Musings on Empathy (Arrogance and Humility)
Clay Shirky recently posted a brief message on achieving balance between arrogance and humility as a function of successful design. Arrogance and humility are powerful words. Our definitions of them vary as widely as do our definitions of success. In the commentary, I came across a suggestion to replace the word ‘humility’ with ‘empathy’. My first thought was that perhaps the author was misinterpreting the intended meaning of humility in the post, associating it with humiliation instead of with being humble. How differently we define these things!
To be humble, in my understanding, is to acknowledge ourselves in the context of God (secular or otherwise), of all life, including human life, of our universe, including all that is knowable to us and all that is not. Humility is not a denial or denigration of self, but rather a means of unity with a whole greater than any one of us. Although it is a concept taught as a virtue in many religions, it does not require a theological framework from any one, or any religion, to be understood.
Empathy is a more modern concept. It is the idea that you can do more than observe me and try to deduce something about me. By empathizing you can supposedly feel what I feel. Is this possible? Can you understand me well enough to feel what I feel? If you can, does this mean you can think as I think? That you can understand my motivations, actions, and responses in the same way I do? The answer to all these questions is no. Even a ‘psychic’ does not profess to achieve more than occasional and limited forays into the mind or soul of another.
So is empathy merely a buzzword? A useful term for opportunists? Did you believe Bill Clinton when he looked into the camera and said, “I feel your pain?”. Is it possible that this word is misused and that it can represent a concept of value which is generally not well understood?
In my view, empathy is a form of intimacy, not in the Biblical sense, or in any metaphysical way, but on an emotional level. The empathy may have a basis in familiarity, but it is intimacy which makes it true empathy.
You watch your child, rushing forward with an eager face raised high, stumble on an obstacle, and you experience the fall on a visceral level. I have had a similar experience watching an athlete go down. My imagination expands as far as my experience and knowledge allows. If, for example, I’ve heard the crunch of tearing cartilage in my own joint, my memory can instantly supply the sound. From my knowledge, I can also supply enough personal understanding of the person with whom I am empathizing to contextualize in time. How it feels to fall unexpectedly related to age, previous falls and injuries, how long it will take to heal and forget. Layers of meaning … an entire tapestry of past present and future context.
Empathy for strangers, especially those with whom we do not personally identify, on some level, is really very rare. It is difficult to do unilaterally, because strangers are, more often than not, entirely discomfited by the intense observation required. The projection of intimacy of any sort can be frightening. People who have a talent for it usually learn to keep that talent hidden, and to only reveal it in specific circumstances, usually presented as prescience or acumen.
There’s a less intense, and therefore easier, level of empathy, which is limited to a very specific context based on similar circumstances. We may both be parents of small children and recognize the commonality of what this demands of us each day. We may attend the same school or work for the same employer or be the same age or share the same cultural background, and so on. Empathizing in limited and contained ways with a peer group is natural for most of us. Empathizing with strangers is not.
Empathy, which can give us a valuable understanding of one another, is not a socially passive trait. On the opposite face of empathy is respect. We need respect as an active social trait in order to co-exist peacefully, and we need empathy to co-exist happily.
I believe that we can be highly empathetic without arrogance but not without humility. Arrogance, however, supports not only unshakable belief in knowing what others want, but also claiming the right to decide for them. That is, considered closely, a breathtaking claim to some of us. To decide for others through leadership based solely on arrogance is only possible through the use of force. To decide for others based on the humble understanding that their lives have at least the same value as our own, is to make a contribution of which we can be proud.
