230
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2024
230 points (90.8% liked)
science
14595 readers
513 users here now
just science related topics. please contribute
note: clickbait sources/headlines aren't liked generally. I've posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry
Rule 1) Be kind.
lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about
I don't screen everything, lrn2scroll
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Conservatives are happier? Since when?
Like, I can disprove that by turning on Fox News for two minutes. It's nothing but 24/7 anger porn and rage bait.
You know how people in groups tend to do pretty bad stuff without reflection and proper teaching, like bullying and excluding others?
That's because it feels good to do these things, as long as you shield yourself from the negative consequences. It doesn't feel good once you develop real empathy, but until that point doing these things will make you happy.
You can’t develop empathy until you break out of the filter bubble. To understand a person you first need to know what their life is like, what motivates them, what values they hold.
Everything I’ve seen tells me that the opacity runs in both directions. Empathizing with someone who holds radically different, diametrically opposed values to your own is very difficult.
No, I disagree. I have empathy for all humans, no matter who. When I hear that some natural catastrophe occurs, I don't need to know details about those affected to feel for them. There was a time when I was a child when that wasn't true, but since some point in my childhood it is.
That coincided with the point in time when I started leaning very left.
That’s not what empathy means. Empathy is the capacity to put yourself in someone else’s shoes and understand how they are feeling, not to feel bad for them when they’re not doing well.
What you’re describing is more like sympathy.
Yes, and I don't need to know the details of someone's life to do so. Do you? You can't feel empathy for e.g. Floridians who recently went through that hurricane?
That's also a form of empathy. You get that, right?
No, because doing badly doesn’t imply feeling badly. People going through bad times respond in a variety of ways. They don’t all respond exactly the same way.
Of course you can respond by donating to help people who have been affected by a disaster. Everyone does that. That’s what sympathy does for us.
Empathy is different! To truly have empathy for someone means to understand them well enough to know how they’re going to respond to something even before they do. It’s very difficult to achieve. Many married couples never reach it.
So you're claiming that most people never have empathy for other people... Sure, that sounds very realistic and not-at-all "holier than thou".
I mean, I've seen plenty of examples where other people have empathized with me, but I guess I just happen to be surrounded by living incarnations of Buddha himself.
Most people have some degree of empathy: for their friends, family, and their in-group. There are plenty of people who don’t, though.
Empathy is the skill of the therapist, the con artist, the salesperson, the poker player. Not everyone is good at understanding other people’s emotions and motivations.
Oh, so now people can have empathy for others without having to understand them well enough to know how they’re going to respond to something even before they do? Just a bit ago you declared that to be an absolute requirement for "true" empathy. Or is it fake empathy they are feeling?
There are degrees of empathy! It’s a skill! A poker player may have enough empathy with you to be able to predict what you’re going to do based on the cards and the stakes. But they don’t know how you’ll react to a new pair of wool socks for Christmas from your aunt, the way your mom might.
To know how a person will respond to a situation is to know something about that person. That is empathy. But many people can be in a marriage for decades without ever learning how their partner responds to every situation. In many cases this leads to divorce.
Now, in that light you should see why I find it absurd when people claim to have empathy for everyone in the world. That’s like claiming to have Counselor Troi’s Betazoid powers. No one knows every person on earth, never mind knowing them as well as their own sister.
To take one person as an example: Vladimir Putin. Intelligence agencies, military commanders, world leaders, analysts, and journalists everywhere spend enormous amounts of effort trying to understand how Putin thinks because human lives are on the line. Yet many of these people failed to predict some of the major actions he has undertaken because they don’t really understand how he feels, nor how many Russians feel. That is a huge failure of empathy brought about by a lack of experience and cultural understanding.
Okay, so we at least agree that you can feel empathy towards someone without having to understand them well enough to know how they’re going to respond to something even before they do. I'm still confused why you brought that up, since I never claimed to have 100% true™ full chonglibloodsport-certified empathy for every person on the planet.
And I'm pretty sure only a psychopath would feel absolutely no empathy towards someone they don't know - you will at least empathize regarding common human emotions, e.g. I don't need to know some random chinese couple to feel happy if I see a husband running to hug his wife in an airport.
So what's your point? You've already walked back that you need to understand them well enough to know how they’re going to respond to something even before they do.
Empathy isn’t a feeling that happens to you, it’s a skill you practice.
Everyone knows about common human emotions. What you don’t know about a stranger is when they have those emotions and when they don’t. What most people think they’re doing when they say they’re being empathetic is engaging in projection. They’re imagining themselves in that situation and assuming the other person is feeling the same way they are.
Do I even have to tell you how often that’s wrong? Many, many people think another person is angry when they are angry and they project their anger onto the other person. It totally baffles them!
Did I ever claim something different?
I wonder how it feels to be talked to like this.
How should I know? I don't know chonglibloodsport enough to know how they’re going to respond to something even before they do.
Maybe it's got the effect to externalise any of the sources of whatever is wrong in your life. Fox gives you easy answers for all your problems, and it's always some 'other'. You don't have to change or work on yourself to improve things, you just have to vote for the guys that will deport/jail the ones holding you back.
Id pay special attention to Study 4 which seems to really hit my key points of criticism as a layman. Study 4 controlled for census region but I’d really like to see this controlled for rural vs urban populations at a finer scale. Without that adjustment I question the validity of other studies included.
That said study 4, if I’m reading it right, still found a correlation with happiness in conservatives but that correlation did not survive when religion was accounted for. Which tells you everything you need to know.
The conservatism isn’t the primary ideology, this is just a roundabout way of asking if religious people report being happier and having more meaning and of course they do. The religious aspect almost overrules the political angle entirely.
But making other people miserable is one of their favorite ways of making themselves happy
That's also the behavior of profoundly unhappy people. I think the real issue is that these are the Republicans answering 10/10 on happiness in the polls:
Maybe that's what makes them happy?
Have you seen a Lemmy feed recently? Pot meet kettle stuff.