Weep with those who weep,
rejoice with those who rejoice
St Paul
Do unto others,
as you would have them
do unto you.
Jesus
rejoice with those who rejoice
St Paul
Do unto others,
as you would have them
do unto you.
Jesus
I was a tad surprised by all the email regarding empathy. It obviously struck a chord. Given some of the questions, I need to make a few more comments.
Empathy: to understand and share the other person’s feelings. The antonym would be what … uncaring? hardhearted? I think the best antonym would be what the French refer to as sang-froid: a coolness, indifference, literally, cold-hearted.
Empathy is a challenge for all of us, as how does one honestly enter into and gain sympathetic understanding of the feelings, perceptions, and experience of another human being? This is especially the case when there are differences in gender, age, culture, religion, and so forth. I think we must always approach empathy as a matter of degree: something that we never fully possess, but, still, should seek to have as much as humanly possible. Anyway--
Empathy can be a two-edged sword
One Edge
Your words, expressions, arguments carry far more power and effectiveness, when others feel that you truly have entered into and understand their experience. Do you know how many people walk around feeling utterly invisible? Given this reality, the slightest demonstration of empathy creates a great potential for a deep level of rapport, as it communicates to others that you care, that you see them, and that, to some degree, you understand them.
The Other Edge
You can become controlled by empathy: intuiting what the other person is experiencing, and then empathizing so deeply that you lose the ability to say or do what is in their (or your) best interest. Some people are so taken by what others are feeling that they can only see through the eyes of the other, not through their own eyes.
Why choose not to empathize with someone?
Some people are uncomfortable with emotions, in general: theirs, yours,his, hers … doesn’t matter.
Others choose to not empathize because it would then require that they reconsider their own beliefs, behaviors, perceptions and decisions, which was the point of the previous blog.
Still others choose not to empathize when they are hurt or angry, so see absolutely no reason whatsoever to empathize with the offending party—which is actually one of those situations where empathy is most called for.
Whatever the case, failure to empathize with others robs us, and those around us, of the dignity owed to creations of God, don’t you think?
Copyright, Monte E Wilson, 2008
6 comments:
How does someone who articulates their stances with such certainty manage to jump over to the other side and see where “they” are coming from? On the issues that I feel this kind of absolute certainty (usually only in matters of faith) I have an impossible time seeing the world through the opposing views’ eyes. Can you honestly say you have been able to feel empathy for atheists, homosexuals, etc? I would say this is completely against our human nature and possible only for people who lack complete conviction on their beliefs.
I do not believe in absolute certainty in matters of faith ... that is why we call it "faith." And anyway, I can remember times when I didn't believe the way I now believe and in that remembering put myself in another person's shoes. Furthermore, simply because I have never been an atheist or a homosexual doesn't mean I have never struggled with doubts (especially during those times of God's Absences) or with other sins, eh?
Then why speak with authority on anything?
If what’s true for you now may not hold true a few years from now, why bother holding any stance?
As for what I mentioned in matters of faith - maybe faith would be the wrong word. My only certainty and convictions are in God’s faithfulness.
Have you ever been wrong about a particular belief you held in the past? I have, as I was raised a Fundamentalist Dispensationalist! I spoke with a sure faith then, as I do now regarding my New and Improved Faith! Anyway, I think the more sure our faith is the more open it is to inspections, questions and debates. Furthermore, as I understand the nature of faith it is accompanied with love and humility, which is how we stand in our faith when encountering those who disagree with us. I am willing to be wrong ... take your best shot and I will listen respectfully. My own experience is that when I do this my faith is actually strengthened (as it is now more informed) and I have also quite often gained the respect and openness of the person with whom I was listening to.
I’m wrong about stuff all the time –as we all are –which is why I was questioning your propensity to take stances on issues in the first place. You’re as sure now as you were when you were a fundy and in a few years you may abandon your New and Improved faith for your Newer and More Improved faith, which may hold differing convictions.
But you have explained your reason behind taking these stances, which I can understand, so I thank you for your time.
Well, as for my propensity for taking strong stances, I certainly earned that reputation, and have spent the last 10 years or longer seeking to live it down! Now, as you can see from my blog, when I am not writing about life and human nature, I am talking about my work in Developing Nations. I stay away from holding forth publicly on theology (in any direct manner, anyway) for all sorts of reasons ... none of which, however, have anything to do with my faith in God.
Post a Comment