NationStates

Just curious as I see that a major difference between people when it comes to their personal philosophy is the level of empathy they possess. But empathy is one of those general words that can send topics off into wild tangents and I expect that. But just to start it off, what does empathy mean to you and how important do you think it is to possess empathy in life?

I feel empathy is very important. It keeps me in touch with the fact we are simply human.

Empathy is, like all human emotions, useful.

Empathy is what stops me and everyone else from buying an assualt rifle and going down in hail of bullets. I'd say it's quite important.

Big Jim P wrote:Empathy is, like all human emotions, useful.

I think Empathy, like all human emotions, can be useful. But it can also be detrimental.

Those lacking in empathy have no place in society, which depends on people caring about and helping each other. They can expect no help in return.

Camicon wrote:Empathy is what stops me and everyone else from buying an assualt rifle and going down in hail of bullets. I'd say it's quite important.

Not self-preservation?

Conserative Morality wrote:

Camicon wrote:Empathy is what stops me and everyone else from buying an assualt rifle and going down in hail of bullets. I'd say it's quite important.

Not self-preservation?

For myself, certainly, but think of all the mentally unstable people there are in the world, all the people who are suicidal and choose to end their lives in a private, rather then public, manner. Think of all the people who would wage a never ending war against people they hate, because no in the world has any empathy, and no one would feel bad that people they have no feeling for are being slaughtered underfoot.

We'd have Rwanda on a world-wide, multi-cultural, scale.

Camicon wrote:For myself, certainly, but think of all the mentally unstable people there are in the world, all the people who are suicidal and choose to end their lives in a private, rather then public, manner. Think of all the people who would wage a never ending war against people they hate, because no in the world has any empathy, and no one would feel bad that people they have no feeling for are being slaughtered underfoot.

We'd have Rwanda on a world-wide, multi-cultural, scale.

The fact that Rwanda acts like that despite the supposed strength of human empathy is an argument against the strength of human empathy.

Conserative Morality wrote:

Big Jim P wrote:Empathy is, like all human emotions, useful.

I think Empathy, like all human emotions, can be useful. But it can also be detrimental.

You gain wisdom, young one. *nod*

Big Jim P wrote:You gain wisdom, young one. *nod*

Must... Not... Make... D&D joke...

Conserative Morality wrote:

Camicon wrote:For myself, certainly, but think of all the mentally unstable people there are in the world, all the people who are suicidal and choose to end their lives in a private, rather then public, manner. Think of all the people who would wage a never ending war against people they hate, because no in the world has any empathy, and no one would feel bad that people they have no feeling for are being slaughtered underfoot.

We'd have Rwanda on a world-wide, multi-cultural, scale.

The fact that Rwanda acts like that despite the supposed strength of human empathy is an argument against the strength of human empathy.

No, it's an example of what happens when people don't have empathy for each other. A lack of empathy, among other things, is what caused 800,000 people to die in 100 days. The people that had the power to stop the genocide didn't care, and did nothing to stop it. That displayed a lack of empathy, not of empathy's inability to stop us doing horrible things to each other.

Camicon wrote:No, it's an example of what happens when people don't have empathy for each other. A lack of empathy, among other things, is what caused 800,000 people to die in 100 days. The people that had the power to stop the genocide didn't care, and did nothing to stop it. That displayed a lack of empathy, not of empathy's inability to stop us doing horrible things to each other.

The idea that empathy was not present in them proves that empathy is not a universally held emotion, even amongst regular human beings.

The alternative is what I suggest, that empathy exists in the vast majority of people, it's simply not that influential.

Miklesia wrote:Those lacking in empathy have no place in society, which depends on people caring about and helping each other. They can expect no help in return.

Oh no they can its simple to fake caring about others and receiving service or goods from them. Empathy makes taking advantage of others so easy. Families are especially easy to manipulate to do your will. Theres no reason for an individual to care about others emotionality. Why be a slave when you can be free of illogical feelings towards others.

Conserative Morality wrote:

Camicon wrote:No, it's an example of what happens when people don't have empathy for each other. A lack of empathy, among other things, is what caused 800,000 people to die in 100 days. The people that had the power to stop the genocide didn't care, and did nothing to stop it. That displayed a lack of empathy, not of empathy's inability to stop us doing horrible things to each other.

The idea that empathy was not present in them proves that empathy is not a universally held emotion, even amongst regular human beings.

The alternative is what I suggest, that empathy exists in the vast majority of people, it's simply not that influential.

Then we have a difference of beliefs, not something easily resolved, and something I'd rather avoid. I'm not sure anyone could ever convince me that empathy is present in everyone, merely ineffective. You either have empathy, or you don't. Some people choose to ignore it, and ignoring it for long enough will leave you without it, in my opinion.

Conserative Morality wrote:

Camicon wrote:No, it's an example of what happens when people don't have empathy for each other. A lack of empathy, among other things, is what caused 800,000 people to die in 100 days. The people that had the power to stop the genocide didn't care, and did nothing to stop it. That displayed a lack of empathy, not of empathy's inability to stop us doing horrible things to each other.

The idea that empathy was not present in them proves that empathy is not a universally held emotion, even amongst regular human beings.

The alternative is what I suggest, that empathy exists in the vast majority of people, it's simply not that influential.

Could it not have been a case of misdirected empathy? You are going to kill my brother, I'll kill all of you before you can.

Camicon wrote:Then we have a difference of beliefs, not something easily resolved, and something I'd rather avoid.

Why do you want to avoid differing beliefs? The only reason to fear differing beliefs is a insecurity in the firmness of one's own beliefs.

I'm not sure anyone could ever convince me that empathy is present in everyone, merely ineffective. You either have empathy, or you don't.

And people have empathy. Nothing of what I've said contradicts that.

Some people choose to ignore it, and ignoring it for long enough will leave you without it, in my opinion.

I don't think the human mind works that way.

Conserative Morality wrote:

Big Jim P wrote:You gain wisdom, young one. *nod*

Must... Not... Make... D&D joke...

Don't bother, it would miss.

empathy is intrinsic to my nature and yes I do find it to be very important to me in that I expect those I care about to care about me and part of that imo is showing empathy with me and vice versa. that said I do think that it can be easily faked and often is but I also know that the times I have had to deal with people who have no sense of it AT ALL have been very friggin annoying to say the least.

Empathy is great. However at the same time, human empathy is like the human eye, whose sensitivity is brilliant except when there's a bright light directly in front of you. That's how empathy can sometimes be a disadvantage if you really do need to hurt someone, or do something that requires you to ignore someone else.

Still rather have it than not.

Empathy is a natural resource that we need more of, and consequently, are running out of.

Desperate Measures wrote:Just curious as I see that a major difference between people when it comes to their personal philosophy is the level of empathy they possess. But empathy is one of those general words that can send topics off into wild tangents and I expect that. But just to start it off, what does empathy mean to you and how important do you think it is to possess empathy in life?

Empathy is very important to me,

Unless when it comes to those subhuman degenerate unpersons; which I will butcher alive if I ever get the chance to.

Volnotova wrote:Empathy is very important to me,

Unless when it comes to those subhuman degenerate unpersons; which I will butcher alive if I ever get the chance to.

So empathy isn't really all that important to you?

Empathy does not mean sympathy, given as "To understand all is to forgive all" is not really true. One can empathise with someone and think the worse of them for it.

Tokos wrote:Empathy does not mean sympathy, given as "To understand all is to forgive all" is not really true. One can empathise with someone and think the worse of them for it.

That's for true.