> There's also a component of this missing - empathy is usually somewhat non-intentional - as in you don't choose what signals make you feel. This line is very

> There's also a component of this missing - empathy is usually somewhat non-intentional - as in you don't choose what signals make you feel. This line is very difficult to draw because we freely pollute the meaning of empathy as an internal feeling with empathy as an external behaviour. Under this definition of empathy we could be compelled to consider blind people incapable of empathy as they're incapable of recognising facial expressions, for obvious reasons we know better. > It's not clear to me an autistic person told something would have the same impact. Even in non-autistic people, an experienced narrated/described doesn't usually have the same reaction as one experienced, and I think this is an important part of empathy (in a game-theoretic/evolutionary sense) as something that is not calculated. The autistic response isn't calculated either, just lacking the facility to recognise some behavioural expressions of emotion. I'm an autistic man but as a child I recall collecting mountains upon mountains of stuffed toys, when they piled high enough to tumble from the bed I'd wake to some of them on the floor and I'd weep at the thought those toys had felt "left out" by being pushed from the bed overnight. (I was very young, cut some slack) This kind of refrain is common, autistic people when questioned express feeling intense overwhelming affective empathy. Where autistic people classically struggle is in cognitive empathy employed as a social hierarchy mechanism and in socially acceptable expressions of empathy.