Is empathy a social construct?

Post Reply New Topic

So many variables! This is why I find it hard to engage with regular theories. My mind can't keep up. Sympathy or agreement (dimension 1), empathy or understanding (dimension 2), mind or brain (dimension 3), logic or experimentation (dimension 4), clinical practice or scholarly history (dimension 5), academic or popular definitions (dimension 6), conscious or unconscious (dimension 7), nature or nurture (dimension , ASD and NT (dimension 9), philosophically problematic terms like knowing another's "essence" (dimension 10). I give up. I raise the white flag! This is more variables than I can cope with.

Words aren't real, they're just how you build stories. Better to let go of the words than confuse them with things.

This is always such a confusing discussion. Mainly because there are a few truths about empathy and ToM that a lot of us miss.

ToM and empathy (the first requires the second), are not really social constructs at all. Social constructs are intentionally designed "constructions" that are arrived at in some sort of agreed upon manner. In other words, discussion ensues, rules are formed, and either some group with authority implements them, or consensus is reached in some way (voting for example).

ToM and empathy do not exist as social constructs. They exist more as axioms. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/axiom

The reason they are axioms is due to the fact that the vast majority practice both. I use the term "practice" rather than "have," because I believe that they are things we "do" or "do not do."

The more important issue isn't whether we are capable of it, but whether we actually DO either one of them The reason this is more important may be confusing to some Autistics (as it was to me at one time), I believe because most of us misunderstand what they both really are. ToM is often referred to as "mind reading," and I think that is at the core of why we become so confused. Because ToM, in reality, is NOT mind reading. "Mind reading" is just an analogy, and it's not a very accurate one.

Mind reading, if it were truly possible, would be accurate all of the time. ToM is NOT accurate, but accuracy is not the point of ToM. ToM is NOT about KNOWING what goes on in other people's minds. Empathy is not about KNOWING how other people feel.

Both ToM and empathy are about GUESSING how others think and feel. Nothing more than that. I think the real difference between NT's and Autistics, is that we tend to be obsessed with accuracy, and have a very hard time seeing any value in a process that involves guess work and inaccuracies. We Autistics do not like processes that result in unpredictability. NT's don't have so much of a problem with random unpredictability.

Therefore, NT's tend to practice more ToM and empathy, and we CHOOSE not to. (At least for most of us, I believe it is a choice. For some, it's not.)

This also explains why we so adamantly refute the claims that we are not capable of ToM or empathy.

It is said that ToM and empathy "come naturally" to NT's, and don't come naturally to Autistics. At first glance, this seems to mean we have to learn to do it while NT's don't, but I am convinced this is not the case.

Let's take a simple example. Ever hear anyone say, "Every body likes pizza." ? Most people who say it know intuitively that it's not really true. Young children, whether ASD or not, will say things like this, sometimes actually believing it is true. We teach young children, ASD or not, that assumptions like that are not accurate, don't we? We teach them the process of imagining that others may not have the same opinions, thoughts, tastes and experiences that we have.

The difference between the NT child and the Autistic child is that the NT tends to accept this reality much easier than the Autistic. As a result, NT's LEARN to PRACTICE ToM and empathy at an earlier age. The Autistic takes longer to accept this truth, and struggles more with the fact that practicing either doesn't produce accurate results all of the time. If it's not an accurate process, why bother with it?

Since we resist it for own reasons so much longer than NT's, by all appearances, it LOOKS like we're either not as good at it, or that we can't do it at all. On our part (Autistics), we may make this "decision" consciously or subconsciously. When it's subconscious, we don't view it as a decision, but as something we just "don't do," or "can't do." We're just unaware of the subconscious rejection of the concept.

When we consciously reject the concepts, it's often based on the misunderstanding that "mine reading" is meant either literally, or though we might understand it isn't literal, we misunderstand that they are meant to represent accurate processes.

NT's may be more accurate in their guesses, but if they are, it's only due to the fact that they have practiced it longer than we have. The more they do anything, the better they get at it. We though, tend not to practice them, and therefore don't develop the skills as quickly, and are not "at par" with our NT peers.

Not at all.

I'm saying that empathy isn't social conditioning.

On another thread, Japan was put forward as the best country to be an aspie in, the reason given was because Japanese society has a very strict set of social rules that aspies can learn and adhere to.

In the story I gave, it is not social conditioning it is 'going with the flow', 'just being yourself', 'doing what comes naturally'.

I think that NT's basically come pre-programmed with a set of emotional API's hard wired into them, a set of API's that we lack. This is why you can use the same criteria to diagnose autism in children, regardless of the social background.

If empathy was a result of social conditioning then different societies should require different diagnostic tools as each society would have a different expression of empathy.



Computer games aren't empathy.
Combat sports aren't empathy, even though you have to read body language to predict an opponents move.

I'll repeat for good measure: if you try oxytocin you will experience NT 'empathy'.

'Mind reading' being not actual mindreading is an important point that oughtn't be taken as mere semantics. Ask a magician whether mindreading is possible or just a trick. I don't know what the process is exactly, though it's not guessswork either. It's a feeling. Trainable through experience? I have no idea, and NTs aren't asking the question. I know this: I've known girls who obviously learned when very young that they couldn't trust people around them and developed their own way of working people out, basically living on their wits. So it's possible to circumvent 'empathy' in biologically normal humans.

I like this analogy.

It's like my BlackBerry then: when I installed the OS, I removed the crapware so I had more space for thing's I'd find more useful.

I feel I have empathy, but its hard for me to express it.......so that throws people off I guess.

I disagree.

(Sorry if I come across as blunt or aggressive, I'm honestly not trying to, just trying to to have a thoughtful discussion)

Research has shown that autistics are more likely to suffer from social anxiety and depression than the NT population is.

No great shock there.

But if you take HFA/AS people give them lots of help with social skills and proclaim the best performing of them to be a success, something interesting happens. The rates of social anxiety & depression issues increases in the more 'successful' group.

If autistic social & communication issues were simply a slow development along an identical track why would this happen? You would expect the mental health problems to go down towards the NT levels, not go up, as the successful ones became more skilled.

If on the other hand, the 'successful' autistics were merely faking the behaviour of NT's you would expect the experience to be a stressful one
as the successful group would be having to constantly maintain a highly skilled performance when interacting socially. You would then expect the mental health problems to get worse in the highly stressed successful group which is what actually happens.

Actually you're not disagreeing at all here. You've brought a different issue into the discussion than the specific point I was making. And it is an important one too.

Part of the miscommunication here is that you actually inferred something I didn't say. (Congrats! You were using ToM. But as I said, ToM isn't always accurate. )

I did not say, or mean to imply that Autistics were on a slow development along an "identical track," with NT's. Far from it in fact. I just didn't take it any further.

In fact, it's not identical at all. All I said was that we both LEARN ToM and empathy, and that we learn both at different rates. Part of the reason for that, I already explained. The fact that we probably don't value them as much due to their being unreliable.

ANOTHER reason, is due to the fact that we DO process them differently. We do most of it intellectually, and consciously. NT's on the other hand, may have to be consciously and intellectually taught some of the principles, but once they've learned them, file them away in their subconscious and it all goes on "auto-pilot." I do not for a moment believe that NT's are simply born with these abilities. Born with the ability to subconsciously process the concepts perhaps, but not born with the skills as sharp as they need to be to be effective. They still have to learn to sharpen them.

When you combine the manner of processing (which is far more resource intensive than NT processing of them), with the lack of perceived value in the processes, for Autistics, it is not just delayed, it is also far more difficult.

Increased stress therefore, is to be expected.

I disagree. NTs already have 'empathy' - it's a simple piece of brain chemistry regulated by oxytocin. We both have to learn social skills. The 'empathy' is what drives them to learn social skills. We have no such drive.

I wish that whole "mind reading" analogy would get scrapped when people describe Theory of Mind. It's something that should be taken literally. Theory of Mind is literally the theories people have about what is going on in other peoples' minds. As you said, a guess. Like all guesses, error will inevitably happen sometimes. Practice reduces the quantity of those errors but it never goes down to zero, as everybody here knows who has been mistaken for angry when actually feeling just fine.


It definately makes sense that autistic people will practice this less on account of not wanting to rely on a process guarenteed to sometimes give wrong results. To NTs, error is acceptable so long as it doesn't derail things too terribly. Good enough is good enough. Close enough is close enough.

Another reason that I think NTs practice more is that practicing requires pretty extensive interaction with other people. The only way to check whether your theory of what somebody else is thinking is correct is to spend time with them. This tends to be enjoyable for NTs. Anything that is enjoyable and causes no stress will be practiced more. Anything that is difficult and stressful will be practiced only at a bare minimum. Since most of the people NTs practice on are other NTs, those theories of mind will have fewer and fewer errors (but never down to zero).


edited to add: fraac brought up oxytocin. Is that what makes it more enjoyable for NTs to get this practice through interaction that increases Theory of Mind's accuracy?

Hmmmm.

I see your point but I'm not sure what I have is ToM or empathy.

If a person walks into the office I can't tell the difference between

a person who hasn't slept because of stress
a person who is upset because their cat just died
a person who has been crying because their boyfriend dumped them
a person who has been out drinking all night and has a hangover

Because the last person I saw with bags under the eyes had been out drinking all night and decide to regale me with the story complete with amusing anecdotes, in an attempt to be social I will proceed to take the piss out the person who's cat just died.

However if some walks up to me and tells me that their cat has just died, I will know that they are upset.



Most of this I agree with, but I still think that what we end up with is a fake empathy and a fake ToM.

I think the problem with agreement might be at least in part one of semantics. In a sense, I actually agree with you, but it's hard for me to explain clearly what I really mean when say "We all learn them."

Empathy and ToM ARE social skills. I think, and this is just the way I look at it, that NT's are born with the ability to process both SUB-consciously while we are born able to do both, but must process them consciously. Even subconscious processing benefits from training. What I really mean is that even though NT subconscious processing of ToM and empathy are present at birth, NT's still need to develop them. Some learning is involved with that development.

Almost all kids have to be taught that just because they perceive things a particular way, not everyone perceives things the same way. Just watch small children when they don't want to engage in certain family activities, like a trip they weren't expecting to take and don't want to go on. All they know is that they aren't getting to do what they want to do. Small children, toddlers, be they NT or Autistic, often throw wild fits because they don't understand the impact on others of what they're doing. Some are more sensitive than other, granted, but most just don't understand, and have to be taught. This in large part is one of the reasons Autism doesn't become apparent until later ages. How many times have Autistic kids been overlooked because even doctors think "they're just being kids?"

Between their ability to subconsciously process these things, and the training, they learn to perfect these skills much faster than Autistics.

Until very recently, I felt the same way, but I'm starting to not like the term "fake" these days. The processing is very different, but I'm not so sure it's really "fake." I know even for me, it FEELS fake, but maybe the difference is only that it is such a conscious, deliberate process for us. In practice, it's not the same, and over time we mostly lag behind our peers, but the results can often be pretty much the same.

Consider two things.

1. Autism is often missed until children are in school, partly because the social demands bring the symptoms to the forefront, but also partly because at very young ages, many NT children don't perform very well with ToM and empathy. The younger the children are, the harder it is to tell the difference between NT's and ADS's.

2. Autism is often missed in adults because we've learned to mask the symptoms through adaptive behaviors. Pretty much the opposite problem

On the one hand we're easy to miss because NT infants babies and toddlers aren't that much more advanced than we are. On the other we are missed because we've advanced to appear more like them. In other words, we start out to all appearances very similar. NT's then advance more quickly, but later we catch up. In the interim it's not that difficult to see we are different. At either extreme, it's much harder to see the differences. If it really is just a difference between subconscious and conscious processing, that would certainly explain not only the differences, but also the difficulty for others to see them. Nobody can see the processes.

We do, kind of, "fake it" but faking it just involves a different manner of processing. I suppose if ToM and empathy were specifically defined as "subconscious" processes, and that isn't how we accomplish them, it could be accurate to say it is "fake," but then we'd probably also have to accept that we do not possess the abilities at all.

I doubt much most of us will ever accept that we don't have either.

The tricky bits cancel out and you're left with a very simply model if you rename 'empathy' to something like 'group identity instinct'. It works on all levels from social down to neurological. Then you can talk about social skills and you aren't debating endless nuances of 'cognitive empathy', 'affective empathy', 'fake empathy', etc. Autistics, psychopaths, etc lack group identity instinct, but use social skills in different ways. Really simply, effective model.

'Empathy' is a BS lie promoted by conmen and idiots.

I think that the word "empathy" should be expunged from the English language. It has acquired so many meanings that it has become effectively meaningless.