Let’s talk about empathy
If I asked you what empathy was, I could almost guarantee your first response: To walk in someone else’s shoes, right? Exactly.
Cambridge Dictionary is the ability to share someone else’s feelings or experiences by imagining what it would be like to be in that person’s situation.
Most of us experience empathy often. When another person experiences the loss of a loved one, for example, a natural response is to wonder how they are getting on. “They must be really finding it hard.”
Empathy can be the place where compassion begins. Our empathetic engagement prompts a sense of the need to do something. That’s not always possible, but it is a natural part of the human condition.
I said that most people experience empathy – but not all. That’s why I found what Elon Musk had to say recently on the subject, most interesting.
Quote from the Joe Rogan show interview:
“We’ve got civilizational, suicidal empathy going on. I believe in empathy, I think you should care about other people but you need to have empathy for the civilization as a whole and not commit to a civilizational suicide.”
“The fundamental weakness of Western Civilization is empathy. The empathy exploit is there exploiting a bug in Western Civilization which is the empathy response. So, and I think empathy is good, but you need to think it through and not just be programmed like a robot…It’s weaponized empathy that is the issue.”
Weaponized empathy? Civilizational Suicide? Empathy exploit? These are strange phrases indeed.
As perhaps evidence of my own empathetic nature, I spent a little time trying to find the background to these strange phrases.
There exists a curious line of thinking that is hardly visible in the secular press but is evident in a few probably obscure Christian writings. A book title by Allie Beth Stuckey stood out. From the description:
In Toxic Empathy (how the progressives exploit Christian compassion), Allie Beth Stuckey argues that empathy has become a tool of manipulation by left-wing activists who bully people into believing that they must adopt progressive positions to be loving.
Clearly, the book is styled as part of the ‘culture wars’ between progressives and conservatives and seems to be an attempt at a push-back against such things as Woke, Cancel Culture, Me Too, Black Lives Matter, etc.
Controversial US Theology Professor, Joe Rigney penned an online article entitled: The Enticing Sin of Empathy. How Satan Corrupts Through Compassion. Part of a two-part letter from a senior demon to a junior demon (styled upon CS Lewis’ book The Screwtape Letters) wherein he attempts to describe how a demon can undermine empathy and turn the empath away from God.
Compassion only suffers with another person; empathy suffers in them. It’s a total immersion into the pain, sorrow, and suffering of the afflicted. Under our influence, we’ve taught the humans to think, “Only a heartless and unfeeling beast could oppose such a total immersion, such a generous act of ‘love.’” Our recent success in this conceptual migration has given us ample opportunity for mayhem.
Rigney has connections to the right-wing Christian Nationalist movement who, perhaps only incidentally, have aligned themselves enthusiastically with President Trump.
I have no idea if Musk has any direct connection with these people or their cohort. I use their commentary simply to try to understand Musk’s almost cryptic comments.
To summarize, it seems that they identify empathy with tolerance of some of the extreme and sometimes violent behaviour that arose out of, for example, Black Lives Matter, or the Cancelling of persons whose words and opinions were at variance to the thinking arising out of the Woke movement, for example. It also suggests that empathy equates to (or may include) a form of manipulation that conservatives must avoid (for reasons that are not clear at all).
Is it possible that some incidents could be considered to be a weaponizing of empathy? Perhaps, were they to become universal modes of behaviour, the damage to society might be considered a form of cultural suicide. But they’re not. Regrettable, unlawful, reckless, or damaging as these behaviours were/are, they are not a problem of empathy.
If there is a problem of empathy here it may be that the images of destruction (after BLM for example) displayed on our screens don’t create an opportunity for empathy to enter in. We are rightly aghast at the behaviour, at the damage and lawlessness but we are never encouraged to think about the ‘why’ behind it all. The rhetoric takes the form of a pile-on.
I began to think of the ‘why’ in all of this after the death of George Floyd when I saw the many millions of people protesting – mostly peacefully – across the globe and including in my home country of Australia. Some of that will have been about solidarity; but mostly what I saw was a visceral response from people who had similar experiences – a trigger response that declares: Enough, is enough! Racism happens and is not contained by borders.
The ’why’ is where empathy comes into play. The ‘why’ is where solutions might be found. Without the ‘why’ these kinds of things may happen again. Without the ‘why’ it is all too easy to demonize.
Musk is not only not asking ‘why’, he is making the mistake of identifying empathy as the problem when, in reality, it is the solution.
In a 2023 article covering the resignation of Joe Rigney from his professorial position at Bethlehem College and Seminary, Minnesota, Warren Throckmorton offered the following:
Empathy is Not Sin
Empathy isn’t acceptance of things you don’t agree with. Empathy doesn’t require you to give up any position you might otherwise have. For instance, parents can empathize with their wayward children (“when I was your age…”) and still administer correction and direction. When parents communicate their understanding with care, it helps build relationship(sic) even when restrictions need to be imposed.
Empathy is simply understanding the inner world of other people. It is all about being able to relate to them and understand what they are going through. It is quite important in human functioning and when absent is associated with cruelty and antisocial behavior.
MSN writer, Emily Standley Allard, was scathing about Musk’s comments:
While Musk said he believes in empathy and that “you should care about other people,” he also thinks it’s destroying society.
This statement is not just revealing about his persona—it’s totally false and very alarming.
Musk’s belief that empathy is a weakness rather than a strength reflects a worldview where only the strongest survive, where success is measured in wealth and technological dominance rather than collective well-being.
It also speaks volumes about his own personal trauma, narcissism and detachment from the struggles of everyday people.
I have seen a great deal of commentary in response to the empathy question and generally concerning the personality types and even mental health of both Elon Musk and President Trump. I am not qualified to comment further and, to be fair, even those who made videos on the subject who hold relevant degrees cannot form any hard and fast diagnosis without examination. I doubt whether any such ‘diagnoses’ would change anyones mind as to the duos fitness to serve. We should judge by their actions. The ‘why’ of those actions should follow.
Regarding Elon Musk, I think there are ‘why’ questions. The sackings of many thousands of federal government workers without due process; the cutting of life-saving programs in USAID, Medicare, and Medicaid; the planned gutting of Social Security, which Musk referred to as ‘the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time’; and all of this without so much as a comment concerning the welfare of these people and their families. They seem to simply be numbers – the higher the number the better.
As I say: correlation is not causation. I simply ask you to consider the following:
At zero degrees of empathy are two distinct groups. Baron-Cohen calls them zero-negative and zero-positive. Zero-positives include people with autism or Asperger’s syndrome. They have zero empathy but their “systemising” nature means they are drawn to patterns, regularity and consistency. As a result, they are likely to follow rules and regulations – the patterns of civic life.
Zero-negatives are the pathological group. These are people with borderline personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder and narcissistic personality disorder. They are capable of inflicting physical and psychological harm on others and are unmoved by the plight of those they hurt. Baron-Cohen says people with these conditions all have one thing in common: zero empathy.
(psychologist Simon Baron-Cohen commenting on his book on the subject Zero Degrees of Empathy: A new theory of human cruelty)
To be clear on my own position: What I see happening to America, and to the rest of the world as a consequence, is engendering chaos and disruption. What Trump and Musk are doing is without precedent and without a coherent narrative.
Being true to myself, I don’t wish either of them any harm, and, from day one, I have tried to understand what’s going on – the ‘why’. As time passes, perhaps the answers will become more evident. Perhaps I’m wrong, but I don’t think so.
Paul Russell: Musings 