How does empathy differ from sympathy, why do we need it, what will happen if it does not exist, and what does the division into “us” and “them” have to do with it?
Empathy is a wonderful mechanism that unites all people at the biological level into a single field. Empathy is innate, and it is inherent not only to humans, but also to a number of highly developed mammals, primarily to great apes. It is often confused with sympathy, but these are very different phenomena.
Sympathy is a positive attitude towards someone, and empathy is the ability to feel the state of another, get used to it. If we see the pain of another person, then our brain and our body respond, reacting as if it hurts us. The degree of response depends on many factors, people have different levels of empathy, with the exception of pathologies in which this ability is not present (like antisocial personality disorder or autism).
Everyone has a common base level of empathy, and it is through it that the connection is established between the infant and parents, and later between children. Compassion and empathy, the ability to forgive, to enter into someone else’s situation, responsiveness, altruism, pity, help, the ability to enjoy acting – all this is based on empathy.
In other words, empathy is not “I understand what you feel”, but “I feel your feelings”, “I feel that you are afraid, that you are happy, surprised, angry”. At the same time, one’s “I” is preserved, it touches the experiences of another, co-experiences, but does not dissolve in it.
A suffering stranger leaves indifferent. Similarly, chimpanzees remain indifferent
All the more terrifying is the realization of how easily one can limit – if not completely suppress – the ability to empathize.
How? Frans de Waal, a well-known biologist, talks about such a very simple study by neurophysiologists at the University of Zurich. They studied the neural response of a person to the suffering of other people.
The men watched as either a fan of their own club or a fan of a rival club received electric shocks in the next room. All the observers were longtime fans, football was taken seriously. And they showed empathy for the fans only of their own club. Moreover, the suffering of a supporter of a rival club activated the pleasure centers in the brain.
Here is the simple answer to how to kill empathy. Divide people into strangers and friends. The more strangers around, the less empathy. Do you want to suppress it completely? Make strangers all around, and make yourself chosen, isolated, unique. Fortunately, this mechanism is as innate as the ability to feel another.
Mice are able to react with discomfort to the pain of other mice, but on one condition – they had to live with the sufferer for some time. A suffering stranger leaves them indifferent. Similarly, chimpanzees remain indifferent.
The smaller the group of “ours”, the less sympathy for the “others”
The division into “us” and “them”, the reaction of isolation is older and more powerful than empathic responsiveness, and it is much easier to activate it.
I remember a simple experiment in which participants were divided into two groups using simple colored squares (blue and red), and then selected representatives from these groups were asked to divide certain amounts between all participants in the experiment.
And then it turns out that the “blue” tried to snatch more for the “blues”, and the “red” – for the “reds”, although these groups were formed by chance and none of the members of the groups knew each other before the experiment. The mere fact “we are the same color” was enough to become biased and reduce the level of empathy.
The famous studies of the psychologist Muazef Sherif showed how people, united in different random groups, can be provoked not only to lose empathy for “outsiders”, but also to open and direct hostility, since the division into groups does not in itself entail an intergroup aggression.
The sheriff found that humiliation and hostility towards members of the opposite group began to manifest itself only in conditions of competition for limited resources. That is, you need to convince people that they have something to share, and then everything will go on knurled.
It is in such a situation that the pain and suffering of the other begin to activate the pleasure centers of those who see this suffering, but belong to a different camp. At the same time, intra-group solidarity and empathy increased, but only towards their own. The smaller the group of “friends”, the less sympathy for the “others”.
Where is the exit? Same place as the entrance. Find what unites us with the “stranger”, find a common goal that can be achieved together
So, everything is very simple, alas. Two simple to disgraceful rules:
- Draw a line between “us” and “them”.
- Convince “your own” that they have something to share with “strangers”.
Further, people will do everything themselves, driven by mechanisms that are common with chimpanzees and other mammals. Code words-signals will appear that distinguish “ours” from “not ours”, you can immediately calculate each other from them.
In humans, labels play this role. There will be a complete closeness to information from the “other side” and excessive trust in “ours” (remember – intra-group solidarity is growing). The “language of hatred” will turn on, the essence of which is the infliction of suffering on another through the word. Joy from the suffering and pain of “strangers”. Justification of murders by “their”…
And then there are reptiles and robots for whom empathy is not available…
And trainers will watch chimpanzees and baboons fighting and think of new experiments… Orwell seems to have some interesting ideas…
Where is the exit? Same place as the entrance. Find what unites us with the “stranger”, find a common goal that can be achieved together.