RE: Why be good?
June 3, 2015 at 3:46 pm
(This post was last modified: June 3, 2015 at 3:58 pm by Simon Moon.)
(June 3, 2015 at 3:03 pm)wallym Wrote: Empathy, to me, is a tricky thing. When you think about it, it's really a different way to make everything about yourself.
"I feel bad that you got hit by a car, because I would hate it if I got hit by a car."
Now you're getting it!
Of course empathy is about oneself. We have a built in, evolved reward system that when we do something altruistic for another (because we know how we would feel in same circumstance), we get an emotional reward. Our brains produce a soup of chemicals that make us feel good as a reward for doing good.
If there wasn't this built in reward system, we would not help others, and our ancestors would not have survived for us to be here talking about this. This reward system is one of our most important survival strategies.
Some people have a broken reward system. We label them as "sociopaths".
Quote:That's why all the hokey sayings are "Treat others like you want to be treated", "Love thy neighbor as thyself" or "Walk a mile in their shoes." The key component of all of these is making it about you. That's why it's not "Treat others how they want to be treated."
Well, "Treat others like you want to be treated" actually works pretty good, since we all have more or less the same bodies, physiology, brains, etc. But I agree, "Treat others how they want to be treated" is probably a better way to put it.
Quote:So what I've done, is shift that to the more appropriate form. "Treat others how they want to be treated." But if I don't care how some guy in India is treated, there's no reason to follow the rule. "Yeah, but how would you feel if you get hit by a car!?" Terrible. But I didn't get hit by a car. Some person I don't care about got hit by a car. So they feel terrible, and I don't feel a thing.
But I, and many others I know, do care about how others are treated in India. It is part of the social contract I follow, to help others when I can.
Yes, it is true, that right now, somewhere in India, there is probably someone trapped in a building that is on fire, and there is nothing I can do about it, nor do I feel visceral empathy. But if someone down the street from me was trapped in a burning building, you can bet that I would be feeling empathy that would motivate me to try to get them out.
Wouldn't you?
Quote:To answer the question, without really answering it, I was empathetic. Just like I was religious. In that I was operating with the belief that I believed things I didn't really believe. In the same way in the end I said "Do I really believe in God?" and the answer was "Not really." The question of "Do I really care about a homeless man in Kentucky?" The answer was not really. And if I'd been a bit more proactive, honest, and open-minded in my thinking, I could have come to those conclusions a lot earlier based on my behaviors which were pretty clear evidence I didn't really believe either.
Also, to clarify, I do have empathy. I'm heavily invested in the happiness of my kid. I doubt I could shake that if I wanted to. And I don't really want to. I'm not looking to overthrow all my biological and social impulses. I tend to care about most people I am generally fond of in my vicinity. The further from my circle of existence, or the more negative my relationship with them is, the less I care about them.
This is not unusual. Remember, the empathy reward system evolved when our ancestors lived in groups of only about 50-150, where everyone knew each other, and many of them were relatives. So, the fact that you show strong empathy toward those in your vicinity, and less the further from your circle they get, is consistent with evolution.
But it seems, that many of us are able to extend our circle to encompass most of humanity, instead of just those in our circle.
Quote:It is an interesting question of whether my brain works differently or not. I'm not convinced it does. But it's not clear to me yet.
I'm sure your brain is within the normal range concerning this.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.