The Problem Of Empathy

[Revoltingest]

Caution: Long post. Multiple issues.
Some simplifying assumptions for brevity.
These are opinions about group tendencies.
This is a discussion, not debate forum.

The empathy spectrum....
Some have little. Some have much. Most are in the middle.
But empathy has more dimensions than a linear range.
The "parochial empathy" phenomenon resembles a vector,
ie it has both magnitude and direction.
Ref....
Can Empathy Actually Be Harmful? | SPSP
Excerpted....
....some research shows that people do not show empathy equally to others. In fact, people often exhibit an empathy bias, meaning that they are more empathetic to those who are similar to them in some way (an ingroup member) than to those with whom they share less in common (an outgroup member). These groups can refer to any social category a person considers themselves to be a part of, some more superficial such as being a student at a particular university or a fan of a certain sports team, and some deeply defining such as race, gender, or religion. This resulting "empathy gap" is known as parochial empathy, and unlike the empathy one extends to people similar to oneself, it can have very negative consequences, especially when it goes beyond feelings and actually leads to disparities in how we treat different social groups. For instance, other research on different types of groups has shown that parochial empathy can predict things like prejudicial attitudes and discriminatory behavior towards immigrants.
......End of excerpt.

Adding to empathy complexity is individual variation
in the extent to which empathy or values govern their
views on politics & religion. It might be viewed as the
old notion of left brain (rational) vs right brain (feeling).

Where is this leading?
The Israel vs Hamas / Israel vs Palestinians conflict.
And the 2 major sides taken finding little in common.

I notice that arguments between pro-Palestinian (p-P)
& pro-Israel (p-I) advocates tend to exhibit parochial
empathy.
- p-I advocates focus upon what happened, ie, 1,400
killed & 200+ kidnapped by Hamas.
- p-P advocates focus upon 11,000 Palestinians killed,
many times more maimed, & hundreds of thousands
made homeless.

If posters are limited to parochial empathy, there
will be no reconciliation. That must be understood
by both sides if it's ever to be overcome.

For those who place values above empathy, the
other significant difference behind this divide is that
the Hamas attack on civilians largely ended last month.
But Israel's attack on Palestinian civilians continues.
To p-I types, it's history.
To p-P types, it's a current event.
If solving the conflict is one's goal, rather than apologetics,
then the p-I types must give more weight to both current
events, & the history that inexorably led to violent armed
resistance, eg, the Oct 7 Hamas attack.


There....that'll get things going.
Now, let's treat this thread differently from the
others. We won't describe each other as evil,
anti-semites, islamophobes, or poopy heads.

 

[Koldo]

Caution: Long post. Multiple issues.
Some simplifying assumptions for brevity.
These are opinions about group tendencies.
This is a discussion, not debate forum.

The empathy spectrum....
Some have little. Some have much. Most are in the middle.
But empathy has more dimensions than a linear range.
The "parochial empathy" phenomenon resembles a vector,
ie it has both magnitude and direction.
Ref....
Can Empathy Actually Be Harmful? | SPSP
Excerpted....
....some research shows that people do not show empathy equally to others. In fact, people often exhibit an empathy bias, meaning that they are more empathetic to those who are similar to them in some way (an ingroup member) than to those with whom they share less in common (an outgroup member). These groups can refer to any social category a person considers themselves to be a part of, some more superficial such as being a student at a particular university or a fan of a certain sports team, and some deeply defining such as race, gender, or religion. This resulting "empathy gap" is known as parochial empathy, and unlike the empathy one extends to people similar to oneself, it can have very negative consequences, especially when it goes beyond feelings and actually leads to disparities in how we treat different social groups. For instance, other research on different types of groups has shown that parochial empathy can predict things like prejudicial attitudes and discriminatory behavior towards immigrants.
......End of excerpt.

Adding to empathy complexity is individual variation
in the extent to which empathy or values govern their
views on politics & religion. It might be viewed as the
old notion of left brain (rational) vs right brain (feeling).

Where is this leading?
The Israel vs Hamas / Israel vs Palestinians conflict.
And the 2 major sides taken finding little in common.

I notice that arguments between pro-Palestinian (p-P)
& pro-Israel (p-I) advocates tend to exhibit parochial
empathy.
- p-I advocates focus upon what happened, ie, 1,400
killed & 200+ kidnapped by Hamas.
- p-P advocates focus upon 11,000 Palestinians killed,
many times more maimed, & hundreds of thousands
made homeless.

If posters are limited to parochial empathy, there
will be no reconciliation. That must be understood
by both sides if it's ever to be overcome.

You are describing the history of human empathy in a nutshell.
How many german civilians were killed during WW II? At least hundreds of thousands.
Worse yet, around 100.000 japanese civilians were killed in Hiroshima alone.
Countries simply don't tend to value their civilians equally to their enemy's.

For those who place values above empathy, the
other significant difference behind this divide is that
the Hamas attack on civilians largely ended last month.
But Israel's attack on Palestinian civilians continues.
To p-I types, it's history.
To p-P types, it's a current event.
If solving the conflict is one's goal, rather than apologetics,
then the p-I types must give more weight to both current
events, & the history that inexorably led to violent armed
resistance, eg, the Oct 7 Hamas attack.


There....that'll get things going.
Now, let's treat this thread differently from the
others. We won't describe each other as evil,
anti-semites, islamophobes, or poopy heads.

It is easier to find a compromise when both sides would lose too much (in their perspective) by doing otherwise.
As it is, the issue is that Israel simply doesn't have to make a deal with Palestine. There is no risk of mutual assured destruction, and Israel is much much stronger than Palestine. Also, other powerful countries simply won't interfer in any particularly significant manner either. The key part to Israel is simply figuring how far they can go without underdoing a major loss.

 

[sun rise]

Ignoring the "bait" of the Middle East

And since this is a thread in Human Affairs, Political Movements and Charities -

Empathy is shown in how much compassion and understanding we can give to another. Sympathy is more of a feeling of pity for another. Empathy is our ability to understand how someone feels while sympathy is our relief in not having the same problems.

Compassion/empathy is not about action but about understanding. I might, for example, have empathy for the emotional trauma of a serial killer understanding how tortured his mind is and his true emotional suffering, but that does not stop me from acting. I can have compassion for the plight of a Russian soldier ordered to charge the Ukrainian line or be shot, but that does not stop me from shooting that soldier. Or in the political world that could mean I support politicians who advocate such policies.

And this is not limited to humans. My empathy for the suffering of animals might motivate me to advocate for political measures to relieve that suffering as much as possible. Or I might support charities with that purpose.

And to get to a specific case, I might have empathy for the suffering and misery that Donald Trump's face makes evident, but I'm still totally opposed to labeling people "vermin" and don't want him anywhere near the levers of power.

 

[Koldo]

Ignoring the "bait" of the Middle East

And since this is a thread in Human Affairs, Political Movements and Charities -

Empathy is shown in how much compassion and understanding we can give to another. Sympathy is more of a feeling of pity for another. Empathy is our ability to understand how someone feels while sympathy is our relief in not having the same problems.

Compassion/empathy is not about action but about understanding. I might, for example, have empathy for the emotional trauma of a serial killer understanding how tortured his mind is and his true emotional suffering, but that does not stop me from acting. I can have compassion for the plight of a Russian soldier ordered to charge the Ukrainian line or be shot, but that does not stop me from shooting that soldier. Or in the political world that could mean I support politicians who advocate such policies.

And this is not limited to humans. My empathy for the suffering of animals might motivate me to advocate for political measures to relieve that suffering as much as possible. Or I might support charities with that purpose.

And to get to a specific case, I might have empathy for the suffering and misery that Donald Trump's face makes evident, but I'm still totally opposed to labeling people "vermin" and don't want him anywhere near the levers of power.

The mere act of understanding someone else's plight doesn't entail compassion. There must also be a concern and worry for their situation.

 

[vulcanlogician]

Excerpted....
....some research shows that people do not show empathy equally to others. In fact, people often exhibit an empathy bias, meaning that they are more empathetic to those who are similar to them in some way (an ingroup member) than to those with whom they share less in common (an outgroup member).

This is so true. It's much easier for me to empathize with my nephew when he falls and gets a scrape on his knee than it is for me to empathize with a murder victim I hear about on the news. My rational brain would say that I should experience a greater feeling about the murder, due to the intensity of the pain and suffering involved, but my animal brain is biased toward those who I know and love.

There is no doubt that this phenomenon plays out on cultural scales. I certainly think it's something we ought to be aware of.

Where is this leading?
The Israel vs Hamas / Israel vs Palestinians conflict.
And the 2 major sides taken finding little in common.

Man, I'd love to have a conversation about what empathy is in the abstract, but once you've said this, I fear that that conversation will not take place in this thread. It'll just be another well-worn debate about the conflict in Gaza.

Empathy is shown in how much compassion and understanding we can give to another. Sympathy is more of a feeling of pity for another. Empathy is our ability to understand how someone feels while sympathy is our relief in not having the same problems.

Not to argue over definitions. Yours is perfectly fine, and many people mean precisely that when they use the word empathy. But in academic psychology, empathy is a more generalized concept. It means that you actually feel (to some extent) the pain and suffering of another upon witnessing it. A famous experiment has a subject hooked up to electrodes. The subject is shown a film of a human hand being smacked with a ruler. The interesting thing is, in nons-sociopathic subjects, the simple witnessing of a hand being struck by a ruler excites the same areas of the brain that are associated with the actual experience of pain. I like THAT definition of empathy, a shared experience of pain upon witnessing the suffering of others. Sympathy, on the other hand-- taking this definition into account-- would actually be your definition of empathy... ie. a capacity to understand the suffering of another, and wouldn't involve the actual suffering of oneself upon witnessing the suffering of another.

I like the definition provided by psychological science... that empathy involves (to some extent) a co-experiencing of pain (or pleasure) upon witnessing it.

 

[vulcanlogician]

The mere act of understanding someone else's plight doesn't entail compassion. There must also be a concern and worry for their situation.

I agree. Empathy involves something more visceral and immediate. Not just an ability to relate to what another is experiencing.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Sometimes empathy gets obscured particularly involving sensitive situations and conditions.

If a person gets so empathetic on one aspect, there is a tendency however to be unempathetic on another's view involving the same situation.

 

[Orbit]

Caution: Long post. Multiple issues.
Some simplifying assumptions for brevity.
These are opinions about group tendencies.
This is a discussion, not debate forum.

The empathy spectrum....
Some have little. Some have much. Most are in the middle.
But empathy has more dimensions than a linear range.
The "parochial empathy" phenomenon resembles a vector,
ie it has both magnitude and direction.
Ref....
Can Empathy Actually Be Harmful? | SPSP
Excerpted....
....some research shows that people do not show empathy equally to others. In fact, people often exhibit an empathy bias, meaning that they are more empathetic to those who are similar to them in some way (an ingroup member) than to those with whom they share less in common (an outgroup member). These groups can refer to any social category a person considers themselves to be a part of, some more superficial such as being a student at a particular university or a fan of a certain sports team, and some deeply defining such as race, gender, or religion. This resulting "empathy gap" is known as parochial empathy, and unlike the empathy one extends to people similar to oneself, it can have very negative consequences, especially when it goes beyond feelings and actually leads to disparities in how we treat different social groups. For instance, other research on different types of groups has shown that parochial empathy can predict things like prejudicial attitudes and discriminatory behavior towards immigrants.
......End of excerpt.

Adding to empathy complexity is individual variation
in the extent to which empathy or values govern their
views on politics & religion. It might be viewed as the
old notion of left brain (rational) vs right brain (feeling).

Where is this leading?
The Israel vs Hamas / Israel vs Palestinians conflict.
And the 2 major sides taken finding little in common.

I notice that arguments between pro-Palestinian (p-P)
& pro-Israel (p-I) advocates tend to exhibit parochial
empathy.
- p-I advocates focus upon what happened, ie, 1,400
killed & 200+ kidnapped by Hamas.
- p-P advocates focus upon 11,000 Palestinians killed,
many times more maimed, & hundreds of thousands
made homeless.

If posters are limited to parochial empathy, there
will be no reconciliation. That must be understood
by both sides if it's ever to be overcome.

For those who place values above empathy, the
other significant difference behind this divide is that
the Hamas attack on civilians largely ended last month.
But Israel's attack on Palestinian civilians continues.
To p-I types, it's history.
To p-P types, it's a current event.
If solving the conflict is one's goal, rather than apologetics,
then the p-I types must give more weight to both current
events, & the history that inexorably led to violent armed
resistance, eg, the Oct 7 Hamas attack.


There....that'll get things going.
Now, let's treat this thread differently from the
others. We won't describe each other as evil,
anti-semites, islamophobes, or poopy heads.

I agree that most people's empathy only extends to people that they consider to be "worthy". e.g. "like them". I am disturbed by some people's seeming inability to find even a shred of empathy for anyone they consider to be "the other" or "on the wrong side".

In the case of Gaza, I am personally appalled that some people can't seem to have empathy for more than one group of people at the same time. They seem to think it's some kind of either/or game, where if they express empathy for Palestinian civilians they will be seen as (a) anti-semitic or (b) Hamas sympathizers, when both of those categorizations are completely false, silencing, and unproductive.

I see a profound failure of empathy in how people react to the bombardment of Gaza and to the general situation of the Palestinians. But in the same breath they demand empathy for "their" victims, the Israelis, whose "side" they are on.

To me that entire conceptualization is morally bankrupt. People are people, and they deserve our empathy. When hate replaces empathy, it just makes a solution harder to find. Two sides pointing at each other screaming "They just want to kill us!" is not a solution to the problem. I think a lot of people need to start practicing radical empathy, and try to see that particular conflict from BOTH sides, especially given the problematic history of the region.

 

[Koldo]

I agree that most people's empathy only extends to people that they consider to be "worthy". e.g. "like them". I am disturbed by some people's seeming inability to find even a shred of empathy for anyone they consider to be "the other" or "on the wrong side".

In the case of Gaza, I am personally appalled that some people can't seem to have empathy for more than one group of people at the same time. They seem to think it's some kind of either/or game, where if they express empathy for Palestinian civilians they will be seen as (a) anti-semitic or (b) Hamas sympathizers, when both of those categorizations are completely false, silencing, and unproductive.

I see a profound failure of empathy in how people react to the bombardment of Gaza and to the general situation of the Palestinians. But in the same breath they demand empathy for "their" victims, the Israelis, whose "side" they are on.

To me that entire conceptualization is morally bankrupt. People are people, and they deserve our empathy. When hate replaces empathy, it just makes a solution harder to find. Two sides pointing at each other screaming "They just want to kill us!" is not a solution to the problem. I think a lot of people need to start practicing radical empathy, and try to see that particular conflict from BOTH sides, especially given the problematic history of the region.

One problem is that some people simply want to fight, and there is no escaping that.
As I see it, the best solution we have on the table so far is to support those that don't want to fight by giving them the opportunity to immigrate elsewhere. Far away from this conflict. There is absolutely no need to see the number of dead civilians increasing at this rate every single day when we are, collectively, able to improve this situation under peaceful terms. Let's show actual empathy by supporting this financially.

 

[bobhikes]

Empathy is something I have, something I do to myself. It is not acting out. I see someone fall and hit their knee hard on the ground, I wince in pain. That does not mean I am going to help them up or care about them in anyway. I just feel their pain what I do because of my empathy is something else. At times I empathize with something I see on TV. It's a momentary thing and then it goes away.

 

[Augustus]

Can Empathy Actually Be Harmful? | SPSP
Excerpted....
....some research shows that people do not show empathy equally to others. In fact, people often exhibit an empathy bias, meaning that they are more empathetic to those who are similar to them in some way (an ingroup member) than to those with whom they share less in common (an outgroup member). These groups can refer to any social category a person considers themselves to be a part of, some more superficial such as being a student at a particular university or a fan of a certain sports team, and some deeply defining such as race, gender, or religion. This resulting "empathy gap" is known as parochial empathy, and unlike the empathy one extends to people similar to oneself, it can have very negative consequences, especially when it goes beyond feelings and actually leads to disparities in how we treat different social groups. For instance, other research on different types of groups has shown that parochial empathy can predict things like prejudicial attitudes and discriminatory behavior towards immigrants.

Reminds me of this:

"Sometimes we commit atrocities not out of a failure of empathy but rather as a direct consequence of successful, even overly successful, empathy,"

Does Empathy Have A Dark Side?


One moral principle that I imagine is universal in one form or another, is the principle of reciprocity.

Someone who is highly empathetic, can "experience" the suffering of their chosen group all the greater, and so via reciprocity justify greater retribution against their transgressors.

Even a cursory glance at history should convince one that individual crimes committed for selfish motives play a quite insignificant part in the human tragedy, compared to the numbers massacred in unselfish loyalty to one’s tribe, nation, dynasty, church, or political ideology, ad majorem gloriam dei... homicide committed for selfish motives is a statistical rarity in all cultures. Homicide for unselfish motives is the dominant phenomenon of man's history. His tragedy is not an excess of aggression but an excess of devotion... it's loyalty and devotion which makes the fanatic." - Arthur Koestler

 

[Revoltingest]

You are describing the history of human empathy in a nutshell.
How many german civilians were killed during WW II? At least hundreds of thousands.
Worse yet, around 100.000 japanese civilians were killed in Hiroshima alone.
Countries simply don't tend to value their civilians equally to their enemy's.



It is easier to find a compromise when both sides would lose too much (in their perspective) by doing otherwise.
As it is, the issue is that Israel simply doesn't have to make a deal with Palestine. There is no risk of mutual assured destruction, and Israel is much much stronger than Palestine. Also, other powerful countries simply won't interfer in any particularly significant manner either. The key part to Israel is simply figuring how far they can go without underdoing a major loss.

Israel faces some risks....
- Continued violent retribution for oppression of Palestinians.
- The war could expand to include other countries.
- USA could reduce support.

 

[Estro Felino]

In Christianity, empathy is not selective.
Suffering is the result of wars. You eliminate all wars, you eliminate suffering.

And by the way, no war is just.
There is no such a thing as just war. I am a pacifist. Pacifist means, no wars.

So...I am sorry...the point that some wars are just and others aren't, is really unlistenable.

 

[We Never Know]

Caution: Long post. Multiple issues.
Some simplifying assumptions for brevity.
These are opinions about group tendencies.
This is a discussion, not debate forum.

The empathy spectrum....
Some have little. Some have much. Most are in the middle.
But empathy has more dimensions than a linear range.
The "parochial empathy" phenomenon resembles a vector,
ie it has both magnitude and direction.
Ref....
Can Empathy Actually Be Harmful? | SPSP
Excerpted....
....some research shows that people do not show empathy equally to others. In fact, people often exhibit an empathy bias, meaning that they are more empathetic to those who are similar to them in some way (an ingroup member) than to those with whom they share less in common (an outgroup member). These groups can refer to any social category a person considers themselves to be a part of, some more superficial such as being a student at a particular university or a fan of a certain sports team, and some deeply defining such as race, gender, or religion. This resulting "empathy gap" is known as parochial empathy, and unlike the empathy one extends to people similar to oneself, it can have very negative consequences, especially when it goes beyond feelings and actually leads to disparities in how we treat different social groups. For instance, other research on different types of groups has shown that parochial empathy can predict things like prejudicial attitudes and discriminatory behavior towards immigrants.
......End of excerpt.

Adding to empathy complexity is individual variation
in the extent to which empathy or values govern their
views on politics & religion. It might be viewed as the
old notion of left brain (rational) vs right brain (feeling).

Where is this leading?
The Israel vs Hamas / Israel vs Palestinians conflict.
And the 2 major sides taken finding little in common.

I notice that arguments between pro-Palestinian (p-P)
& pro-Israel (p-I) advocates tend to exhibit parochial
empathy.
- p-I advocates focus upon what happened, ie, 1,400
killed & 200+ kidnapped by Hamas.
- p-P advocates focus upon 11,000 Palestinians killed,
many times more maimed, & hundreds of thousands
made homeless.

If posters are limited to parochial empathy, there
will be no reconciliation. That must be understood
by both sides if it's ever to be overcome.

For those who place values above empathy, the
other significant difference behind this divide is that
the Hamas attack on civilians largely ended last month.
But Israel's attack on Palestinian civilians continues.
To p-I types, it's history.
To p-P types, it's a current event.
If solving the conflict is one's goal, rather than apologetics,
then the p-I types must give more weight to both current
events, & the history that inexorably led to violent armed
resistance, eg, the Oct 7 Hamas attack.


There....that'll get things going.
Now, let's treat this thread differently from the
others. We won't describe each other as evil,
anti-semites, islamophobes, or poopy heads.

"I notice that arguments between pro-Palestinian (p-P) & pro-Israel (p-I) advocates tend to exhibit parochial empathy.
- p-I advocates focus upon what happened, ie, 1,400 killed & 200+ kidnapped by Hamas.
- p-P advocates focus upon 11,000 Palestinians killed, many times more maimed, & hundreds of thousands made homeless"

Are you saying in war when one side kills more than the other side, the leading side should pause to let the other side catch up?

Or once you killed as many as you've lost, stop and hope the other side stops too?

 

[Estro Felino]

Many people went to watch the movie Oppenheimer, feeling a sadistic pleasure, knowing what the result of his accomplishment did.
Yes. Sadism is a very horrific component within human nature.
Schadenfreude.
in Christianity it's not acceptable.

It's the same sadism of the lion that tortures the gazelle, before eating it.

With these premises...well...I think we are light years away from empathy.

 

[jes-us]

Caution: Long post. Multiple issues.
Some simplifying assumptions for brevity.
These are opinions about group tendencies.
This is a discussion, not debate forum.

The empathy spectrum....
Some have little. Some have much. Most are in the middle.
But empathy has more dimensions than a linear range.
The "parochial empathy" phenomenon resembles a vector,
ie it has both magnitude and direction.
Ref....
Can Empathy Actually Be Harmful? | SPSP
Excerpted....
....some research shows that people do not show empathy equally to others. In fact, people often exhibit an empathy bias, meaning that they are more empathetic to those who are similar to them in some way (an ingroup member) than to those with whom they share less in common (an outgroup member). These groups can refer to any social category a person considers themselves to be a part of, some more superficial such as being a student at a particular university or a fan of a certain sports team, and some deeply defining such as race, gender, or religion. This resulting "empathy gap" is known as parochial empathy, and unlike the empathy one extends to people similar to oneself, it can have very negative consequences, especially when it goes beyond feelings and actually leads to disparities in how we treat different social groups. For instance, other research on different types of groups has shown that parochial empathy can predict things like prejudicial attitudes and discriminatory behavior towards immigrants.
......End of excerpt.

Adding to empathy complexity is individual variation
in the extent to which empathy or values govern their
views on politics & religion. It might be viewed as the
old notion of left brain (rational) vs right brain (feeling).

Where is this leading?
The Israel vs Hamas / Israel vs Palestinians conflict.
And the 2 major sides taken finding little in common.

I notice that arguments between pro-Palestinian (p-P)
& pro-Israel (p-I) advocates tend to exhibit parochial
empathy.
- p-I advocates focus upon what happened, ie, 1,400
killed & 200+ kidnapped by Hamas.
- p-P advocates focus upon 11,000 Palestinians killed,
many times more maimed, & hundreds of thousands
made homeless.

If posters are limited to parochial empathy, there
will be no reconciliation. That must be understood
by both sides if it's ever to be overcome.

For those who place values above empathy, the
other significant difference behind this divide is that
the Hamas attack on civilians largely ended last month.
But Israel's attack on Palestinian civilians continues.
To p-I types, it's history.
To p-P types, it's a current event.
If solving the conflict is one's goal, rather than apologetics,
then the p-I types must give more weight to both current
events, & the history that inexorably led to violent armed
resistance, eg, the Oct 7 Hamas attack.


There....that'll get things going.
Now, let's treat this thread differently from the
others. We won't describe each other as evil,
anti-semites, islamophobes, or poopy heads.

No human has empathy . Empathy is feelings of the body that the mind experience agrees upon .

 

[Shadow Wolf]

This is so true. It's much easier for me to empathize with my nephew when he falls and gets a scrape on his knee than it is for me to empathize with a murder victim I hear about on the news. My rational brain would say that I should experience a greater feeling about the murder, due to the intensity of the pain and suffering involved, but my animal brain is biased toward those who I know and love.

The rational brain also knows it can't handle that much. When it tries too it over stresses and starts breaking down.

 

[osgart]

It's always easier to care when things are going well, and among one's own kind.

I don't think anyone needs to feel what others feel in order to care enough to make the effort to understand, and act according to a worthy set of values.

The more someone knows of a people then the more they will be affected by what happens to those people. How well can we understand the Palestinians through our news media?

At some point the people have to be experienced beyond P-I, and P-P. As individuals, as groups, as a culture, and as a society. That would take courage and understanding for opposing sides to get a better perception of each other.

The media might paint a picture that doesn't reveal enough of the problem. It's important to know the source that filters the information humans gather. Empathy is best governed by one's values, and one's wisdom to discern.

I prefer to try to understand before I get my feelings mixed up in a situation.

 

[Revoltingest]

"I notice that arguments between pro-Palestinian (p-P) & pro-Israel (p-I) advocates tend to exhibit parochial empathy.
- p-I advocates focus upon what happened, ie, 1,400 killed & 200+ kidnapped by Hamas.
- p-P advocates focus upon 11,000 Palestinians killed, many times more maimed, & hundreds of thousands made homeless"

Are you saying in war when one side kills more than the other side, the leading side should pause to let the other side catch up?

Or once you killed as many as you've lost, stop and hope the other side stops too?

No & no.

 

[Revoltingest]

No human has empathy . Empathy is feelings of the body that the mind experience agrees upon .

OK.