News:

Departing the Vacuousness

Main Menu

Empathetic Civilization

Started by Sophus, December 02, 2010, 12:22:48 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Sophus

This is a TED talk that got animated really brilliantly. I think it is spot on.

[youtube:2epmjbg5]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7AWnfFRc7g[/youtube:2epmjbg5]
‎"Christian doesn't necessarily just mean good. It just means better." - John Oliver

McQ

This is absolutely right on the mark. I'm on board with this 100%.
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Jillette

Wilson

That's really well done, and fascinating.  I've been aware of mirror neurons for several years now.  According to Wikipedia, the only mirror neurons confirmed so far are the original type - where a particular neuron lights up whether the subject performs a certain activity or sees someone else perform it.  Emotional mirror neurons - pain, happiness, sadness - haven't been specifically identified by researchers, but certain regions of the brain light up whether the subject experiences one of those emotions or the subject observes someone else experiencing that emotion, so it probably comes down to the same thing, just more complicated than at the single neuron level.

I believe that empathy was an evolutionary development that persisted because it gave us the ability to cooperate with others in our family groups and tribes, making survival of that group more likely.  A less attractive evolutionary characteristic during hunter-gatherer times was that it was of benefit to survival that we not share our food with those outside our group, so that we drew a line between us and them, and saw them as an enemy.  I believe we have been expanding our circle of empathy ever since the hunter-gatherer days, as we cooperate with others outside our group, and find that they are much like us.  At this point most of us do feel that all the people of the world are like us and worthy of our benevolence.  But it's a hit and miss process, and religion and nationalism and racism can get in the way.  Still, the general tendency is in the direction of global empathy, as the video's narrator hopes.

Sophus

Quote from: "Wilson"At this point most of us do feel that all the people of the world are like us and worthy of our benevolence.  But it's a hit and miss process, and religion and nationalism and racism can get in the way.  Still, the general tendency is in the direction of global empathy, as the video's narrator hopes.

Yes, I think it does explain some of the world's most "evil" people. They simply have very narrow concepts of who their brotherhood is and that causes them to see innocents as genuine threats. Religion tends to to build inclusive communities and also goes hand in hand with nationalism.

I've known about mirror neurons for some time too now. What I'd be more interested in learning about are the studies in childhood development he talks about. What makes some grow up to have a broader range of empathy than others?

He notes that our awareness of death and the fragility of life are what drives empathy, but we're also empathetic toward positive things  or otherwise neutral things (like laughter or eating a peanut). So I wonder what the evidence behind that is.

It also seems science and philosophy are beginning to overlap more and more. That's a beautiful mix.
‎"Christian doesn't necessarily just mean good. It just means better." - John Oliver

Wilson

I don't think I agree with his idea that awareness of death is what drives empathy.  I'm with you on evil people having a very small view of who "us" is.

McQ

Quote from: "Wilson"I don't think I agree with his idea that awareness of death is what drives empathy.  I'm with you on evil people having a very small view of who "us" is.

Come to think of it, I want to change my percentage of agreement with Rifkin to 99%, forcthis same reason. I don't think that just the awareness of mortality drives empathy. That rang asca bit simplistic to me too. There's more to it than that.

Also, great call on the notion that "evil" people have a narrower view of who us is.

I shared this video with my wife tonight, who also found it very solid.
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Jillette

Whitney

The video was so short that "mortality" and "death" could have been general ways of referring to the fact that we can feel pain which then results in empathy.  If we couldn't die we wouldn't have had an evolutionary drive to develop pain receptors.

Sophus

Quote from: "Whitney"The video was so short that "mortality" and "death" could have been general ways of referring to the fact that we can feel pain which then results in empathy.  If we couldn't die we wouldn't have had an evolutionary drive to develop pain receptors.
That's true, but he also noted that there would be no empathy in heaven or a utopia, which are ideals for where we're going, not where we've been. It seemed to hint that there's a shift around the age of 8 when we become increasingly aware of our own mortality. The notion that this triggers empathy seems to coincide with other things I've heard, like very young children not yet being able to determine "right from wrong".
‎"Christian doesn't necessarily just mean good. It just means better." - John Oliver

Whitney

Young children who don't yet truly understand mortality are still able to empathizes with others. I think the disconnection comes in where they may not be able to understand that certain actions cause pain till those actions happen to them.  I've seen kids who have biting problems stop biting simply because someone finally bit them back and they realized that action hurt and wasn't fun; these were 2 year olds.  So, they can empathize but they may need to be taught what their actions do since they aren't yet intellectually mature enough to figure out action-result on their own.  If children really didn't develop empathy till they were closer to 8 I don't think we'd have an overpopulation problem because no one would want to raise kids who for half of their childhood were not able to determine right from wrong.

The reason he assumed there could be no empathy in heaven or a utopia because neither situation would involve undesirable things...no death; but also no pain, suffering etc:  the mechanisms through which we directly empathizes with others.

Wilson

I wonder if the creator of the video remembers getting obsessed with death at about that age and generalized it to everybody.  I don't recall anything like that myself.

Sophus

Quote from: "Whitney"Young children who don't yet truly understand mortality are still able to empathizes with others. I think the disconnection comes in where they may not be able to understand that certain actions cause pain till those actions happen to them.  I've seen kids who have biting problems stop biting simply because someone finally bit them back and they realized that action hurt and wasn't fun; these were 2 year olds.  So, they can empathize but they may need to be taught what their actions do since they aren't yet intellectually mature enough to figure out action-result on their own.  If children really didn't develop empathy till they were closer to 8 I don't think we'd have an overpopulation problem because no one would want to raise kids who for half of their childhood were not able to determine right from wrong.

The reason he assumed there could be no empathy in heaven or a utopia because neither situation would involve undesirable things...no death; but also no pain, suffering etc:  the mechanisms through which we directly empathizes with others.

Empathy can apply to the sharing of positive feelings too. I don't know, you could very well be right. I'm simply suspecting that there is more research regarding this he's drawing from that he didn't have time to reference to or elaborate about.
‎"Christian doesn't necessarily just mean good. It just means better." - John Oliver

Whitney

Quote from: "Wilson"I wonder if the creator of the video remembers getting obsessed with death at about that age and generalized it to everybody.  I don't recall anything like that myself.

I'm guessing it might be based on some sort of study of when kids tend to understand death as something permanent; I have read elsewhere that the age was around 6 but that isn't really far from 8 either.  I know that I understood death as something final when I was between two and three because I asked my dad if I could come back to ride the ponies (at some petting zoo we were visiting) if I was still around the next year; I was about to go into heart surgery.  Of course my circumstances were not what normal 2 1/2 year olds go through.

Inevitable Droid

Good art work.  Good intentions.  Bad arguments.

1. On what does he base his assertion that empathy is tied to our awareness of inevitable death?  I certainly don't find myself thinking about death when I find myself empathizing.

2. On what does he base his assertion that our brains aren't wired for aggression?  Being wired for empathy doesn't preclude being wired for aggression also.

3. On what does he base his assertion that medieval brains were wired differently than ours today?  All those old brains are gone.  They decomposed.  We can't investigate them.  Is he extrapolating from skull shape or size, perhaps?  He doesn't say.

4. On what does he base his assertion that we only empathize with people we identify with?  In my case the reverse causality is frequent.  First I empathize, then I identify.

Too many holes in his logic.  Pretty pictures, though.
Oppose Abraham.

[Missing image]

In the face of mystery, do science, not theology.

Davin

Quote from: "Inevitable Droid"Good art work.  Good intentions.  Bad arguments.

1. On what does he base his assertion that empathy is tied to our awareness of inevitable death?  I certainly don't find myself thinking about death when I find myself empathizing.

2. On what does he base his assertion that our brains aren't wired for aggression?  Being wired for empathy doesn't preclude being wired for aggression also.

3. On what does he base his assertion that medieval brains were wired differently than ours today?  All those old brains are gone.  They decomposed.  We can't investigate them.  Is he extrapolating from skull shape or size, perhaps?  He doesn't say.

4. On what does he base his assertion that we only empathize with people we identify with?  In my case the reverse causality is frequent.  First I empathize, then I identify.

Too many holes in his logic.  Pretty pictures, though.
From what I can tell from the video, it's not an argument, but an expression of the conclusions gathered from research. If you want to know the basis, then you're probably going to have to ask the guy speaking in the video the questions, in the absence of that avenue then you're going to have research it on your own or find someone that already has.

1) I believe the basis comes from research done over the last ten years as stated in the video.
2) Same as 1).
3) One can gain some insight into the psychological state of dead people in various ways, I'm sure there has been research done in many various ways to get a decent picture of the psychological state of those who lived long ago.
4) Same as 1).
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Wilson

Quote from: "Inevitable Droid"Good art work.  Good intentions.  Bad arguments.

1. On what does he base his assertion that empathy is tied to our awareness of inevitable death?  I certainly don't find myself thinking about death when I find myself empathizing.

2. On what does he base his assertion that our brains aren't wired for aggression?  Being wired for empathy doesn't preclude being wired for aggression also.

3. On what does he base his assertion that medieval brains were wired differently than ours today?  All those old brains are gone.  They decomposed.  We can't investigate them.  Is he extrapolating from skull shape or size, perhaps?  He doesn't say.

4. On what does he base his assertion that we only empathize with people we identify with?  In my case the reverse causality is frequent.  First I empathize, then I identify.

Too many holes in his logic.  Pretty pictures, though.

Agree with you for the most part.

On 3, our brains ARE presumably wired differently, because our brains have evolved to some extent, just as all our other body parts have.  Probably not enough to make that one a significant point, however.  

On 4, empathizing is essentially the same as identifying with someone - feeling his pain, mostly - so he's just stating the obvious.