Autism, Emotions, Empathy, Sympathy, Whatever!

Post Reply New Topic

You know what's annoying? I see everyone sympathizing with each other when they have problems. For me, I can't feel sympathy as well as others can, or empathy, I mix the two up. If someone comes to tell me a problem, I can't help them. I don't feel anything and I can't give advice. They see I'm "blank" and see I'm "heartless". Sometimes I feel selfish for this, like I only care about my own problems. Sometimes it is that way. It gets worse when I get irritated with the person ranting.

Last year, my then friend failed a final and was upset because she had her summer privileges taken away. I didn't feel anything nor could I provide advice, sympathy, or a shoulder to cry on. I was, as I said earlier, blank. I knew she could sense this and had a gut feeling she now thought lower of me. People would think differently of me when witnessing my apathy and wonder "what's wrong with her?"

You know what's worse? When I expect others to listen to me when I'm upset. I feel like a heartless hypocrite, something I never want to be.

We have a class devoted to the Holocaust. We watched documentaries that featured the filling of mass-graves and whatnot. Girls gasped. I didn't. I barely felt a thing while others asked, "Ms. (Name), how could they do that?". I don't think what the Nazis did was right, but watching pixels dance across a screen didn't do a thing.

When Japan was dealing with the tsunami+earthquake, everyone felt sympathy and whatnot. I felt nothing. What is wrong with me? Do other Aspies/Auties feel the same way and question why this is?

I can relate when it involves people I don't know personally. I feel little for them, though it's not that I don't care, I genuinely do.
However, I'm afraid I can't really relate when it is with people I know personally, and particularly friends or family. I'm not very empathetic, even here, though I try my best to help them out when they are in a predicament, even if my advice isn't necessarily helpful.

Some of the problems I can't relate to, and sometimes it just gets annoying.

My sympathy goes as far as telling someone where they went wrong, what they should have done and offering them a solution. In a fast talking annoyed tone of voice too.

We are all different. I do not relate to this post at all. I am very sympathetic, if I am aware of a situation, e,g, the horrors of the holocost movie, but I have difficulty with empathy, the ability to sense others feelings.

I feel really guilty when somebody needs my support but I do not realise. This of course happens with the people that I am closest too and whom I am supposed to understand. Those not so close will be more obvious in explaining to some extent.

I sympathize/empathize whenever the reason is so good that Im actually affected, and I can reject being affected when it would be a waste of time.

Who is egoistic? Me or the person craving for my attention?

I dont expect sympathy/empathy if I fail a final because its kind of childish/dependent/cantankerous??? and easy to think around. I would just be annoyed, and if you give me sympathy/empathy in that situation you're making it worse.

I have a lot of sympathy and empathy regarding (in my opinion) essential problems that are difficult to deal with.

Another thing is that if it is expected of me to react in one spesific way, I will detect this expectation and go:

Also if too many people are "riding around" on sympathy/empathy for an essential problem, I probably turn my back on it because it can get too much. Stretching the problem until we all get sick of it, no thanks.

Sympathy/empathy is about taking someones side emotionally because you understand the problem. I do that a lot.

Ok, let's start and take it a piece at a time.

I used to have this problem. I see it this way:

Life (and socializing) is a cooperative game where, in order to get the best possible outcome, one has to do things for other people. Sympathy is merely an example. Whether you feel it instinctively, or not, does not matter. The point is that people tend to ask people for help and they expect to be helped.

One needs to learn a number of basic things:

One way to be friendly with people is to give them sympathy when they're asking for it (implicitly, of course). Being a dick would work against one. Refusing to play the sympathy game is, in effect, asking to be ignored, which generally has the same results.

The complicated and calculating part is determining exactly how much sympathy to dole out to a particular person and/or situation. If you care for someone, it depends on how much you care about them. If you don't, it depends on how much they can do for you later on...or how much they can screw your life if you antagonize them.

Keep in mind that being too nice is not the best idea. However, if you have trouble determining who you can be an ass to and who you should be nice to, it's a better to be safe than sorry. That is, when in doubt, be nice to others. As a result, they'll be nice to you more often than not.


So let's take the example of that friend of yours, eh ?

Well, she failed a final. It's probably her fault, but you consider each other to be friends. She's upset and she asked you for advice and/or sympathy. You were unable to provide any because her situation doesn't affect you directly.

Guess what? You're wrong. It DOES affect you directly, and you attest to this yourself. Not only does she think of you as less of a friend, but you can be sure that she won't be as nice to you in the future. Furthermore, she might tell her other friends about how strange and 'heartless' you are...and that'll impair others' perception of your person.

So. What should you have done? Well, you could have AT LEAST said something to the effect of "I'm sorry," regardless of whether you are actually sorry or not. If you pretended to care, maybe you could've done more. That's up to you, though. At least strive to be nice and pleasant.

Oh, and about getting annoyed at others' rants: Learn some patience. It will go a long way.

I take inspiration from Herman Hesse' novel Siddharta, which I thoroughly recommend to be read by all. In it, the main character is asked for his qualifications when looking to for work after having been a monk for some time. He replies with something to the extent of:
Being able to think critically is not enough. With patience, one can achieve far greater things than one could otherwise.


Anyway, onto the next course on the menu:
Well, I feel the same way, to be honest. My personal philosophy concerning human nature is strongly Hobbesian. That is, I believe that, inherently, most people are cruel and selfish creatures. Thus, it does not shock me that people could have done such things. After all, wars have existed since the dawn of History.

The difference, however, is that I try as hard as possible not to reveal this to people who are not close friends, as they might take offense and think I'm some kind of psychotic potential serial killer. I'd recommend that you do the same. If you completely refuse to pretend to be sympathetic in reference to such matters, at least be humble and concede that the said occurrences are horrible, etc.

Whatever you do, make great efforts not to piss people off. Trust me, your life will be THAT much better and happier this way.


::sigh::

I seriously wish someone told me these things 10 years ago. Thankfully, I am very happy to have the few close friends I have who have tolerated my company and stupid questions long enough for me to understand this...and other matters.

How weird. You posted this in The Haven. I wonder why people double-post.

People tend to explore different forums. People that tend not to explore this forum may explore the Haven, and vice versa

Yeah, I've heard that reasoning before, but threads can be moved if they're not relevant to a certain space. There's no need to clog up the place with double posts. I would say that this thread didn't belong in The Haven since it's obviously not a private subject for you.

I feel it belongs in both forums. Oh well.

Okay good post! Im not happy that I have to learn this, because it is, to be honest: annoying.
The best possible outcome is for me not to play a game, but to be allowed to be myself, and so your version is the next best, but the only realistic.
I dont want to sacrifice myself 100% of the time. The problem is that you are right, because thats the way it works, so maybe I will get cancer because of all the patience I will have to raise. The idea that I will have to bend for the existing rules is undescribably annoying. I wonder if its possible to find a balanced way between being myself and act: if there is some space for me on this planet or not.

If people complain about a silly thing, Im not affected other than secretly annoyed. Reacting in a bad way would at the same time not even be a solution. But playing emathic/sympathic to the ridiculous problem to make friends because you need them later, is based on a lot of "air" and thats wasting precious lifetime, but well, probably necessary.

Friendship should be for granted, without all the rules, if I would have it my way.

Meh. I can't argue with someone who's the same age as my son. It's not worth my time. So, whatever, kid. I'm out.

And the good reason is ...?

I don't know what you're asking me.

Well, you COULD go off and live in the forest/desert/mountains away from modern society and not have to bother with playing these games at all. Of course, in that case, you're playing the game of how much your willing to sacrifice in ease of living to get what you want.


Ah, well, therein lies one of the fundamental differences between the NT and us. They instinctively know how to get the balance they want; we have to resort to learning how to obtain this balance. The process and the mistakes one makes can be hazardous to one's well-being, but it's certainly possible.


Well, regarding a lot of "air" and lifetime, these are variables that are different for each person. Personally, my seemingly-invincible sense of self-worth was crushed when I got into high school. I was (un)fortunate enough to get into one of the premier schools in the country, so having quickly met some REAL geniuses and otherwise incredibly brilliant people, I realized that one can get away with not following rules if one is either incredibly brilliant, powerful, or charismatic.

Given that I am not incredibly productive, my "air" and lifetime don't have as much value as I'd like them to have. I have two reasonable choices. I can either become more productive, which would be following the rules implicitly...or I can waste my precious lifetime, because the opportunity costs of not doing so are sufficiently high to make it a good idea.


The rules are implicit. An NT person would argue that they are not rules, but merely...natural laws.

In any case, having it "one's own way" requires that one be exceptional, and, mind you, not merely exceptionally ignorant, in order to still have good results. Otherwise, having it "one's own way" is prohibitively costly, at least in my opinion.