29 Comments
User's avatar
jk's avatar

I think this is one of the reasons that Buddhist traditions emphasize compassion over empathy. Empathy elevates and privileges the ego; compassion restricts it to being an observer

Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

my wife's a Buddhist and was saying something like this. She was saying that empathy can be a path to compassion sometimes for some, but conflating empathy with compassion is a bad idea (was I believe her point.)

Expand full comment
jk's avatar

I would love a followon piece that could be nothing but an edited discussion between you folks on compassion vs empathy as a path to action. Empathy as, perhaps, training wheels for a compassionate mindset, as the statement from her you reported appears to imply.

Expand full comment
human being's avatar

Yes, I would think the hubris involved with empathy is problematic - my experience is universal enough to enable me to know what it must be to be you, and my imagining is good enough to serve as a proxy for you.

Expand full comment
Chryssanthi Ventouratos's avatar

Empathy is a negative word in Greek (its origin.) It means that someone wants everyone else to suffer as they suffer. The opposite of "empathy" is "sympathy," which carries a more substantial meaning than in English, more akin to compassion than just feeling bad about it.

Expand full comment
rebecca wilova's avatar

Lots of food for thought. It’s always bugged me that people blandly said “all lives matter” which, while that SHOULD be true, is clearly untrue on multiple levels. But what structural racism is vs what many whites think racism (only) is, actual overt acts of violence, is something too many white people don’t understand and are indeed privileged to not recognize.

Expand full comment
Zora's avatar

Hartman makes some valid points. Years ago I listened to a podcast with Paul Bloom who wrote a book “Against Empathy.” It would be interesting to see how his take compares with Hartman’s. His subtitle is “The Case for Rational Compassion.” However, compassion as it is defined etymologically means “to suffer with” or “to suffer together” and seems to me equally suspect as a form of projection. Someone meditating and feeling compassion doesn’t have any more knowledge of the subjective experience of a person starving or being beaten than someone who feels empathy and tries to imagine that pain inside themselves. On the other hand, while it’s important that the one who is suffering have their own voice and actually be heard, it seems to me that our desire to get beyond a purely rational understanding of their plight and try to feel it in our bodies—even though it is purely projection in either empathy or compassion—is not necessarily a bad thing. It all depends on what this projection leads to.

Expand full comment
Rachel Baldes's avatar

I understand the danger of the behavior discussed here, but is it really fair to label it true empathy? This is an honest question I'm curious to know if there is a consensus about. To me this type of grandiose performance of victimhood is an attempt to pass off more toxic character traits by attempting to disguise them as empathy.

I also don't really understand what the "self-empathy" could mean beyond self-pity? The definition of empathy is rooted in its relating to someone outside the self.

Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

I don't think there's any one definiton of empathy.

I think it's more useful to recognize that empathy can sometimes be positive and sometimes negative, rather than framing good empathy as the real empathy? I think it's just good to recognize that there isn't some real or authentic empathetic gesture we can be sure is going to lead to good. it's important to be careful.

Expand full comment
Rachel Baldes's avatar

That's helpful! I've been framing it internally as insincere or performative but I can see that it's more complicated than that. Especially since it's a word that has been being used a lot more frequently than in the past and not necessarily in the context I associate it with most.

Expand full comment
human being's avatar

Excellent excellent essay. Once again you connect the dots between a behavior which purports to be benevolent and even helpful, with the underlying discomfort it causes in me. Thank you

Expand full comment
jk's avatar

Oooh, here’s an essay/video on feeling cringe and its relationship to empathy! https://skepchick.org/2023/09/the-science-of-cringe/

Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

oh that's interesting. and yes, feeling with someone seems universal and has odd effects...but using it as a kind of basis for moral feeling/guidance is probably unwise...

Expand full comment
Patris's avatar

I agree with you

Expand full comment
NickS (WA)'s avatar

I think it's important to distinguish between, "empathy has real problems and limitations and is often oversold as a virtue" and "empathy is bad." I am reading this article in the context of other conversations I've had on the topic, but if I were to summarize my own thinking it is:

In addition to the problems discussed in the article I'd add:

1) People will sometimes confuse the effort of empathizing with action and believe that they are making a difference without actually doing anything (heck, I'm guilty of that myself sometimes).

2) Empathy is a spotlight; usually focusing attention on one person or one problem and isn't very good at illuminating broader issues.

3) For that reason empathy can be exploited to manipulate people or steer them towards desired conclusions.

All that said, I think empathy is a useful tool in the toolkbox of "trying to be a good human in a complicated world." It can (and will) occasionally lead people astray, and it's important to use multiple strategies to try to understand the world and our role in it, but it's good for empathy and a broadly shared sense of common humanity to be part of that.

I look at the headline ("Empathy Doesn't Make You Less Racist") and I think, "what does make people less racist?" Some combination of hundreds of moments of either wanting to be less racist, or being nudged to be less racist and small changes that are sometimes improvements and sometimes missteps. Empathy doesn't prevent the missteps, but I'd hope that it can be a possible motivation to accept the nudges and attempt the changes.

Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

Well, I think often being less racist is a collective process. Norms ir laws which make it harder to engage in public displays of racism tend to force people to act in a less racist manner; then motivated reasoning leads you to justify being less racist by telling yourself that being less racist is good. It’s a virtuous cycle.

I think empathy is probably a neutral thing, overall.? But I think it’s also something of a secular religion at this point; people build their sense of their own virtue on it in ways that I think are pretty counter productive.

Expand full comment
NickS (WA)'s avatar

"I think empathy is probably a neutral thing, overall.? "

My intuition is that it would be a positive on average. I haven't really thought about it, but I wonder how you'd measure that. Out of curiosity, what evidence would affect your opinion?

A quick google search suggests that measures of empathy correlate positively with openness to experience which correlates with liberal political positions, but that is a case where correlation absolutely doesn't mean causation.

So, I don't know, what sort of evidence would you look for?

Expand full comment
Patris's avatar

Classifying empathy as condescension rejects the capacity for anyone to be an honest ally.

Most people do not need lofty thoughts to imagine the what it must be like to have to live with inherited bias any group of people are forced to bear, especially racism - or antisemitism which I’ve witnessed and called out. Not because I’m black or Jewish or Muslim - but because it’s demeaning, disgusting and offensive.

I hesitate to say I believe I understand her pov lest I insult anyone. But really, ffs.

Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

I don't think empathy and the capacity to be an honest ally are the same thing. You don't need to imagine yourself as someone else to think mistreating people is cruel. And rather than imagining yourself into someone else's position you can...just listen to them.

Expand full comment
Caz Hart's avatar

It's a great deal simpler, or more complex, than all that.

The ability for humans to empathize is not merely questionable, but likely delusional, egotistical, an expression of hubris.

Many people barely know what it is to be themselves, let alone know what it feels like to be an other.

Expand full comment
Dionne Dumitru's avatar

Equating Hudson and Rankin is quite a stretch. Hudson was merely appropriating something that liberals abhor to link it to something liberals advocate. No attempt at empathy from him. Based on your representation here, it’s also hard to read Rankin’s statements and understand the criticism. He actively worked (at some personal risk I assume) to help people escape enslavement. I didn’t see how he used his thought experiment to serve his own goals at the expense of the people he’s empathising with.

Jennifer Finney Boylan wrote in a piece in the NYT today about the importance of using « moral imagination « to understand what life is like for trans people if you aren’t trans. I don’t see how that is different from Rankin. But, I only know of him what you wrote.

Agreed that making oneself the story rather than others is egregious, as is judging others based on what you think they should do. I don’t think the empathy label works to serve the points you make in conclusion.

Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

Well, it's Hartman's reading, and her argument is that the move he makes is to put himself in the place of the people he's supposedly helping. That's the same move Hudson makes, and it can go really bad places. Abolitionists like Rankin had very specific, racist ideas about what freed people should do and be, and Hartman argues—quite persuasively I think—that their belief that they could speak for free people led them to harm them.

Expand full comment
Patris's avatar

I do.

Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

sure! but that's not the same thing as empathy, is my point. If someone says, "being marginalized means I am treated in this unjust way" you don't need to imagine yourself in their position. You can just say, "that sounds unjust and bad, even if it's not something I experience or can necessarily see myself experiencing."

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 20, 2023
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

It might be various things? Hartman's point, in reading abolitionist texts closely, is that, when you aren't in a real dialogue with the person who is suffering, the feeling can sometimes be functionally described as self-pity. Whatever you describe it as though, it's not always politically valuable or progressive, and can sometimes be the opposite.

Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

Think about the Kavanaugh trial. Republicans felt a lot of empathy for him, and he was suffering to some degree; he felt humiliated, publicly shamed, under attack, in danger of losing his life's work, etc. But, obviously, those emotions were heavily predicated on not thinking about certain other people, and on a sense of which people the empathizer could feel themselves into and which they weren't trying to feel themselves into.

Kate Manne talks about this using the term "himpathy"; ie, it's easier culturally to empathize with powerful (white) men than with women or less powerful people. Identifying suffering and feeling pain when you do—those are influenced by social and political factors, like anything else. And the right especially, as I say in this piece, manipulates empathy a lot.

Expand full comment
DR Darke's avatar

I'm...no, I don't think I have any empathy at ALL for Straight White Men who behave like assholes. Brent Kavanaugh was humiliated by proof that he was a bigoted, fascistic DoucheBro in college, and other evidence showing that his opinion hasn't changed any since?

No. All I feel for Kavanaugh, or Mitch McConnell, or Rudy Giuliani—who, let's face it, is really TRULY suffering right now? Is nothing but *schadenfreude* (a word I've used twice today!), that quiet satisfaction that the Universe is starting to correct itself, along with a bit of glorious rage at seeing A Bad Person Finally Get What's Coming to Him!

To put it in terms of a single picture...?

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/cpsprodpb/E934/production/_107000795_meme4.jpg

Does this mean that I'm vindictive? You'd better believe it! I've watched too many good people get unjustly beat upon by the likes of Kavanaugh, McConnell and Giuliani...and Trump, and Marjorie Taylor Greene, and that babyraper Matt Gaetz, and Lauren Boebert, and every two-faced Clinton NeoLib, to feel anything but satisfaction at their downfall.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Feb 25
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

it's there! It's just an older post I restacked/reshared today. the link is here: https://www.everythingishorrible.net/p/empathy-doesnt-make-you-less-racist

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Feb 25
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Noah Berlatsky's avatar

Ah, sorry. It should say at the top of the email that in restocking, but probably easy to miss…

Expand full comment