Empathy Is Actually a Choice

88 views
Skip to first unread message

Sam Vaknin author of "Malignant Self-love"

unread,
Jul 21, 2015, 8:29:11 AM7/21/15
to Google NPD List, Article Submit Narcissisticabuse, Article Submit Toxic Relationships, Article Submit Google Narcissisticabuse, Article Submit Linknfactoid
Learn more about empathy - click on these 2 links:
 
 
 
 

Empathy Is Actually a Choice

Photo
Credit Gérard DuBois

Gray Matter

By DARYL CAMERON, MICHAEL INZLICHT and WILLIAM A. CUNNINGHAM

ONE death is a tragedy. One million is a statistic.

100% of the text of "Malignant Self-love" (700 pages) + GIANT BONUS PACK - for 40% the price! 100% of the tips, advice, and knowledge - at less than HALF the cost!!! Updated to reflect the NEW criteria in the recent fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). Buy the e-book instead of the print edition: http://www.ccnow.com/cgi-local/cart.cgi?vaksam_MSL-EBOOK

You’ve probably heard this saying before. It is thought to capture an unfortunate truth about empathy: While a single crying child or injured puppy tugs at our heartstrings, large numbers of suffering people, as in epidemics, earthquakes and genocides, do not inspire a comparable reaction.

Studies have repeatedly confirmed this. It’s a troubling finding because, as recent research has demonstrated, many of us believe that if more lives are at stake, we will — and should — feel more empathy (i.e., vicariously share others’ experiences) and do more to help.

Not only does empathy seem to fail when it is needed most, but it also appears to play favorites. Recent studies have shown that our empathy is dampened or constrained when it comes to people of different races, nationalities or creeds. These results suggest that empathy is a limited resource, like a fossil fuel, which we cannot extend indefinitely or to everyone.

What, then, is the relationship between empathy and morality? Traditionally, empathy has been seen as a force for moral good, motivating virtuous deeds. Yet a growing chorus of critics, inspired by findings like those above, depict empathy as a source of moral failure. In the words of the psychologist Paul Bloom, empathy is a “parochial, narrow-minded” emotion — one that “will have to yield to reason if humanity is to survive.”

We disagree.

The BIBLE of NARCISSISM "Malignant Self-love: Narcissism Revisited" in Barnes and Noble now COSTS USD $40 instead of USD $55!!! CLICK ON THIS LINK TO PURCHASE THE PRINT EDITION http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/malignant-self-love-sam-vaknin/1101380970?ean=9788023833843 Updated to reflect the NEW criteria in the recent fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) (Or, click on this link - http://www.bn.com - and search for "Sam Vaknin" or "Malignant Self Love")

While we concede that the exercise of empathy is, in practice, often far too limited in scope, we dispute the idea that this shortcoming is inherent, a permanent flaw in the emotion itself. Inspired by a competing body of recent research, we believe that empathy is a choice that we make whether to extend ourselves to others. The “limits” to our empathy are merely apparent, and can change, sometimes drastically, depending on what we want to feel.

Two decades ago, the psychologist Daniel Batson and colleagues conducted a study that showed that if people expected their empathy to cost them significant money or time, they would avoid situations that they believed would trigger it. More recently, one of us, Daryl Cameron, along with the psychologist Keith Payne, conducted an experiment to see if similar motivational factors could explain why we seem more empathetic to single victims than to large numbers of them.

 
12gray-blog427.jpg
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages