Is empathy a social construct?

Post Reply New Topic

Yes. I have the same problem, but so do NT's. Ever read the book "How to Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie? It's written for all people, and a lot is devoted to just this kind of thing. Seems we're not the only ones who have trouble with things like this, else so many books wouldn't be written about it. Everyone would already know how to do it. Some, granted, are better than others at it, but we certainly aren't the only ones not so great at it.



Yeah, well I think that's just a matter of semantics. I've called it "fake" too, until just recently. Now I view it as a different form of processing with basically the same result, but a lot slower. So we are still pretty much in agreement.

I don't see how it's the same if it's different.

You lost me. What do you mean by "it?" And not sure who you think seems to be saying "it" is the same and different. Were you addressing me, someone else, or anyone in particular?

I don't think NTs reading "How to Win Friends" hoping to improve their social status are the same as autistics not knowing how to deal with someone with a sad face. Those appear to be problems from different domains. The NT wants more power in their hierarchy, the autistic wants an honest connection without respect to hierarchies.

I couldn't agree with you more. Motivation though, isn't the point. The point is NT's often aren't that good at the practice of empathy or ToM, which is why books like that are written for them. Many of them have trouble with the same things we do with both. Don't forget, problems with empathy is only one possible symptom of Autism. It is neither a requirement of, nor exclusive to Autism. This means that NT's also often have problems with empathy. It may be the only symptom of Autism they have, which would of course mean they do not have Autism, but doesn't mean the problem can't be just as bad.

"Not knowing how to deal with a sad face" is a different problem from the empathy issue. That's a body language issue. Different symptom, so even within the Autistic realm, these are different domains. Also, the NT also wants honest connections without respect to hierarchies. That's friendship as well as deeper relationships. And, that's why the book includes the concept of winning friends, not just influencing people.

The reason I brought up the book is because it's full of real life examples from the author himself, who is NT, of situations in which he failed to exercise ToM and empathy. It's full of good examples demonstrating that trouble in these areas is not exclusive to Autistics. Yes, the reason we have trouble is different. Yes, how we as Autistics have to learn to deal with and process them is different from how NT's do it. My point was only that we ALL have to learn some things about them in order to become any good at them. NT's in general learn more quickly than we do.

I have read it, it didn't help. I still have zero friends, the exact same number as before. My influence on the planet is still limited to annoying people by leaving nail bitings everywhere I go.



Yeah, well I think that's just a matter of semantics. I've called it "fake" too, until just recently. Now I view it as a different form of processing with basically the same result, but a lot slower. So we are still pretty much in agreement.[/quote]

What happened 'just recently'? I'm really interested to know what changed your mind.

I have spent years attempting to have a conversation with people that work on checkouts.

I selected this as a target because it is an interaction that all NT's do, the target is captive and bored and wants to have a conversation to break the monotony of the day.

I go shopping with my mother or my girlfriend and I memorise the exact conversation, the timing, the posture, the cadence, the pitch and then a few days later I attempt to have the exact same conversation with the exact same shop assistant.

I have done this over and over again, with dozens of bored checkout girls/men/boys/women/black/white/asian/chinese etc etc

To date I have had exactly zero conversations with people that work in a supermarket. Yet NT's do this automatically, without thinking.

I can cope with thinking about people and predicting their desires inside of a philosophical construct, name your philosopher, I have his collected works on one my bookshelves, carefully thumbed through repeatedly with ragged edges but an unbroken spine because I hate opening a book that far.

Yet I can not hold a conversation with a bored and captive shop assistant.

How is the way that I interact with the world the same thing as the way an NT reacts with the world?

If you define empathy as social skills rather than the instinctive feeling they get about people, and ignore the orthogonal motives of NT and autistic, then I'm not sure what there is left to say. Yes, some of all of us could use better social skills for various reasons. You are maybe overlooking what many find to be the real problem, which isn't learned tricks but the unconscious herd instinct that means checkout workers won't talk to DC.

NT writers conflate the instinctive feeling with social skills and call it 'empathy' because they haven't the awareness not to. We needn't be so careless.

DC: I've had a (kind of) conversation with exactly 1 checkout girl. She was easily the prettiest girl I've seen working in a supermarket and she started chatting about how she loved Tropicana Ruby Breakfast, which I was buying. I had nothing to say so I just mumbled 'yes, it's nice'. I recommend beautiful girls and alpha males to all autistics. As they're at the top of the hierarchy they're allowed to talk to anyone without following rules. Because this is how it really works. We're just monkeys with delusions of rationality.

No, NTs don't want an honest connection. Most want to know their place.

NO Fraac. This is wrong. It should read. Many NTs don't want an honest connection. Many NTs want to know their place. Many do.

Its about the local culture you are in, and you have 2D views of all NTs.

Your ideas about empathy/oxytocin/heirachies sound to me pretty sound. As a generalisation its fine, but you offer no qualifications. And it dont work like that a significant amount of time because actually we are not just animals. Its close but the difference is everything, and a lot of NT people know that and are not sheep. Yes, the underlying biology makes us (99% DNA?) chimps and that has an enormous influence on society. But we are much more than that and can intellectualise our base instincts and learn to rationalise stuff. We overcome our chemistry, I see and know it all the time.

You seem to have never met an NT who dont go with the herd. I have an image of you shacked up in some housing estate in Basingstoke, experiencing the world through the net and deciding every independent thinker you ever stumble upon is an Aspie (because you are).

I've surrounded myself all my life by hundreds and hundreds of independent NT thinkers who are just people, not a herd or a pack. I don't do groups so much, I make unilateral connections. People who are smart and can stand outside a social situation and see whats going on and act as they wish, not due to herd pressures. I'm not disagreeing with you that these instincts are there, and they're powerful. I just think you got to get out more to test these firmly held opinions. Go get the data, then decide.

Disclosure I'm an NT, I'm just off the nibble the grass over there, moo moo (I'm a Jersey and God I love these eyelashes and look at the size.....)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDcQKB2DxxA[/youtube]

I think for research to begin to understand this empathy/social construct/animal hierarchies/in out group stuff, first you need a sea change in the publics perception of Aspergers.

Its entirely possible with an education programme. Society does change and sometimes quickly with good education (within my lifetime people used to drink and drive and people accepted it, now it is entirely unacceptable to nearly everyone).

Once a larger NT public are better able to 'get' the different way of thinking there will be better research and discussion. Researchers won't be allowed to mess up on the crass myths and will have to do better science.

It would be good for everyone. Aspies need to be branded as cool (in my opinion straightforward, rational, honest, open, self-aware, abile to accept new ideas, interested in different cultures/viewpoints, evidence based) + anything else lovely that anyone happens to be.

But you can't really have that until you get over the empathy/haughty/unsocialble myth.

If NTs dont know you are an Aspie, many of the places your mind goes, as opposed to mine, can be misinterpreted as an NT being blunt and rude, often due to lack of 'cognitive empathy'.
In everyday language empathy = caring about others. So all the time people think you dont care about others, they can't connect. Then they learn you have "emotional empathy" and turn on a dim cos now your are nice, but different.

You got to nail the empathy thing. Get it discussed on QI (do you get that in the states?) Sticky learning, people love to say they learn something on QI, then they spread it.

What seems a logical comment to you, can seem weird or 'loaded' with other meaning. When you 'get it' the ultra honesty its actually endearing. Its refreshing for an NT to know that they can trust that honesty.

What is needed is Aspie politicians, bankers, lawyers.

I did say 'most'. The NTs I've met who seemed free of the herd where very beautiful, but society would wait for them to slip up and then class them as high functioning borderlines or psychopaths. Few have managed to avoid dealings with the legal system. They had all the social skills but used the hierarchy to feel safe rather than worshipping it. We are just animals, we haven't transcended into a master race. That isn't a bad thing, it simply is.

Public perception of Aspergers is (in Britain, where Simon Baron-Cohen is the rent-a-quote mouthpiece) that we're "zero positives" meaning we lack 'empathy' but are harmless, potentially useful robots. "Zero negatives" are baddies who lack 'empathy' and include psychopaths, narcissists and borderlines. What I'm suggesting is that 'empathy' is group herding instinct, the same biological imperative that causes sadism, and that those people currently being kept down with labels are the only ones rejecting the lies and trying to stay sane.

The science is very close to confirming this but widespread acceptance of the implications would destroy society as we know it. The sea change in the public perception of Aspergers cannot be allowed to happen - too much is at stake for those currently with power.

No. Empathy is basically using a subconscious simulation based on your own thoughts/emotions (plus some imagination) to explain the thoughts/emotions of others. It can break down if either 1.) people are too dissimilar for one to simulate the other, 2.) people are not aware enough of how their own thoughts/emotions 3.) people don't have enough imagination to picture how something looks from the others point of view, or 4.) people don't have a neutral enough emotional baseline to accurately simulate someone else.

Autistic people might have a problem due to 1, 2, or 3. Issue 4 seems to affect both NTs and autistics alike. The problem is people tend to project their own emotions onto others. That or they see more hostile intent in others when they have a negative baseline.

I'd also say empathy is sometimes a prerequisite for sympathy and compassion as it's hard to feel for someone if you can't imagine what they're going through. It is possible for some to have some cognitive empathy without any sympathy or compassion. This would be the case of sociopathic individuals.

If it's subconscious how do you know it works by simulation? I think that's an autistic model of a nonautistic process. I think it works by power hierarchies.

In everyday language people confuse empathy and sympathy. Empathy is seen as caring, people tend to assume if you can put yourself in someone else shoes, you will be sympathetic.

Most people would have no inkling that a sociopath or psychopath could have empathy, as its seen as a positive attribute and confused with sympathy.

yes, I know what you mean, I always cry when a new baby is born or when I see starving children on television, I feel sorry for people who are worse off than me, if that's not empathy then I don't know what is. However, I do remember a time in my life where I just couldn't understand the pain of others, these were very lonely years.

Because I'm probably half-NT and I'm pretty sure it's what I do. You can also google "mirror neurons".

"empathy = power hierarchies" sounds like something an extremely bitter person would say. I don't see the logic that would lead you to that conclusion.