Just read the study from 2009: Aspies have TOO MUCH Empathy

Post Reply New Topic

I just thought of something for whatever it's worth: I have to use empathy in my job. I'm a technical writer and I write the help for software, so I have to imagine what it's like for that person to use the software. If they want to use the new 3D feature I have to imagine a lot of the possibilities, like not just how to draw a cylinder, but how what kinds of things might they be drawing with the cylinder, maybe a camera, so they'll need to combine it with a rectangular box with a hole in it for the cylindrical lens, and so on. And not only that, but like most people working for a business, I need to imagine how they would need to understand how to do that efficiently. It's not enjoyable to read help and time is money. People want to know what they need to know as quickly and as clearly as possible and then get out of the help and produce something. That takes empathy for their situation.

But I certainly don't have sympathy for them, unless they lost their job because the help was so bad they couldn't figure out how to do their work and they had a stupid boss who blamed it on them. Then my heart would go out to them and I would try harder as a technical writer to give future users what they needed. But it seems like sympathy comes about when something happened to somebody who didn't cause it. So, for example, I wouldn't kill somebody's father, because I know how painful that would be and I don't want the father or their family or society to be in pain. But if someone else killed their father, then I would have sympathy for them. The killer wouldn't have sympathy, unless they did it by accident, but probably no one would want to hear about their sympathy at that point. Unless they were apologizing a million times, "I'm so sorry. I thought he had a gun and was going to shoot you!".....

No mention of animals in that article.

Humans well .

If you have an emotional reaction about someone's situation, this is sympathy.
If you have an emotional reaction that mirrors someone's emotions, this is empathy.

It's like the difference between reading a review of a book...and reading a book. Sympathy is all about feeling for someone, being happy that your friend got a promotion (Even if your friend might feel differently), sad that the mailman you chat with every afternoon was transferred because he no longer gets to enjoy your talks and insights (Even if you are why he transferred >.>). What you feel is about someone and whether you like or dislike etc the situation they are in, for their sake. It is quite independent of what they are actually feeling, really, although it can quite often be accurate. Just like the review, you are experiencing a reaction to another's situation. They read the book, and you are reading what they have to say about it. It's a level away from empathy, which is more about experiencing what they are experiencing. When you read the book, you are experiencing the book itself. With empathy, when your friend gets a promotion, and you are talking about it with them, and you start feeling stressed and anxious for no self induced reasons, and latter learn your friend isn't happy that he was promoted, but is stressed and anxious about whether or not he is up to snuff...you have experienced empathy.

You can be both happy for your friend, and/or feel his stress and anxiety about the new responsibilities. These two things are compatible, or they may be separate. Some people are more able or likely to do one over the other, some may be prone to engage in both, or any combination of degrees or frequencies.



There is also the ability to cognitively understand these two without feeling them. Earlier in this thread this was considered a subtype of the two.

You can have the knowledge of someone's situation, without engaging in feeling anything for them. This was referred to earlier as cognitive sympathy. This is indeed often a strength of a Psychopath, and they are also generally adept at pretending to have real sympathy because of it. This is also the subtype that allows someone to choose to fake sympathy if it suits tem. But it not always malicious in that way, most often people with this cognitive sympathy just "get it", they are aware that someone is in distress, and likely understand why they are, and often what would alleviate the distress if possible, this is just independent of whether they care or not. This can co-exist with real sympathy too. Like in the earlier example, you can understand that your friend worked hard and if he is promoted would gain more status, power, and money. You can understand that these things are often motivators and if he achieves this it is a good think, conceptually, for him to do. This is independent on whether you care or not though. It is just a knowledge, or understanding.

You can also have cognitive empathy. This is where one can understand that certain things can provoke emotional responses in others, and often a degree of ability to see or be aware of emotions when they are occurring. To be consciously aware of what emotions are transpiring in other people. This is also independent on whether you care or even experience the same emotion. If you see someone enjoying themselves and understand that what they are experiencing is joy, this would be cognitive empathy. (Side note…Psychopaths who are good at this as well… are really scary) This is the ability to comprehend emotions in other, and to recognize and identify them.



Now, all of those often work in concert with one another. And if people don't really break it down into what causes what in whom...then yea, there isn't much point in there being a distinction between empathy and sympathy. People who are less self aware often don't understand why there is even a distinction at all, even if it is explained. For some with more self awareness, there is often confusion because numerous others don't even bother to make the distinction...it is easy to understand why these two are so readily confused with one another. There are difference facets of each though, and the two are quite distinct.

Definitions (to clear up any confusion):

Sympathy:

Empathy:

The definition for Empathy is more or less correct, although quite vague.

Sympathy...not so much. Pretty much all of the definitions are describing Empathy to some degree.

Other portions of the Sympathy definition, such as: "mutual or parallel susceptibility or a condition brought about by it c : unity or harmony in action or effect <every part is in complete sympathy with the scheme as a whole — Edwin Benson>", are actually defining the word SIMPATICO, which is not at all the same thing.

Actually, I should redact my above statement that simpatico is not at all the same as sympathy. The two words do have similar origins (simpatico comes from the latin word for sympathy), but the two words have very different understandings. Simpatico is much closer to our understanding of Empathy, but much stronger. It suggests a oneness between two people. For instance, it could be said that E.T. and Elliot were in simpatico in E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial. Elliot had empathy for E.T., but it went much further than empathy typically does...it's like they were one person.

I'm explaining all of this, because people, even Merriam-Webster, often confuse and/or combine the definitions of the two terms erroneously. The definitions above are clearly defining simpatico, because while you can be IN simpatico with someone, you can not be IN sympathy with someone; conversely, you can be in someone's sympathies, but you can not be in someone's simpatico. All of the definitions for Sympathy above are describing a state of being, which Sympathy is not. Sympathy is an expression, not a state of being. Empathy and Simpatico are both a state of being or feeling.