guide at my university years ago, and whenever a visiting family asks about a service or program, and I know for a fact we don't have it, I always wind up giving them a reference to a higher-up, when I could easily just tell them we simply don't offer it. When I spoke with clients years ago that I knew had anger management problems, sometimes I would tell them what they wanted to hear than to risk having them explode. I would empathize with their burning questions and distress and would want to put an end to it immediately, rather than see them struggle.

In the end, it's not the empathy should go completely out the window. Empathy is still a good thing to have, it just has a lot of faults when used (see Lesson 1). But if you employ empathy, and it doesn't seem to hit any of the faults, it's a great thing. I just think that Bloom was trying to convey the idea that there are many other ways and reasons to be kind and good to one another that have nothing to do with empathy—like morals, compassion, understanding, reason, and justice.

I would rate this book a 7/10, and would definitely be a book I'd categorize under "Heart" and "Nerve" because of its heavy emphasis on making more rational, compassionate judgments.

If you liked this and would to get your own copy, you can get it here:

https://amzn.to/2UjTCqr

- Instagram ( @soulheartnervesinew )

www.instagram.com/soulheartnervesinew

- YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPl8xtt1e_4M_lLhEKJzNTg/

- Twitter ( @SHNSPodcast )

www.Twitter.com/SHNSPodcast

- Facebook

fb.me/SoulHeartNerveSinew