6 ms·

What's the Difference Between Empathy, Sympathy, and Compassion?

popularrecluse 4y ago
12 year old me playing D&D: "What is the purpose of having separate intelligence and wisdom stats? They are the same thing!" Older me: "Oh."
- coldtea 4y ago
  They'll find out it's really not, when they inevitably meet a foolish highly-intelligent person doing unwise things...
  - phkahler 4y ago
    Yep, that's probably why PP said 12 year old. Teen years are full of opportunities to learn this difference. There's no shortage of intelligent morons at 15 ;-)
- peteradio 4y ago
  Intelligence: Here is how you can remove this fence. Wisdom: Should we really be removing this fence?
  - fullstop 4y ago
    Intelligence: A tomato is a fruit Wisdom: It does not belong in a fruit salad
    - naniwaduni 4y ago
      Tomato is great in fruit salad, what are you on about?
      - TuringTest 4y ago
        There's low wisdom stats, too :P
  - andrewl 4y ago
    Exactly. The famous Chesterton’s Fence.
- dgb23 4y ago
  My fighter is somewhat wise but not so smart. At least he knows he isn't the smartest, thus he writes everything down in a journal he deems important. He doesn't come up with the most interesting or cunning solutions. But he knows that good preparation, a solid formation and sharp weapons can solve many problems and avoid pitfalls. The opposite (smart but not wise) would be someone who is book smart or even a smart-ass. Probably coming up with all sorts of crazy and interesting ideas, but doesn't necessarily judge situation too well and might quickly discard simple but effective solutions. They might be quick minded and suddenly do high risk/reward kind of moves that either save the day or fail spectacularly.
neom 4y ago
I'm not particularly religious these days, but I was raised a Christian. When I was around 10 learning about the ideas behind empathy, sympathy and compassion this song always came to mind[1]. I think compassion is doing something with your empathy and sympathy. I think compassion is really important, more people should "cross over the road". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCP5gHlasf8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCP5gHlasf8
coldtea 4y ago
Empathy: I feel what you feel/understand where you're coming from Sympathy: I like you/I feel for you/It hurts me when you're hurt Compassion: I feel bad/want to help when you feel bad There's some overlap, and each is often needed to get the others
chiefalchemist 4y ago
Imagining these three as a spectrum, and not three static silos, is most helpful.
a_subsystem 4y ago
Empathy deals with the emotional systems (I feel you). Sympathy deals with intellectual (I understand what you feel or imagine it must feel like x). Compassion is a transcendent experience in which you try to imagine yourself in the shoes of another.
- javaunsafe2019 4y ago
  I would describe the first two more like: I feel with you. I have feelings for you. Sympathy for me is liking someone or something e.g. an idea whereas I understand empathy as to be able to understand and share someone’s emotion/emotional situation.
BulgarianIdiot 4y ago
Empathy: the ability to feel what others feel. Sympathy: you align with that they feel, not merely understand it. Compassion: you're doing something about it, not merely aligning with it.
- mmvora 4y ago
  But don't you feel that sometimes Sympathy has alot of negative connotations associated to it when compared to Empathy? (Which in turn puts you in a position of dis-alignment)
  - BulgarianIdiot 4y ago
    Well, popular words are highly overloaded. So yes, maybe.
photochemsyn 4y ago
I think it's clearer to create a tree: Empathy |--Sympathy (positive view of the result of empathizing) |--Antipathy (negative view of the result of empathizing) For example, one could empathize with someone who is consumed with hatred of other people, and possibly understand how they came to adopt that view, while strongly disliking that kind of mentality, and that would be antipathy. One could even have compassion for such a person, while also accepting that they need to be locked up in a prison because of their history of serial murder of other people. Alternatively, one could empathize with a parent fleeing a war zone with children in tow, and most people would be sympathetic towards that person and their motivations, because one could understand why a parent would want to protect their children from harm, at a personal emotional level. A compassionate response would be to say, "Perhaps our government / community can provide some basic resources for these people, and why not also try to stop that war from continuing so we don't have to take in all these refugees, as well?" Empathy doesn't really have an opposite, but it is a capability which may be missing in some people, comparable to vision vs. blindness. A person lacking any sense of empathy is somewhat rare, but they do exist and are generally categorized as sociopathic narcissists... they do tend to be a bit on the power-mad side of things, and hence are more frequently found running governments, corporations, and (other?) organized crime cartels, as well as starting wars, etc. Perhaps the lack of empathy is genetic in nature? Someone could come up with a DNA test, perhaps.
atmosx 4y ago
Fun fact: empathy comes from the Greek word «εμπάθεια» which nowadays means disliking someone. The word change meaning throughout the years, so in English retained the original meaning while in modern Greek the meaning is the exact opposite. The result is ofc confusion when someone is using the word in Greek, because often times one can’t be sure what is the authors intent :-)
labrador 4y ago
The inability to naturally and spontaneously think or feel empathy, sympathy, and compassion is one of the hallmarks of the psychopath. Faking these three for approval is also the hallmarks possibly making one a psychopath.
phemartin 4y ago
Listen to this article (5min) at https://playtext.app/doc/clggowx2f0002jp0fal6qzpbu https://playtext.app/doc/clggowx2f0002jp0fal6qzpbu
mittermayr 4y ago
I just finished teaching a class this morning and this came up during a design thinking segment. It's a male-heavy class and when these terms come up, they tend to laugh it off as some kind of esotherical side-quest. When I ask if anyone feels comfortable explaining the difference, it always ends in a beautiful disaster because that one person feeling brave enough to go for it, usually completely derails, only to be taken over by another student taking it into a similar dead-end. It almost always ends with them agreeing that this is a complex topic and therefore impossible to pin down. I then bring up the scenario of someone who lost their dog (in a tragic freak accident) a while back... A sympathic friend asks them how they cope, or feel, they acknowledge the fact that there is a process of grief happening. They show sympathy by observing your state from the outside. The empathic friend stops by to check how they can help and then leaves with the rest of the dog food. They're able to walk a moment in your shoes and see the problems you're facing. Which, I think, should be a fundamental quality of a good product manager, planner or user researcher. Anyways, dumb teaching stuff, but I kinda like the example.
- hosh 4y ago
  That’s an interesting story. I think the key thing missing here is the notion of “well-being”. When designing with well-being in mind (of end-user, community, society, ecology), then sympathy, empathy, and compassion all makes more sense. (Though I disagree with how Chopra distinguishes among those terms). I don’t think males are incapable of it. We’re socialized to reject it, but we all need it in some way or another.
- cjmcqueen 4y ago
  As I look at the other examples given here and reflect on my own Christian beliefs, I see a common understanding that compassion or active empathy involves action. Sympathy is nice, but it seems most folks here agree it is at the level of understanding and doesn't involve the creativity of action. I think this is what Jesus was teaching with the "Good Samaritan" parable: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/nt/luke/10 https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/nt/luke... And, I think a masculine response to sympathy/empathy has never been expressed more (worst) than in the classic movie Funny Face with Audrey Hepburn and Fred Astaire... the scene probably doesn't play as well as it did back in 1957. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FXW2S_KU4o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FXW2S_KU4o I agree this is a skill to develop if you really want to excel at product management, planning, user research, education, medicine... anywhere you need to account for the human condition.
rented_mule 4y ago
I recently watched a talk by a Registered Nurse on a topic she calls "assertive empathy". It's a bit long at 41 minutes[0], but the real world examples were particularly interesting to me. An example that runs throughout the talk involves a young man who is verbally abusive and physically threatening to the nursing staff. His behavior is causing them real difficulty in just doing their jobs of assisting with his recovery. The solution? Demonstrate empathy ("I understand that what you're going through is hard and we're here to help.") but be assertive and set boundaries ("But you must show us the same level of respect we show you. We won't tolerate abuse."). By holding that line while continuing to show care, she eventually catalyzed a change in his behavior toward them. This assertive empathy is seen as the height of respect by this patient who might not feel respected anywhere else in his life. Having been hospitalized myself, I know just how amazing a good nurse can be. I think the world would be a better place if we all learned more about human interaction from experienced nurses. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYU9yTp0lD4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYU9yTp0lD4
hosh 4y ago
Huh. On the face of it, the way Chopra defines these are fairly simple, yet powerful way to make sense of this. … but, I am not sure it is complete. For example, the way Chopra defined sympathy and empathy is the way psychologists define cognitive empathy and affective empathy. It implies that sympathy is something else all together. (The way I learned sympathy in the colloquial sense is more along the lines of virtue signaling, or at least a show of solidarity) As for Chopra’s definition of compassion, I don’t think it adequately distinguishes it from pity. Furthermore, I have experienced compassion in a form that was not about relieving suffering (not exactly) … admittedly though, this is gettin to into the Buddhist view of things.
Insanity 4y ago
There's a quote in the book "Radical Candor" which talks about Empathy vs Compassion which I rather like: "picture yourself walking along a mountainous trail. You come across a person being crushed by a boulder on their chest. The empathetic response would be to feel the same sense of crushing suffocation, thus rendering you helpless. The compassionate response would be to recognize that that person is in pain and to do everything within your power to remove the boulder and alleviate their suffering. Put another way, compassion is empathy plus action."
- nmz 4y ago
  You can be compassionate without being empathetic. You can recognize, intellectually that someone is in distress and still help. I cannot even imagine the pain someone is in, actually, I think its healthier to be compassionate without being empathetic. else you would be emotionally exhausted if you felt as others in distress do. Reading the news would be an act of torture.
mbesto 4y ago
I really like this description of empathy vs sympathy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZBTYViDPlQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZBTYViDPlQ It was the first time I "got it".
mcv 4y ago
I've come across several articles and discussions that suggests empathy is a bit of a trap. You may feel what someone else is feeling, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you're helping them. I'm currently reading Rutget Bregman's Humankind: A Hopeful History (Dutch: De Meeste Mensen Deugen) about how people in emergency situations or when society breaks down, tend to be far more altruistic than we usually tell ourselves. The exact opposite of Lord of the Flies turns out to be true. But then where does xenophobia come from? One of the culprits, he suggests, might be empathy. As we feel and identify more strongly with one person who have something in common with, we tend to see other people as more different. So xenophobia might be the other side of the same coin as empathy. Not sure if it's true, and I haven't finished the book yet, but Bregman tends to be pretty thorough in his research, and he does base this idea on experiments.
- hosh 4y ago
  I am not sure I buy that (empathy leads to xenophobia), so I’d have to think about that some more. I learned this from a particular Buddhist teaching — what someone want is not necessarily the same as what someone needs. It takes wisdom to know what the deeper needs are. So the way I learned that empathy is a trap the same way sympathy and compassion is a trap. Someone unable able distinguish surface wants for deeper needs, or why and how the suffering happens will seek out things that will not really help.
  - mcv 4y ago
    The issue is of course a lot more complex than I can summarise in a brief comment. It's a 500 page book (though well worth reading). But he describes a couple of experiments, including some with babies: show a baby two puppets, one who is mean and one who is nice, and they'll prefer the nice one. But show them two puppets, one who share the same taste in food but is mean, and another who is nice but doesn't share the same taste, and they'll prefer the mean one. He includes observations that groups of terrorists of various kinds are often very close to each other, soldiers fight harder and more effectively against an enemy if they have a strong sense of camaraderie. Empathy makes us closer to some, but more distant from the rest. The book quotes a professor Bloom who is against empathy for that reason. A colleague of his showed that when people are encouraged to empathise with one mortally ill patient, they're more likely to support preferential treatment for that one patient even if it comes at the cost of other patients who are just as ill and in need of treatment. I wonder if the same is true with Trump supporters: they oppose his indictment because they empathise with him, but they want Hillary Clinton locked up because they don't empathise with her. They believe Trump understands them and cares about them, even in the face of evidence to the contrary. It's not that they're heartless people who have chosen evil, it's that they've been blinded by the limited focus of their empathy. But this is my own speculation, not Bregman's. And I certainly don't pretend to understand it.
leroy-is-here 4y ago
Empathy is knowing the mental feelings of someone because you’ve known them. Sympathy is knowing the physical symptoms of someone because you’ve felt them. Compassion is a way of acting when knowing empathy and sympathy.
bdhe 4y ago
This might be a great article, but it is important to note that this comes from a company founded by Deepak Chopra, who is a famous figure and undoubtedly has done some good work but is a deeply flawed person, perhaps a charlatan really. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_Chopra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_Chopra > Chopra has metaphorically described the AIDS virus as emitting "a sound that lures the DNA to its destruction". The condition can be treated, according to Chopra, with "Ayurveda's primordial sound".[18] Taking issue with this view, medical professor Lawrence Schneiderman has said that ethical issues are raised when alternative medicine is not based on empirical evidence and that, "to put it mildly, Dr. Chopra proposes a treatment and prevention program for AIDS that has no supporting empirical data". > Chopra has been criticized for his frequent references to the relationship of quantum mechanics to healing processes, a connection that has drawn skepticism from physicists who say it can be considered as contributing to the general confusion in the popular press regarding quantum measurement, decoherence and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.[136] In 1998, Chopra was awarded the satirical Ig Nobel Prize in physics for "his unique interpretation of quantum physics as it applies to life, liberty, and the pursuit of economic happiness" > In May 1991, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published an article by Chopra and two others on Ayurvedic medicine and TM.[144] JAMA subsequently published an erratum stating that the lead author, Hari M. Sharma, had undisclosed financial interests, followed by an article by JAMA associate editor Andrew A. Skolnick which was highly critical of Chopra and the other authors for failing to disclose their financial connections to the article subject.[145] Several experts on meditation and traditional Indian medicine criticized JAMA for accepting the "shoddy science" of the original article.[146] Chopra and two TM groups sued Skolnick and JAMA for defamation, asking for $194 million in damages, but the case was dismissed in March 1993. Not someone with a great track record.
s_dev 4y ago
This has no place on HN. Deepak Chopra is a charlatan on par with some edgy teenager running his own blog but professing to be the equivalent of a respected doctor or scientist. Here he is getting his "beliefs" exposed to some pretty basic questions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ka--VV-_t_U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ka--VV-_t_U I'm going to flag this so dang can investigate further.
- lisper 4y ago
  You can flag a post as inappropriate by clicking the "flag" link under the headline. If a post gets flagged enough, it disappears from the home page.
- msarrel 4y ago
  I completely agree with this comment
- 23B1 4y ago
  The conversation on HN will be interesting and valuable though. I vote 'keep' Edit: it already is, as you can see. Baby/bathwater etc.
  - s_dev 4y ago
    Nope -- successfully flagged. It's all nonsense -- the HN mod made the right call.
    - 23B1 4y ago
      If you read the comments, it's quite a bit of good advice, especially in tech where employees are treated like chattel instead of people. But hey, congratulations on the 'win'
- qumpis 4y ago
  I've never heard of the person, but the video you linked doesn't seem to do a good job of exposing charlatism at all, it's a rather strange meme of a moment taken out of context. Edit: this random post on reddit seems to question this person's techings (?) And imo do a better job at 'exposing' https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/d1ewq/why_deepak_chopra_is_a_dangerous_charlatan/?xpromo_edp=enabled https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/d1ewq/why_deepak_c...
none_to_remain 4y ago
I've seen conflicting definitions, of course... I think it's important to keep in mind that you're not necessarily being "nice" with this sort of sense. If you want to hurt someone emotionally, empathy can help tell you where to stick the figurative knife for maximum damage
ojintoad 4y ago
I'd recommend this article and author as an alternative authority on the subject https://www.empathy-driven-development.com/defining-empathy-is-like-nailing-jell-o-to-a-wall/ https://www.empathy-driven-development.com/defining-empathy-...
anbende 4y ago
I am a clinical psychologist and did research related to empathy and compassion. Often in clinical work I have seen almost the exact opposite distinction between empathy and sympathy with empathy being understanding and sympathy being shared feeling. In the research, definitions are muddy and one of the main problems with empathy research (IMO) is that each research group seems to use their own definition and these definitions are often incompatible. My own preferred definition defines cognitive and affective empathy, with cognitive being the understanding and affective being sharing in the emotion. I personally don’t care for the way the article defines these things. It seems to contrast sharply with more or less all scientific and clinical uses of the terms AND the everyday use of sympathy which does NOT commonly mean understanding but usually something like pity or just “feeling for”. It almost seems like the author accidentally switched empathy and sympathy throughout the article.
andrei_says_ 4y ago
In the world of nonviolent communication where empathy is one of the central concept, empathy occurs when a person feels felt. When empathy occurs, the person who is experiencing the feelings, and now feels felt and understood on the level of the feeling, has the resources to digest / process, understand, and move forward / shift. Learning how to give empathy to others and self is one of the most important outcomes of the training. What makes it difficult to teach is that it is less of an intellectual process, it is closer to a felt presence experience, and very simple. I have an roleplay exercise called “not empathy” going through the standard cultural approaches like telling a similar story, or telling the feeling person that whoever wronged them is the bad guy/gal, or reminding them how valuable their experience is as learning or that soon they’ll be laughing from the distance of time. None of these is empathy and none provides the space needed for the shift.
nmz 4y ago
I always think of manipulative people. They might be sympathetic to your situation, but they do not have compassion, meaning they employ their understanding to F you over. Sympathy is good for the good, but for bad actors, it is a tool to use against others.
tekla 4y ago
I really really dislike this shit with empathy/sympathy/compassion and how its considered good. It only works when your thought patterns are "normal". As soon as you stray from acceptable norms, this shit just makes it easy to judge you as weird and a freak.
tpoacher 4y ago
Q: What's the Difference Between [Subjective Definition 1], [Subjective Definition 2], and [Subjective Definition 3]? A: They are different subjective definitions. This should have been the whole article.
yawpitch 4y ago
This isn't a bad piece, but it somewhat oversimplifies these concepts. For example, "compathy" is more directly "viscerally feeling what another feels" while "empathy" is more accurately defined as the intellectual or emotional capacity for engaging in compathy. That capacity can be grounded in actually feeling what the observed other feels -- which, arguably, is impossible if the observed is experiencing something the observer has no shared personal experience with -- or by feeling what an observer imagines the observer would feel if sharing the personal experience of an observed. Actual empathy _requires_ that one is "able to understand what the person is feeling" -- which is what this piece uses as the (somewhat imprecise) definition of "sympathy". Similarly, "sympathy" is more accurately defined as "(the expression of) understanding of what the person is feeling" ... one need not actually understand the feelings of another to engage in sympathy (ie, most sympathy does not require actual empathy, but actual sympathy does require actual empathy), and often actual compassion (which derives from actual empathy) requires one to not engage in actual sympathy. Nevertheless, good to see an attempt to unpack these terms. > “If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion.” ... and try to recognize that what is desired, but not attained (happiness) is not as important or impactful as what is practiced, but not mastered (compassion).
- dschuler 4y ago
  Sympathy literally means "feeling together".
  - photochemsyn 4y ago
    I think that's empathy - which may also result in antipathy and revulsion, e.g. one may empathetically understand why some person would want to own slaves or sit atop a strict hierarchical-religious power structure, as they like the feeling of having absolute power over others, while strongly disliking such motivations and having no sympathy for people who engage in that behavior.
  - slushh 4y ago
    The definition of sympathy from the article doesn't rhyme with symbiosis [1] or symphony [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbiosis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbiosis [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony#Etymology_and_origins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony#Etymology_and_origins

12 year old me playing D&D: "What is the purpose of having separate intelligence and wisdom stats? They are the same thing!" Older me: "Oh."

coldtea 4y ago
They'll find out it's really not, when they inevitably meet a foolish highly-intelligent person doing unwise things...
- phkahler 4y ago
  Yep, that's probably why PP said 12 year old. Teen years are full of opportunities to learn this difference. There's no shortage of intelligent morons at 15 ;-)
peteradio 4y ago
Intelligence: Here is how you can remove this fence. Wisdom: Should we really be removing this fence?
- fullstop 4y ago
  Intelligence: A tomato is a fruit Wisdom: It does not belong in a fruit salad
  - naniwaduni 4y ago
    Tomato is great in fruit salad, what are you on about?
    - TuringTest 4y ago
      There's low wisdom stats, too :P
- andrewl 4y ago
  Exactly. The famous Chesterton’s Fence.
dgb23 4y ago
My fighter is somewhat wise but not so smart. At least he knows he isn't the smartest, thus he writes everything down in a journal he deems important. He doesn't come up with the most interesting or cunning solutions. But he knows that good preparation, a solid formation and sharp weapons can solve many problems and avoid pitfalls. The opposite (smart but not wise) would be someone who is book smart or even a smart-ass. Probably coming up with all sorts of crazy and interesting ideas, but doesn't necessarily judge situation too well and might quickly discard simple but effective solutions. They might be quick minded and suddenly do high risk/reward kind of moves that either save the day or fail spectacularly.

neom 4y ago

I'm not particularly religious these days, but I was raised a Christian. When I was around 10 learning about the ideas behind empathy, sympathy and compassion this song always came to mind[1]. I think compassion is doing something with your empathy and sympathy. I think compassion is really important, more people should "cross over the road". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCP5gHlasf8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCP5gHlasf8

coldtea 4y ago

Empathy: I feel what you feel/understand where you're coming from Sympathy: I like you/I feel for you/It hurts me when you're hurt Compassion: I feel bad/want to help when you feel bad There's some overlap, and each is often needed to get the others

chiefalchemist 4y ago

Imagining these three as a spectrum, and not three static silos, is most helpful.

a_subsystem 4y ago

Empathy deals with the emotional systems (I feel you). Sympathy deals with intellectual (I understand what you feel or imagine it must feel like x). Compassion is a transcendent experience in which you try to imagine yourself in the shoes of another.

javaunsafe2019 4y ago
I would describe the first two more like: I feel with you. I have feelings for you. Sympathy for me is liking someone or something e.g. an idea whereas I understand empathy as to be able to understand and share someone’s emotion/emotional situation.

BulgarianIdiot 4y ago

Empathy: the ability to feel what others feel. Sympathy: you align with that they feel, not merely understand it. Compassion: you're doing something about it, not merely aligning with it.

mmvora 4y ago
But don't you feel that sometimes Sympathy has alot of negative connotations associated to it when compared to Empathy? (Which in turn puts you in a position of dis-alignment)
- BulgarianIdiot 4y ago
  Well, popular words are highly overloaded. So yes, maybe.

photochemsyn 4y ago

I think it's clearer to create a tree: Empathy |--Sympathy (positive view of the result of empathizing) |--Antipathy (negative view of the result of empathizing) For example, one could empathize with someone who is consumed with hatred of other people, and possibly understand how they came to adopt that view, while strongly disliking that kind of mentality, and that would be antipathy. One could even have compassion for such a person, while also accepting that they need to be locked up in a prison because of their history of serial murder of other people. Alternatively, one could empathize with a parent fleeing a war zone with children in tow, and most people would be sympathetic towards that person and their motivations, because one could understand why a parent would want to protect their children from harm, at a personal emotional level. A compassionate response would be to say, "Perhaps our government / community can provide some basic resources for these people, and why not also try to stop that war from continuing so we don't have to take in all these refugees, as well?" Empathy doesn't really have an opposite, but it is a capability which may be missing in some people, comparable to vision vs. blindness. A person lacking any sense of empathy is somewhat rare, but they do exist and are generally categorized as sociopathic narcissists... they do tend to be a bit on the power-mad side of things, and hence are more frequently found running governments, corporations, and (other?) organized crime cartels, as well as starting wars, etc. Perhaps the lack of empathy is genetic in nature? Someone could come up with a DNA test, perhaps.

atmosx 4y ago

Fun fact: empathy comes from the Greek word «εμπάθεια» which nowadays means disliking someone. The word change meaning throughout the years, so in English retained the original meaning while in modern Greek the meaning is the exact opposite. The result is ofc confusion when someone is using the word in Greek, because often times one can’t be sure what is the authors intent :-)

labrador 4y ago

The inability to naturally and spontaneously think or feel empathy, sympathy, and compassion is one of the hallmarks of the psychopath. Faking these three for approval is also the hallmarks possibly making one a psychopath.

phemartin 4y ago

Listen to this article (5min) at https://playtext.app/doc/clggowx2f0002jp0fal6qzpbu https://playtext.app/doc/clggowx2f0002jp0fal6qzpbu

mittermayr 4y ago

I just finished teaching a class this morning and this came up during a design thinking segment. It's a male-heavy class and when these terms come up, they tend to laugh it off as some kind of esotherical side-quest. When I ask if anyone feels comfortable explaining the difference, it always ends in a beautiful disaster because that one person feeling brave enough to go for it, usually completely derails, only to be taken over by another student taking it into a similar dead-end. It almost always ends with them agreeing that this is a complex topic and therefore impossible to pin down. I then bring up the scenario of someone who lost their dog (in a tragic freak accident) a while back... A sympathic friend asks them how they cope, or feel, they acknowledge the fact that there is a process of grief happening. They show sympathy by observing your state from the outside. The empathic friend stops by to check how they can help and then leaves with the rest of the dog food. They're able to walk a moment in your shoes and see the problems you're facing. Which, I think, should be a fundamental quality of a good product manager, planner or user researcher. Anyways, dumb teaching stuff, but I kinda like the example.

hosh 4y ago
That’s an interesting story. I think the key thing missing here is the notion of “well-being”. When designing with well-being in mind (of end-user, community, society, ecology), then sympathy, empathy, and compassion all makes more sense. (Though I disagree with how Chopra distinguishes among those terms). I don’t think males are incapable of it. We’re socialized to reject it, but we all need it in some way or another.
cjmcqueen 4y ago
As I look at the other examples given here and reflect on my own Christian beliefs, I see a common understanding that compassion or active empathy involves action. Sympathy is nice, but it seems most folks here agree it is at the level of understanding and doesn't involve the creativity of action. I think this is what Jesus was teaching with the "Good Samaritan" parable: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/nt/luke/10 https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/nt/luke... And, I think a masculine response to sympathy/empathy has never been expressed more (worst) than in the classic movie Funny Face with Audrey Hepburn and Fred Astaire... the scene probably doesn't play as well as it did back in 1957. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FXW2S_KU4o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FXW2S_KU4o I agree this is a skill to develop if you really want to excel at product management, planning, user research, education, medicine... anywhere you need to account for the human condition.

rented_mule 4y ago

I recently watched a talk by a Registered Nurse on a topic she calls "assertive empathy". It's a bit long at 41 minutes[0], but the real world examples were particularly interesting to me. An example that runs throughout the talk involves a young man who is verbally abusive and physically threatening to the nursing staff. His behavior is causing them real difficulty in just doing their jobs of assisting with his recovery. The solution? Demonstrate empathy ("I understand that what you're going through is hard and we're here to help.") but be assertive and set boundaries ("But you must show us the same level of respect we show you. We won't tolerate abuse."). By holding that line while continuing to show care, she eventually catalyzed a change in his behavior toward them. This assertive empathy is seen as the height of respect by this patient who might not feel respected anywhere else in his life. Having been hospitalized myself, I know just how amazing a good nurse can be. I think the world would be a better place if we all learned more about human interaction from experienced nurses. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYU9yTp0lD4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYU9yTp0lD4

hosh 4y ago

Huh. On the face of it, the way Chopra defines these are fairly simple, yet powerful way to make sense of this. … but, I am not sure it is complete. For example, the way Chopra defined sympathy and empathy is the way psychologists define cognitive empathy and affective empathy. It implies that sympathy is something else all together. (The way I learned sympathy in the colloquial sense is more along the lines of virtue signaling, or at least a show of solidarity) As for Chopra’s definition of compassion, I don’t think it adequately distinguishes it from pity. Furthermore, I have experienced compassion in a form that was not about relieving suffering (not exactly) … admittedly though, this is gettin to into the Buddhist view of things.

Insanity 4y ago

There's a quote in the book "Radical Candor" which talks about Empathy vs Compassion which I rather like: "picture yourself walking along a mountainous trail. You come across a person being crushed by a boulder on their chest. The empathetic response would be to feel the same sense of crushing suffocation, thus rendering you helpless. The compassionate response would be to recognize that that person is in pain and to do everything within your power to remove the boulder and alleviate their suffering. Put another way, compassion is empathy plus action."

nmz 4y ago
You can be compassionate without being empathetic. You can recognize, intellectually that someone is in distress and still help. I cannot even imagine the pain someone is in, actually, I think its healthier to be compassionate without being empathetic. else you would be emotionally exhausted if you felt as others in distress do. Reading the news would be an act of torture.

mbesto 4y ago

I really like this description of empathy vs sympathy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZBTYViDPlQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZBTYViDPlQ It was the first time I "got it".

mcv 4y ago

I've come across several articles and discussions that suggests empathy is a bit of a trap. You may feel what someone else is feeling, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you're helping them. I'm currently reading Rutget Bregman's Humankind: A Hopeful History (Dutch: De Meeste Mensen Deugen) about how people in emergency situations or when society breaks down, tend to be far more altruistic than we usually tell ourselves. The exact opposite of Lord of the Flies turns out to be true. But then where does xenophobia come from? One of the culprits, he suggests, might be empathy. As we feel and identify more strongly with one person who have something in common with, we tend to see other people as more different. So xenophobia might be the other side of the same coin as empathy. Not sure if it's true, and I haven't finished the book yet, but Bregman tends to be pretty thorough in his research, and he does base this idea on experiments.

hosh 4y ago
I am not sure I buy that (empathy leads to xenophobia), so I’d have to think about that some more. I learned this from a particular Buddhist teaching — what someone want is not necessarily the same as what someone needs. It takes wisdom to know what the deeper needs are. So the way I learned that empathy is a trap the same way sympathy and compassion is a trap. Someone unable able distinguish surface wants for deeper needs, or why and how the suffering happens will seek out things that will not really help.
- mcv 4y ago
  The issue is of course a lot more complex than I can summarise in a brief comment. It's a 500 page book (though well worth reading). But he describes a couple of experiments, including some with babies: show a baby two puppets, one who is mean and one who is nice, and they'll prefer the nice one. But show them two puppets, one who share the same taste in food but is mean, and another who is nice but doesn't share the same taste, and they'll prefer the mean one. He includes observations that groups of terrorists of various kinds are often very close to each other, soldiers fight harder and more effectively against an enemy if they have a strong sense of camaraderie. Empathy makes us closer to some, but more distant from the rest. The book quotes a professor Bloom who is against empathy for that reason. A colleague of his showed that when people are encouraged to empathise with one mortally ill patient, they're more likely to support preferential treatment for that one patient even if it comes at the cost of other patients who are just as ill and in need of treatment. I wonder if the same is true with Trump supporters: they oppose his indictment because they empathise with him, but they want Hillary Clinton locked up because they don't empathise with her. They believe Trump understands them and cares about them, even in the face of evidence to the contrary. It's not that they're heartless people who have chosen evil, it's that they've been blinded by the limited focus of their empathy. But this is my own speculation, not Bregman's. And I certainly don't pretend to understand it.

leroy-is-here 4y ago

Empathy is knowing the mental feelings of someone because you’ve known them. Sympathy is knowing the physical symptoms of someone because you’ve felt them. Compassion is a way of acting when knowing empathy and sympathy.

bdhe 4y ago

This might be a great article, but it is important to note that this comes from a company founded by Deepak Chopra, who is a famous figure and undoubtedly has done some good work but is a deeply flawed person, perhaps a charlatan really. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_Chopra https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_Chopra > Chopra has metaphorically described the AIDS virus as emitting "a sound that lures the DNA to its destruction". The condition can be treated, according to Chopra, with "Ayurveda's primordial sound".[18] Taking issue with this view, medical professor Lawrence Schneiderman has said that ethical issues are raised when alternative medicine is not based on empirical evidence and that, "to put it mildly, Dr. Chopra proposes a treatment and prevention program for AIDS that has no supporting empirical data". > Chopra has been criticized for his frequent references to the relationship of quantum mechanics to healing processes, a connection that has drawn skepticism from physicists who say it can be considered as contributing to the general confusion in the popular press regarding quantum measurement, decoherence and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.[136] In 1998, Chopra was awarded the satirical Ig Nobel Prize in physics for "his unique interpretation of quantum physics as it applies to life, liberty, and the pursuit of economic happiness" > In May 1991, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published an article by Chopra and two others on Ayurvedic medicine and TM.[144] JAMA subsequently published an erratum stating that the lead author, Hari M. Sharma, had undisclosed financial interests, followed by an article by JAMA associate editor Andrew A. Skolnick which was highly critical of Chopra and the other authors for failing to disclose their financial connections to the article subject.[145] Several experts on meditation and traditional Indian medicine criticized JAMA for accepting the "shoddy science" of the original article.[146] Chopra and two TM groups sued Skolnick and JAMA for defamation, asking for $194 million in damages, but the case was dismissed in March 1993. Not someone with a great track record.

s_dev 4y ago

This has no place on HN. Deepak Chopra is a charlatan on par with some edgy teenager running his own blog but professing to be the equivalent of a respected doctor or scientist. Here he is getting his "beliefs" exposed to some pretty basic questions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ka--VV-_t_U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ka--VV-_t_U I'm going to flag this so dang can investigate further.

lisper 4y ago
You can flag a post as inappropriate by clicking the "flag" link under the headline. If a post gets flagged enough, it disappears from the home page.
msarrel 4y ago
I completely agree with this comment
23B1 4y ago
The conversation on HN will be interesting and valuable though. I vote 'keep' Edit: it already is, as you can see. Baby/bathwater etc.
- s_dev 4y ago
  Nope -- successfully flagged. It's all nonsense -- the HN mod made the right call.
  - 23B1 4y ago
    If you read the comments, it's quite a bit of good advice, especially in tech where employees are treated like chattel instead of people. But hey, congratulations on the 'win'
qumpis 4y ago
I've never heard of the person, but the video you linked doesn't seem to do a good job of exposing charlatism at all, it's a rather strange meme of a moment taken out of context. Edit: this random post on reddit seems to question this person's techings (?) And imo do a better job at 'exposing' https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/d1ewq/why_deepak_chopra_is_a_dangerous_charlatan/?xpromo_edp=enabled https://www.reddit.com/r/atheism/comments/d1ewq/why_deepak_c...

none_to_remain 4y ago

I've seen conflicting definitions, of course... I think it's important to keep in mind that you're not necessarily being "nice" with this sort of sense. If you want to hurt someone emotionally, empathy can help tell you where to stick the figurative knife for maximum damage

ojintoad 4y ago

I'd recommend this article and author as an alternative authority on the subject https://www.empathy-driven-development.com/defining-empathy-is-like-nailing-jell-o-to-a-wall/ https://www.empathy-driven-development.com/defining-empathy-...

anbende 4y ago

I am a clinical psychologist and did research related to empathy and compassion. Often in clinical work I have seen almost the exact opposite distinction between empathy and sympathy with empathy being understanding and sympathy being shared feeling. In the research, definitions are muddy and one of the main problems with empathy research (IMO) is that each research group seems to use their own definition and these definitions are often incompatible. My own preferred definition defines cognitive and affective empathy, with cognitive being the understanding and affective being sharing in the emotion. I personally don’t care for the way the article defines these things. It seems to contrast sharply with more or less all scientific and clinical uses of the terms AND the everyday use of sympathy which does NOT commonly mean understanding but usually something like pity or just “feeling for”. It almost seems like the author accidentally switched empathy and sympathy throughout the article.

andrei_says_ 4y ago

In the world of nonviolent communication where empathy is one of the central concept, empathy occurs when a person feels felt. When empathy occurs, the person who is experiencing the feelings, and now feels felt and understood on the level of the feeling, has the resources to digest / process, understand, and move forward / shift. Learning how to give empathy to others and self is one of the most important outcomes of the training. What makes it difficult to teach is that it is less of an intellectual process, it is closer to a felt presence experience, and very simple. I have an roleplay exercise called “not empathy” going through the standard cultural approaches like telling a similar story, or telling the feeling person that whoever wronged them is the bad guy/gal, or reminding them how valuable their experience is as learning or that soon they’ll be laughing from the distance of time. None of these is empathy and none provides the space needed for the shift.

nmz 4y ago

I always think of manipulative people. They might be sympathetic to your situation, but they do not have compassion, meaning they employ their understanding to F you over. Sympathy is good for the good, but for bad actors, it is a tool to use against others.

tekla 4y ago

I really really dislike this shit with empathy/sympathy/compassion and how its considered good. It only works when your thought patterns are "normal". As soon as you stray from acceptable norms, this shit just makes it easy to judge you as weird and a freak.

tpoacher 4y ago

Q: What's the Difference Between [Subjective Definition 1], [Subjective Definition 2], and [Subjective Definition 3]? A: They are different subjective definitions. This should have been the whole article.

yawpitch 4y ago

This isn't a bad piece, but it somewhat oversimplifies these concepts. For example, "compathy" is more directly "viscerally feeling what another feels" while "empathy" is more accurately defined as the intellectual or emotional capacity for engaging in compathy. That capacity can be grounded in actually feeling what the observed other feels -- which, arguably, is impossible if the observed is experiencing something the observer has no shared personal experience with -- or by feeling what an observer imagines the observer would feel if sharing the personal experience of an observed. Actual empathy _requires_ that one is "able to understand what the person is feeling" -- which is what this piece uses as the (somewhat imprecise) definition of "sympathy". Similarly, "sympathy" is more accurately defined as "(the expression of) understanding of what the person is feeling" ... one need not actually understand the feelings of another to engage in sympathy (ie, most sympathy does not require actual empathy, but actual sympathy does require actual empathy), and often actual compassion (which derives from actual empathy) requires one to not engage in actual sympathy. Nevertheless, good to see an attempt to unpack these terms. > “If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion.” ... and try to recognize that what is desired, but not attained (happiness) is not as important or impactful as what is practiced, but not mastered (compassion).

dschuler 4y ago
Sympathy literally means "feeling together".
- photochemsyn 4y ago
  I think that's empathy - which may also result in antipathy and revulsion, e.g. one may empathetically understand why some person would want to own slaves or sit atop a strict hierarchical-religious power structure, as they like the feeling of having absolute power over others, while strongly disliking such motivations and having no sympathy for people who engage in that behavior.
- slushh 4y ago
  The definition of sympathy from the article doesn't rhyme with symbiosis [1] or symphony [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbiosis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbiosis [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony#Etymology_and_origins https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symphony#Etymology_and_origins