The Empathy Gene ... GOT EMPATHY?
As I have been blogging on Patch for some time now, I have increasingly become aware of what appears to be a simple divide between respondents, particularly with regard to issues that deal with the lives, human rights, health or well being of people they do not know (Others).
Often I have wondered, throughout life, why some people seem passionately driven to help others, to stand for equality, justice, sustainable solutions that take in consequences of personal action, short and long range — while other people ardently hold to the opposite view.
The latter profess beliefs and positions along the lines of bringing oneself up by one's own bootstraps, the notion that any one of us can be self-supportive and that all should be, and a propensity to view people in need as defective, perhaps immoral, lazy and even as being punished by God. The Patch blogger experience, providing me with a cross section of readers ... albeit those with Internet access ... has underscored a developing theory. I have wondered whether the gap in responses could be genetic or strongly effected by genes. I wish I had the exact quote of a respondent who said in effect, replying to some human crisis I was talking about involving people (elsewhere) that he just couldn't work up any concern about the matter. He did not care.
Now many folks don't care in the full sense of the word ... care being an action not a sentiment ... but I got the idea that he was saying that the suffering I was discussing had no emotional register for him at all. The other day, prompted by an unusually caustic remark a blog responder made suggesting that our government should take lessons from Syria and apply them to the Occupy "types," I Googled a question, "is there an empathy gene?"
To my surprise, research is being conducted on this question and preliminary answers are affirmative! Apparently some of us have receptors that take in oxytoxins and some have another set up that makes this reception difficult or impossible. Studies were careful to point out that environmental factors also effected levels of empathetic potential and response (poor connection with a mother during first five years, for instance) but there was a clear connection between this genetic combination and a persons ability to feel and show empathy for other individuals. On a sliding scale we might see psychopath at one end and "empath" near the other.
While it may be possible to be TOO empathetic, that categorization would break down on personal life choices, religious or spiritual beliefs, etc. Not every empath chooses Mother Theresas life. Of course, as well, this is a sliding scale ... most of us are blends ... having varying amounts of compassion. Nonetheless, for the purpose of discussion, consider for a bit that we could assemble two rough camps of people. We do this all the time conceptually ... (right or left wing, liberal, conservative, pro-life, pro-choice, hawk, dove, etc. A dilemma arises in naming my camps. As with the pro-life tag, when the other camp would seem to be pro-death, according to language and logic, those in that group would argue that they are not pro-death, not against life ... but have a different opinion regarding when human life begins and about other related issues ... conception from rape, health of the mother, etc.)
For this thread may I use the terms Empath and SI, for self interest? As with the pro-life term, we can't assume that Empaths have no interest in themselves nor that SI's don't care at all about others. But let's think about two camps. There have been so many arguments during this political season about the importance of social welfare vs. what has come to be called "entitlement." Could it be that the division of views is aligned with genetic differences ... that some people are predisposed to be relatively more concerned with the well-being of others than another group tuned to focus on their own affairs and happiness? Relative to foreign policy ... could it be that those who are not troubled by issues where the well being of people in distant lands are threatened (for instance) are inclined by their coding NOT to care .... The oxytoxins are not getting through ... while those who sincerely are deeply troubled by violence, whoever it touches, are, likewise, set up by circumstance of birth, to feel in this way?
A psychopath, on the extreme, far end, clearly has a void of empathy. People afflicted with this illness can not feel FOR others ... can not put themselves in the place, conceptually, of another human enough to feel for them. They can kill remorselessly. I don't know that they feel for themselves either ... perhaps the readers schooled in psychology can help us here. A lot of the rhetoric and philosophy talked about these days is crossed by the extents to which we care about others, what we consider care to be, if we care at all or if our priorities should remain within smaller perimeters. Do you believe your philosophies might be tied to relative abilities to feel empathy? Think about your ancestors ... where would they fall on the sliding scale mentioned above. In this case example might also have been formative for you of course, but could they have been biologically predisposed to their empathy factor?
There are many articles available throwing light on these questions. I would love to know what you think.
Luke
1:58 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
Brian,
Yes, I do believe that there is plenty of evidence that empathy is strongly affected by genetics. It is also affected by environment, as you indicated.
Of course, it is also a frequent observation that those who are more analytical will get lower scores on overt empathy (i.e. doing something about it instead of merely talking about it). Even so, we need these analytical types to help us make better decisions.
Take, for example, a young teen who comes from a financially disadvantaged family. Would you be blessing him/her more by giving them $10,000, or by giving them the mindset that ambition and hard work with be rewarded? I think the mindset will have many times the rewards than the 10k has to offer.
But let's get a little more practical. Studies repeatedly show that the poor socialize their young to be poor. How will we stop this problem? Why hasn't this problem been solved by our social safety nets?
http://www.concordia.ca/now/what-we-do/research/20101116/vicious-cycle-poverty-breeds-poverty.php
Finally, I differentiate between those who merely advocate for the poor and those who help the poor with their own time and their own after-tax money. The TV cameras gravitate towards the former, and are nowhere to be found near the latter.
Lyle Ruble
6:43 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
@Luke....In my day we had an expression that illustrates your point; "those that talk the talk and those that walk the walk." Like you I have spent a great deal of my life walking the walk. From a psychological perspective, the quality of empathy, leading to action, is something that must be nurtured from birth. I worked for many years with anti-social personality disorders (sociopaths) and found that they had the ability to rationalize their thoughts, feelings and actions to justify their behavior. If empathy did not directly benefit them, then they wouldn't display it or if they did display empathy, more often than not it was simply a manipulation to influence others in regards to the misrepresent the sociopath's true intent.
Exploring the histories of anti-personality disorders, most people suffering from this condition have not adequately bonded and many or most have attachment disorders. There are two antecedent conditions which can cause such; a lack of proper bonding with primary caregivers (nurture) or they are born with the inability to successfully bond (nature).
Opinions and actions concerning social justice must be learned. If you don't grow up in an environment that promotes social justice, then it is very difficult to identify with the conditions of those who find themselves at the lowest levels in our society. (continued)
Lyle Ruble
7:00 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
@Luke....(continued) I happen to agree with you that those born into the culture of poverty are taught how to live in that environment, making it extremely hard to break free of the poverty culture. We, as a society, condemn, scapegoat and educate that those who find themselves in the culture of poverty, are somehow there because of a failing of character.
Brian has focused on an extremely important aspect of society. In my almost 70 years, I have never seen such a time where extreme self interest was so willingly accepted as the norm. In short, the new term is 'self responsibility' to reflect this value. A healthy human being is able to balance self interest against others interests. I think there is a general lack of focus on teaching our children through proper modeling the balance between self and others. It doesn't help when "helicopter" parents educate their children that they are the center of the universe.
I don't think it is an accident of fate that the Gen-Xers are the least empathic of all previous generations. Their birth and lives have occurred during a period of time where self interest and building wealth became the most important value. The attitudes of the Gen-Xers, haunt us now and will only become more severe as they pursue their self interests leading to a less just society.
Luke
5:29 pm on Friday, August 31, 2012
Lyle,
It's hard to interact with the left on these issues, given that all terms are loaded. Unfortunately, terms that you used like "social justice" and "character" are loaded terms. Contrary to what you seem to suggest above, character is also learned. So yes, I do fault the character of a lot of people, and I can say that I also think that what often passes as social justice is anything but that. Therefore, I have offered solutions that are backed by empirical studies, rather than stories that would make good commercials for politicians.
The actions I advocate are not embraced by the left, with the exception of a lot of those who are actually working on the front lines to solve the poverty situation, or academics. Most other people are only trying to treat the symptoms, because that makes them look and/or feel virtuous.
Finally, please note that what I am advocating is not "self interest." Rather, I am advocating that WE help those to need to learn what to do to improve their plight. That involves a new narrative, but there I go again.... about narrative.
Bob McBride
6:58 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
i'd take the degrees to which people present themselves one way or another on the internet with a grain of salt. Chock it up to the level of misinformation this medium affords us.
Speaking of that, here's a test you can use to self-diagnose your psychopathic/sociopathic tendencies: http://kevin-goodman.com/?p=1245 There are others out there if you don't like the results this one gives you (or want a second opinion, so to speak). BTW, if you think Patch's comment section is a mess, take a look at the one attached to the article attached to the test.
Brian Carlson
8:47 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
Well that was fun. Thanks for posting. I wonder if more sociopaths would take this test than empathetic personality types and if psychopaths would take it at all.
Bob McBride
9:04 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
Here's a podcast from "This American Life" on the topic.
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/436/the-psychopath-test
I initially listened to this (actually a rebroadcast at the time, given the date, I think) while, coincidentally, going through some stuff kept by a relative who owned a business back in the 50s, including letters from former employees sent to him after they'd either been fired or decided to quit. None very flattering and I'm not sure why he elected to hold onto those in particular, but each letter's take on him seemed to include references that were similar to those used to describe some of the subjects in this episode. Which probably explains why I remembered it.
Keith Schmitz
7:33 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
Looks like the test brought out the best in some people. Thanks for the insight Bob.
Bob McBride
7:52 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
You're welcome, Keith.
I'd also like to add that some people are exactly as they present themselves and further testing in those cases would be redundant. Thank's offering yourself up as a reminder, Keith.
GearHead
8:19 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
Some on this board have pointed out I'm not very empathetic. Nothing could be further from the truth. Nothing is more frustrating than trying to give someone that is down a hand up, and having them bite the hand trying to feed (teach) them. Is it pride, idiocy or an unwillingness to see things as they truly are that colors perception and prevents personal growth? One thing seems constant, however. The desire to blame others for one's miserable place in life. It's the mark of a loser. It seems as though some are happier being self-destructive rather than taking an obviously clearer path to a better life. I run out of patience, figuring my time better spent with someone more self-reliant and with a better attitude.
Brian Carlson
9:58 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
GH
IMO Assistance to a person in need is not always easy to define. What is help in any given situation? It's likely to be multi-faceted in any serious situation and bay need to come from several sources....I am not qualified to" help"an extremely depressed person with a broad range of problems, economic, relational, emotional, etc. In all of the person's challenges but I can be empathetic and offer what assistance I can...I can show the person I care by as much as inviting him or her to have a cup of coffee. Money isn't always the answer, education is often part of the answer, but compassion is always possible...an act of some sort arising from empathy. Some wisdom may be required in choosing what particular assistance you give but, if you sincerely wants to help.... You will persist until you find an effective way.
Brian Carlson
8:58 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
http://leftbehindagain.com/homealone/?p=692
Some very interest.ing insights in this brief Q&A with the author of The Science of Evil. Here is one quote:
Don’t you think there are people who are actually evil, who know what they’re doing is wrong and harmful but choose to do it anyway?
I argue in the book that I don’t find the term evil very useful. Once you are down at zero degrees of empathy, all kinds of behavior become possible. I don’t find it scientifically useful to use that term. Empathy is a scientific term in a way that evil
isn’t. You can try to localize it in the brain; you can look for which part of brain is activalted. It’s normative behavior. Evil is kind of the opposite of good, I guess, but empathy, as we were talking earlier, is quantifiable and normal. You can measure it and look for it, whereas you don’t see evil in the brain."
Brian Carlson
9:37 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
Lyle, I am not a psychiatrist...sat in the other chair a few times I can say... But I am struck by what appears to be a cultural shift to raise "extreme self interest" to a cultural virtue. Somewhere out in the range between Psychopath and it's opposite...some sort of Extreme Empath (EE), perhaps toward the Psychopath end... falls the land of Sociopath. Apparently, it is not a designation for a specific illness or disorder as a zone into which many disorders and illnesses cross. In this country... Narcissism may be found.
Is the difference between narcissism and self interest a matter of degree? Is narcissim extreme self interest? Look at this info from the DSM and consider the characteristics identified.
Online implementation of the Raskin and Terry (1988) NPI
Narcissism Spiritual Unhealthy Unprincipled
Characteristics
Arrogance Bad boundaries Betrayal Boasting Bravado Conceit Criticism (intolerance of) Egocentrism Egotism Empathy (lack of) Entitlement (exaggerated) Envy Exploitative Fantasy Grandiosity Grandstanding Greed Haughtiness Hidden agenda Hubris Magical thinking Manipulative Narcissistic abuse Narcissistic elation Narcissistic injury Narcissistic mortification Narcissistic rage Narcissistic supply Narcissistic withdrawal Omnipotence Opportunism Perfectionism Self-absorbed Self-esteem Self-righteousness Selfishness Shamelessness Superficial charm Superiority complex Tantrum True self and false self Vanity
I didn't
Brian Carlson
9:38 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
There are many types.... But consider the traits relative to this culture, to groups of people, to political persuasions, to leadership....etc. I will add that, politically, this should obviously have bipartisan applications.
Brian Carlson
9:42 am on Friday, August 31, 2012
It just struck me as interesting seeing the list of characteristics of Narcissism that "empathy(lack of)" is bumping up against "entitlement(exaggerated)." Does this ring any bells?
Brian Carlson
9:19 pm on Friday, August 31, 2012
A list of sociopathic tendencies makes me wonder if I am looking at a job description for candidates to higher office! Do ant of you think this list, or a lot of it, applies to the candidate you DON'T like? I hear a lot of claims either identical to these negative qualities or in so many word the same. Picture the guy you don't like and go down the list. Does he ring most of these bells?
Disregard for rights of others
Considerable superficial charm
Above average intelligence
Incredible glibness
Inflated sense of self that convinces a sociopath that whatever he does is his right.
Conning and manipulative
Lack of empathy. Rather views pain of his victims with contempt and takes advantage of their distress.
Failure to relate emotionally and promiscuous behavior. Even if they do appear committed, it would be superficial. They would use such relation for ulterior motives.
Lack of remorse or shame. They view everyone around them as objects and opportunity to achieve their goals. Hence sociopaths keep violating other's rights without any guilt.
Streak of violence
Pathologically ego centric and self-centered.
Impulsive behavior. Their belief that they are always right and inability to submit to authority makes them impulsive. These people hardly stay on a job for long.
Addiction to drugs and alcohol.
Unreliable and irresponsible.
Luke
9:23 pm on Friday, August 31, 2012
Well, I'm sure you are being a bit cynical, but it's a politician's job to be obsessed with themselves, or they won't survive.
Studies show, however, that politicians have a good measure of contempt for their constituents, and tend to consider them stupid. However, I think they are usually right in their assessment. ;)
Brian Carlson
9:21 pm on Friday, August 31, 2012
Apply this to current political races. Picture the candidate you don't like and run through the sociopathic trait checklist to see how many balloons he gets. Pretty messed up dude right?
Now realize that intelligent people on the other side of the political fence believe exactly the same about your guy! He lit up like stadium lights at a night game when they ran the list on your man.
Consequently, it's either likely that we are electing presidents with many sociopathic qualities or, we are buying into propaganda, the negative attack..ad hominem stuff that demonizes any opponents..... A kind of sociopathic view in itself but consciously applied.
Brian Carlson
9:38 pm on Friday, August 31, 2012
Luke, I was only partially cynical. But are you saying it's due to the nature of the job... that anyone who gets the top job has to be self obsessed? r is it the election process we have in place... requiring a consant show of total self confidence, very manipulative language and speeches, lack of remorse or shame for any past mistakes, a kind of emotional distance with ostentatious displays of passion for one's country and party, an apparent belief that they are always right ( ever see a candidate learn anything in a debate, and alter his views)? In fact is the whole system forcing sociopathology on those who would serve or are true sociopaths gravitating toward this environment? Is it impossible to imagine a system in which leaders were selected according to their marked service to their country, their evident wisdom, their vision?
Luke
9:54 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
@Brian,
"Luke, I was only partially cynical. But are you saying it's due to the nature of the job... that anyone who gets the top job has to be self obsessed? r is it the election process we have in place... requiring a consant show of total self confidence, very manipulative language and speeches, lack of remorse or shame for any past mistakes, a kind of emotional distance with ostentatious displays of passion for one's country and party, an apparent belief that they are always right ( ever see a candidate learn anything in a debate, and alter his views)?"
All of the above.
Edwin Rutsch
12:49 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
May I suggest a further resource to learn more about empathy and compassion.
The Center for Building a Culture of Empathy
The Culture of Empathy website is the largest internet portal for resources and information about the values of empathy and compassion. It contains articles, conferences, definitions, experts, history, interviews, videos, science and much more about empathy and compassion.
http://CultureOfEmpathy.com
Brian Carlson
1:15 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
Thank you sir. Will check out the site.
Lyle Ruble
3:55 pm on Sunday, September 2, 2012
@Brian Carlson...You bring up an issue of what is the difference between narcissism and anti-social personality disorder (sociopath, psychopath). I want to throw another into the mix which is also hard to discern from other maladies; significant immaturity brought on childhood trauma.
Although, many of the personality disorders share characteristics, it takes a trained clinician to differentiate between the pathologies. I have observed many on the patch who display characteristics consistent with certain pathologies, but it is not sufficient to diagnose such. There are just too many variables to consider, in order to say all those lacking empathy suffer from antisocial personality disorder would have to meet the following criteria: consistent display of Conduct Disorder prior to age 15 and characteristics would have to lead to certain behaviors over the age of 18. Therefore, diagnosis is specific, but must be made by the clinician. Narcissism shares many characteristics with anti-social personality but have distinct differences. There is only one personality on the Patch who I would think may suffer from narcissism and he refers to himself in the third person quite often. But, again that isn't sufficient to render such a diagnosis.
I think that the social/psychological evidence would point to a specific cultural value system of discounting others and dehumanizing them into a lower orders. Just like in war, the enemy must be dehumanized first so they can be killed.