Monday, July 27, 2015

Empathy: Overrated?

So asks this Atlantic article, regarding whether the Age of Reason should give way to the Age of Empathy:

Bad idea, say the cognitive psychologist Paul Bloom and the neuroscientist Richard J. Davidson. At their Aspen Ideas Festival talk on Thursday, Bloom allowed that a the word “empathy” as it’s sometimes colloquially used—to mean kindness, goodness, morality, and love—is unobjectionable. But in the Obama-esque sense of feeling another’s feelings, empathy, they contend, it mostly hurts the world. “To the extent that I’m an empathetic person,” Bloom said, “I’m a worse person.”

Empathy is a documented psychological phenomenon: If you see someone else poked in the hand, Bloom said, your own pain centers in the brain will light up. And scientists have demonstrated that you’re more likely to help someone whose pain you feel. The problem, as Bloom sees it, is that “because of its focusing properties, [empathy] can be innumerate, parochial, bigoted.” People are often more empathetic toward individuals who resemble themselves, a fact that can exacerbate already-existing social inequalities. And empathy can cause people to choose to embrace smaller goods at the expense of greater ones. "It's because of the zooming effect of empathy that the whole world cares more about a little girl stuck in a well than they do about the possible deaths of millions and millions due to climate change,” Bloom said.

Empathy can also make people do evil. “Atrocities are typically motivated by stories of suffering victims—stories of white women assaulted by blacks, stories of German children attacked by Jewish pedophiles," Bloom said. It also can lure countries into violent conflicts based on relatively small provocations, and researchers have shown that people who are more empathetic are more likely to want to impose harsh punishments on people. “The more empathy you have, the more violent you are—the more ready and willing you are to cause pain,” Bloom said.  

Empathy doesn’t even necessarily make day-to-day life more pleasant, they contend, citing research that shows a person’s empathy level has little or no correlation with kindness or giving to charity. And in the professions centered around helping others, empathy can be a burden, leading to burnout and incompetence caused by emotional contagion. “When I go to my therapist, I want her to understand me and I want her to make me better,” Bloom said. “But if I’m going, ‘I’m anxious and depressed!’ I don’t want her going, ‘I’m anxious and depressed!’”

So what should empathy be replaced with? Bloom and Davidson proposed two things. One is “rather cold-blooded, rational cost-benefit analysis,” Bloom said. “Go after not what gives you buzz, but what really helps other people." For example: Instead of giving to a child beggar in India, and thereby reward the criminal organization that likely put that child there, donate to Oxfam. The recommendation dovetails with the rising “effective altruism” movement, which The Atlantic’s Derek Thompson recently described as “munificence matched with math.”

Of course, this sounds a lot less emotionally fulfilling than helping someone you have a connection with. That’s where the second potential empathy replacement comes in: compassion.  To do good, Bloom said, “we need an emotional push. But the push need not come from empathy. It can come from love, from caring, from compassion, from more distant emotions that don't come from being swallowed up in the suffering of others."

At the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Davidson has studied the brains of Buddhist monks and explored the ways that compassion is neurologically distinct from empathy. He even believes it to be an intrinsic trait like linguistic ability—something that must be fostered at a young age to be implemented throughout life, and something that can be strengthened through practice. To that end, he and his colleagues developed a “kindness curriculum” for preschoolers.

But what about personal relationships—don’t they rely on empathy? Bloom and Davidson said it’s possible but not yet scientifically proven that some amount of empathy is indeed required in order to practice compassion. But they contend that even the closest relationships need not be dominated by the sharing of emotions. At the end of the Aspen session, an audience member posed a scenario to the scientists: What if she was fired from her job, and her partner offered her a back rub and kind words but didn’t truly get why she was upset? Wouldn’t the comfort feel hollow, useless?

“What you’re really asking for is compassion plus understanding,” Bloom replied. “Suppose you feel humiliated. I don’t think it’s what you want or what you need for your partner to feel humiliated. You want your partner to understand your humiliation and respond with love and kindness. I think for your partner to feel humiliated would be the worst thing you want. Because now, you have to worry about your partner’s feelings.”

Saturday, July 25, 2015

Sociopath envy?

Is this the source of the sometimes observed sociopath envy? Is it really just jerk envy (because sociopaths are too oblivious to conform to social norms, and therefore are seen as confidently bucking social norms because they're too powerful to be bothered with conformity)? From Forbes, on Why Jerks Get Ahead:

And so it is with rudeness, because while most of us deplore it, research suggests that we also see it as a sign of power. A study published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science indicated that the ruder someone acts, the more convinced observers become that he or she is powerful, and therefore does not have to respect the same rules the rest of us bow to.

In one of the experiments, study participants read about a visitor to an office who marched in and poured himself a cup of “employee only” coffee without asking.  In another case they read about a bookkeeper that flagrantly bent accounting rules. Participants rated the rule breakers as more in control and powerful compared to people who didn’t steal the coffee or break accounting rules.

In another experiment participants  watched a video of a man at a sidewalk cafĂ© put his feet on another chair, tap cigarette ashes on the ground and rudely order a meal.  Participants rated the man as more likely to “get to make decisions” and able to “get people to listen to what he says” than participants who saw a video of the same man behaving politely.

What this study appears to indicate is that violating norms is viewed by others as a sign of power, even if the observers would otherwise judge those violations as rude or flatly wrong.  Considering many of the openly rude jerks we venerate, these findings make a lot of sense. (Though I would like to see a follow on study that examines observer perceptions when the rude rule breakers are caught. Perhaps it’s less the rudeness and corruption we admire, and more the ability to get away with it that intrigues us. Maybe we’re just a little smitten with the charisma of villainy.)


Thursday, July 23, 2015

Famous sociopaths: Gandhi?

From a reader:

Two sociopaths I know both insist that Gandhi was a sociopath; their evidence was Gandhi's hunger strike.  I found their reactions fascinating, because both are sociopaths of course, neither one know each other, but both were equally as skeptical and offended by Gandhi's motivations for the hunger strike.  Both thought that anyone who thinks Gandhi did ANYTHING for any reason other than fame and power is a sucker, and that Gandhi over did it because the hunger strike led to a massacre of some of his Hindu followers. 

What do you think?  Do you think that some of the world's greatest humanitarians, such as Gandhi, or Martin Luther King, had sociopathic  tendencies?

I wish I could convey better just how striking a similarity in responses these two people had. 

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

Sociopath?

From a reader:

I don't even know where to start... I have seriously been looking into (and studying) sociopathy. I am generally sure that I am definitely a sociopath. When I was younger I remember manipulating my parents and even my siblings when I would get in trouble. For instance, my brother and I would get caught for something... we would both be questioned as to who did the (wrong) deed. Then left to our rooms... until the guilty party spoke up. I repetitively remember just holding out in silence and waiting for my brother to step forward and admit to it after 24-48 hours passed. I would then hear him getting physically punished and not even bat an eye. I recall getting people fired from work simply because I didn't like them, or because I wanted their job. Once, I came upon a drunken coworker on the job, who couldn't finish his shift. I assured him I would cover his ass, and everything he needed to be "good to go."  Instead, I called the owner of the establishment and told them about the entire situation. He then "showed up" and caught the fellow. He was fired immediately. I then got his job position. I continued to pretend he was a good friend (to his face) and even hang out with him, lying to his face about the person who "snitched." I didn't even bat an eye. I felt nothing for him. I thought that he was stupid and therefore didn't deserve his position, since he couldn't even take necessary precautions to break the rules intelligently. I was better. I never feel any actual guilt for things. The closest I can imagine is a paranoia of being discovered. Such as, while im hanging with these people, getting what I can off of them. The only negative thought about the situation is "What if they figure it out?"  Even then, I wouldn't stress too much about it, because I couldn't give two shits about the guy, and I could probably lie my way out of anything.

I actually hate hanging out with other people. I'm not sure why.... I will be around them, and they will suggest an outing of some sort but when it comes to the next day, or the day of plans,  I flake out. I lose all interest. 

The only thing that somewhat throws me off is my newest relationship. I am in a relationship with a girl that I can be more open with about my darker thoughts. She is very non judgmental... and maybe even a bit on the morbid side for an empath. When she isn't around me I wish for her to be, but I feel like it's that she quenches my boredom. Not that I can't live without her, or that I would be wrecked without her. She goes out of her way to do things often for me. Little notes, suprise lunches... She is very sexually pleasing. For these reasons I feel like I "Love" her. Is it possible to have a "target" and not realize it? I have been doing that with women my entire life. I feel empowered when my "mate" (whatever you want to call it.) thinks unusually high of me. I guess I feel like I want my partner to think of me as badass. I realize that I have been using these women to fuel my ego... when things happen and they have exited my life, I have felt sad... even cried before... but it feels like a hole is in my routine and that I am bored. I cannot text/call them to alleviate my boredom when I want. I don't think I've ever felt like I want them back, unless its some sort of game to me.... where even if I know I'm not interested.. the fact that they dont "want me" drives me insane and I put on all of my charm to reel them back in. Sometimes just to hurt them again and for them to leave. Or maybe to see how many times I can pull this off. 

I am prone to bouts of anger and fantasize about killing people. I was at a fast food restaurant and this woman cut in front of me. She was old. I wished I could follow her home and kill her for thinking herself above me. She was an old hag, why the fuck did she cut me off like I didn't even matter? People should watch how they treat others, I thought. I wanted to choke the life out of her while screaming at her, "Was it worth it?" After thinking about this and realizing that the laws of society keep me from regularly doing what I wish/want to do.... I suddenly went off on another random thought. Completely forgetting about my rage.

I would really enjoy talking more with you... I have never spoken to a human being so openly like this. 

Sunday, July 19, 2015

Film: The Act of Killing

From a reader:

I think this reviewer describes it properly:

http://disorderedworld.com/2013/07/16/the-act-of-killing/

The thing I found odd about this movie is that I could easily see myself acting the way the death squad leader did. Especially when I was younger, I had a lot more anger at other humans.

So the deal with "The Act of Kililng" is that they guy has the original gangsters (sociopaths) talking about what they did.

They boast about their deeds and are celebratory.

This is horrifying for normal people. You can see it in one of the clips here, where they have a panel:
http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/dec/19/joshua-oppenheimer-act-of-killing

The film panel is horrified that the perpetrators talk about this stuff so causally and happily.

I realized - this horror is the "essence" of the experience that sociopaths experience when we're honest with normal people about our subjective experience.

E.g. I was talking with a friend about Himmler's Posen speech - http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/holocaust/h-posen.htm

For example:

"...Whether the other races live in comfort or perish of hunger interests me only in so far as we need them as slaves for our culture; apart from that it does not interest me. Whether or not 10,000 Russian women collapse from exhaustion while digging a tank ditch interests me only in so far as the tank ditch is completed for Germany. We shall never be rough or heartless where it is not necessary; that is clear. We Germans, who are the only people in the world who have a decent attitude to animals, will also adopt a decent attitude to these human animals, but it is a crime against our own blood to worry about them and to bring them ideals..."

I explained that I liked its honesty and clear priorities. I wish our leaders would reason and talk this clearly. I'd feel a lot safer and happy.

My friend explained that that sort of speech scares and disgusts normal people. I explained that the "normal" speech used to justify such actions like, "we're doing it for freedom" or "God says we should do it", bothers me, because it seems dishonest, illogical and arbitrary. But that's exactly the stuff that makes normal people like you and feel relaxed.

And yet if I'd worked Russian women to death to get the tank ditch built, my feelings (or lack of them) would incline me to boasting about what I'd done. I'd be proud that I'd done the nasty job because I had a clear sense of what was really important, and I'd acted on it, doing a dirty job.

If you watch "The Act of Killing", it seems that in general, gangsters have the sociopathic mindset. E.g. at one point, one killer starts to say that some stories, even true ones shouldn't be told, because they'll make the bad guys (commies) look good. One of the gangsters tells him that the truth is the truth, and there's nothing wrong with telling it. You can bet that that guy would be a Himmler fan too.
Join Amazon Prime - Watch Over 40,000 Movies

.

Comments are unmoderated. Blog owner is not responsible for third party content. By leaving comments on the blog, commenters give license to the blog owner to reprint attributed comments in any form.