The American Psychological Association defines empathy as follows:
[U]nderstanding a person from their frame of reference rather than one’s own, or vicariously experiencing that person’s feelings, perceptions, and thoughts. Empathy does not, of itself, entail motivation to be of assistance, although it may turn into sympathy or personal distress, which may result in action. In psychotherapy, therapist empathy for the client can be a path to comprehension of the client’s cognitions, affects, motivations, or behaviors.
I agree with the portion of this definition that relates to understanding and comprehension about a person’s thoughts, emotions, behaviors, and otherwise. However, I disagree with the proposal that one individual is capable of “vicariously experiencing” another person’s cognitive or emotive processes.
Colloquially, empathy refers to the act of emotional or sensorial experiencing what another person experiences. As far as I understand, this is a virtually impossible endeavor, aside from the experience of conjoined twins who may literally share physiological functions.
Importantly, it isn’t as though the veracity of this colloquial term is untestable using the scientific method. For instance, one could use a twin study that is composed of identical twins. Twin X is placed in a room in one area while twin Y is placed in a room at an entirely different location.
Twin X is exposed to various scenarios which correlate with joy, fear, anger, sorrow, disgust, and surprise. Meanwhile, twin Y is asked a series of questions about what twin Y is perceivably experiencing.
I propose that without a meaningful measure of confidence, twin Y would be unable to accurately empathize with twin X – that is to say that twin Y wouldn’t literally feel what twin X feels. Modification of this experiment could then be tested.
Place twins X and Y in the same room. Both participants are blindfolded while donning noise-cancelling headphones. However, twin X receives sounds through the headphones which correlate with an emotional response.
Meanwhile, twin Y is asked questions through the headphones about what twin X is feeling. Again, without significant confidence, I propose that twin Y wouldn’t literally feel what twin X feels.
I argue that feeling what another person feels doesn’t actually occur, aside from perhaps conjoined twins. Rather, the occurrence of colloquially empathizing – or supposedly feeling what another person feels – relates to an imagined experience.
An individual can imagine what another person feels (emotion or bodily sensation), which is an effect of a cognitive and not an emotive or sensory experience. Thus, through use of imagination, an individual can think about what it’s like for another person to emote or sense in a particular manner.
In this regard, it’s almost as one source describes of empathy, “Empathy is the ability to emotionally understand what other people feel, see things from their point of view, and imagine yourself in their place. Essentially, it is putting yourself in someone else’s position and feeling what they are feeling.”
I suggest it’s “almost” as the source states, though I argue that it’s virtually impossible to actually feel what others feel. For instance, I know what my experience with sorrow is like. However, when I’m sad it isn’t as though you literally feel sorrow in the same way as me.
Your experience with sorrow, given a similar circumstance such as the death of a loved one, may rate a seven on a scale from one to ten – whereas one is the least and ten is the greatest. However, because of my views on death, the loss of a loved one may result in a one for me.
Likewise, our pain levels may differ. If you’re stung by a wasp, you may experience pain at a rate of seven using the same scale. If that very wasp stings me, I may feel pain at a level ten.
We aren’t symmetrical in our emotive or sensory experiences. Therefore, I argue that through use of imagined experience – what actually occurs when empathy is at hand – people can’t literally feel what others feel.
In a blogpost entitled On Empathy, I made the case for use of logic and reason, as we may utilize rational compassion rather than actually feeling what others feel. We simply imagine what other people feel and this imagined content can then lead to compassion regarding the experience of others.
In any case, when I’ve informed others about my stance on colloquial empathy, I’ve received skeptical responses from some people. It appears as though a select number of individuals insist on believing in irrational concepts. Alas, I unconditionally accept these fallible human beings.
Recently, political commentator Tucker Carlson featured podcaster Darryl Cooper in an interview that some declared as little more than “Holocaust revisionist” rhetoric. As a matter of disclosure, I watched the entire interview and appreciated the information.
As to the veracity of claims made by Cooper, I plead ignorance. Nevertheless, I like hearing different perspectives regarding historical narratives. Also, it appears to me that Cooper was perhaps using a method of strategic empathy concerning his perspective on World War II.
According to one source, strategic empathy is defined “as stepping into the minds of others” and “may be essential to understanding the interests of, the motivations of, and the constraints on adversaries.” This approach involves imagination and not the experience of actually feeling.
The Chinese military general and strategist Sun Tzu succinctly stated of what is now called strategic empathy:
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
Knowing oneself and knowing one’s enemy requires strategic empathy. Putting oneself into the proverbial shoes of Adolf Hitler, as to understand the imagined motivations and feelings of the Austrian-born German dictator, is a matter of strategic empathy Cooper apparently practices.
This isn’t always a comfortable experience. Perhaps stepping into the imagined mental and emotional processes of Hitler may take an individual on a cognitive and emotive journey of discomforting rational compassion.
I imagine that the fallible human being, that Hitler doubtlessly was, perhaps cared deeply about the German people. Thus, I don’t globally rate Hitler as a terrible, horrible, awful monster who was unworthy of compassion.
This isn’t to suggest that how the dictator behaved was excusable. Rather, I separate the individual from the action. Through use of strategic empathy I’m able to comprehend what I imagine Hitler thought or felt, though without condoning his behavior.
Forgive me a personal anecdote. Many years ago, I had a client on my caseload that was facing a number of legal counts regarding aggravated sexual assault concerning two children who were under the age of 14.
As is the case with Hitler, I was able to recognize the client as a fallible human being who was worthy of rational compassion. Even though I found this individual’s behavior reprehensible, I used strategic empathy to understand the client – as this method of comprehension doesn’t solely relate to one’s enemy.
None of the other clinicians within the agency for which I worked wanted anything to do with the client. To them, this individual was a monster and deserved to be buried underneath the jail.
However, I used Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) to separate the person from the behavior. In turn, I was able to unconditionally accept the imperfect client while intervening on the individual’s behalf in regard to a criminal justice diversion program.
Perhaps you’ll conclude that my advocacy for humane treatment of this person, using strategic empathy, was inexcusable. Maybe you maintain that such people don’t deserve empathy, as you refuse to imagine what such individuals think or feel.
That’s fine, because I unconditionally accept you as a flawed individual who is worthy of rational compassion, too. You’ll receive no global evaluation of your personhood from me.
Likewise, I don’t view Hitler, Cooper, my former client, others, or even myself as monstrous individuals. Strategic empathy, rather than colloquial empathy, is something I regard as a worthwhile endeavor and that which allows me to improve my skills as a psychotherapist.
Would you like to know more about how not to upset yourself with unproductive beliefs about yourself or others in a similar fashion? If so, I look forward to assisting you. However, don’t expect me to actually feel what you feel, because that’s crazy talk.
If you’re looking for a provider who works to help you understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.
As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.
At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply helping you to feel better, I want to help you get better!
Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW
References:
Abbe, A. (2023, May 19). Understanding the adversary: Strategic empathy and perspective
taking in national security taking in national security. The US Army War College Quarterly. Retrieved from https://press.armywarcollege.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3221&context=parameters
APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2023, November 15). Empathy. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/empathy
Carlson, T. (2024, September 2). Darryl Cooper: The true history of the Jonestown Cult, WWII, and how Winston Churchill ruined Europe [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/vOTgPEGYS2o?si=8cHMsJbwIHi2D_bW
Cherry, K. (2024, July 3). What is empathy? Verywell Mind. Retrieved from https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-empathy-2795562
Hollings, D. (2024, August 7). Awfulizing. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/awfulizing
Hollings, D. (2024, September 14). Crazy. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/crazy
Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer
Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use
Hollings, D. (2024, May 11). Fallible human being. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fallible-human-being
Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better
Hollings, D. (2023, September 13). Global evaluations. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/global-evaluations
Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/
Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching
Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason
Hollings, D. (2022, October 22). On empathy. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-empathy
Hollings, D. (2023, September 3). On feelings. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-feelings
Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist
Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt
Hollings, D. (2024, April 21). Sensation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/sensation
Hollings, D. (2023, August 6). The science. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-science
Hollings, D. (2022, July 11). Unconditional acceptance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unconditional-acceptance
Robertson, K. (2024, September 6). Tucker Carlson criticized for hosting Holocaust revisionist. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/06/business/media/tucker-carlson-holocaust-interview-biden-administration.html
Stable Diffusion. (n.d.). Hitler’s uncharacteristic embrace [Image]. Black Technology LTD. Retrieved from https://stablediffusionweb.com/image/13250647-hitler-s-uncharacteristic-embrace
Substack. (n.d.). Darryl Cooper [@martyrmade]. Retrieved from https://substack.com/@martyrmade
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Adolf Hitler. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Sun Tzu. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Tzu
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Tucker Carlson. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucker_Carlson
Comments