Choosing empathy is important for democracy

Choosing empathy is important for democracy

Written by C. Daryl Cameron

In the weeks leading up to and following the U.S. presidential election, many of us are asking about the role of empathy in American politics. Does it matter whether a candidate expresses concern for voters and what that person’s vote says about their ability and willingness to empathize with others?

Empathy is important to democracy, but it’s complicated to understand, as scientists and philosophers have been trying to study it in practice for years. I am one of those scientists. When we use this word in everyday life, we often mean sharing another person’s emotions, such as feeling their sadness or joy, but also expressing sympathy or sympathy for their suffering. Sometimes it means showing interest, understanding and believing in their hurts and joys.

How important was empathy when it came to November’s election? And how can we continue to have empathy in a difficult, exhausting, and polarized political environment? And do we need to? Or? Here I argue that we need to remember our responsibility to choose and control the extent of our empathy. And we can do this by reflecting on why we care and engage, whether it’s to protect our values, feel better, or better understand our values. It will be. world. As research in my lab and my field has shown, insensitivity is a decision. We are the authors of empathy, and numbness is not a foregone conclusion.

About supporting science journalism

If you enjoyed this article, please consider supporting our award-winning journalism. Currently subscribing. By subscribing, you help ensure future generations of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas that shape the world today.

I think showing empathy is a choice. We must be aware of the social pressures that can lead these choices in certain directions if we do not make efforts to control our own empathy. While it is important to extend empathy across the political divide, it is also important to remain motivated to empathize with the most marginalized, especially when they are targeted by other political groups. that’s right. With common ground, such harm may be minimized.

To me, empathy is a strength, not a weakness, and a way to care for those we care about most. When we become insensitive to the needs of others, we risk losing sight of the importance of democracy and treating each other with dignity. Especially in the current situation, redouble your desire to empathize and remember: Willingness Empathy may be just as important as the ability to empathize. Effort is important.

Exit polls suggest that having an empathetic leader may not be that important to many voters. Of the four qualities they look for in a candidate for the 2024 U.S. presidential election, only 18 percent cited empathy (“caring about people like me”) as the most important. Perhaps surprisingly, this is consistent with research showing that people value leaders who are fair-minded, display schadenfreude, and enjoy the pain of their political opponents. Of the 18% who prioritized empathy, only a quarter supported Trump. But the pressing question may not be for whom empathy matters most, as our research shows that voters may overestimate differences in partisan concerns. .

More importantly, how do we maintain the willingness to empathize as a value and social norm? How can I avoid numbness like this? new yorker What about comics about isolation as self-care?

Before politics gets involved, we know that people find empathy exhausting and exhausting. My team has found that people typically find it painful to empathize with strangers and choose to avoid it. If empathy were like complex mathematics, people might take the easy way out and avoid problem sets. However, since people choose empathy and sympathy for those close to them, it is important to whom these feelings are directed. Adding in political dynamics (such as what our political opponents and opponents think about our empathy) can make the calculation of empathy even more difficult.

Harassment of black people, girls, and women has increased since the election. Incidents like this suggest that we need to be careful that we are not normalizing anti-empathy, Especially for marginalized people. Others suggest empathizing with working-class voters and learning more about those who don’t feel heard. Norms can shape how we think about empathy. For example, when parents show who is worth empathizing with, children are more likely to follow suit. Those who wish to empathize with marginalized communities must reflect on and defend their values.

Finally, the election results raise questions about whether people should empathize across party lines. Again, motivation is important. When people believe that cross-party empathy helps political dialogue, hostility decreases and support for democracy increases. But do people think it appropriate to empathize with others who express anti-empathy? In a world where schadenfreude is rampant, such empathy may seem dangerous. Daily Wire’s TikTok’s “Liberal Tears” and unconfirmed but viral Reddit posts about Trump supporters learning about the possible negative consequences of their votes (Reddit forum “My face was eaten by a leopard”) ” with over 48,000 upvotes). People can learn from the consequences of empathizing and may retreat when they are punished rather than rewarded.

So how can we maintain empathy in the face of exhausting headwinds? First, to continue cultivating empathy, we need to recognize the positive benefits that come from sharing adversity, especially for those who are most vulnerable. It can remind you of your social power. You can build common ground by sharing experiences. But remember that finding common ground across partisan divides can mask real differences of opinion about how marginalized groups are considered and treated. That is important. To foster cross-partisan empathy, we should not assume that different political groups all express their values ​​in the same way.

Another point is that empathy and compassion can help us reacquaint ourselves with what we value. Compassion for those in need can lead to and provoke anger and punishment on their behalf. Moral outrage can support collective action to help people in need, and people are more likely to engage in moral outrage when their commitments are clearly defined. Being able to use anger wisely may be the key to political engagement and democratic dialogue. Strategically handling empathy can foster anger and civic engagement (e.g. Roe vs. Wade turned upside down). By remembering why we care in the first place, we can support sustainable choices to engage rather than be insensitive.

This is an opinion and analysis article and the views expressed by the author are not necessarily those of the author. scientific american.