Recently, a member of Wildmind’s community reminded me of an article titled “The Surprising Downsides of Empathy” from the BBC website, which was published about two and a half years ago.
The article discusses how misplaced empathy can have negative effects, such as causing exhaustion and apathy, and even preventing us from effectively helping those in need. Worse, our empathetic tendencies can sometimes be exploited to manipulate us into harmful behaviors.
While many people believe that more empathy is needed in the world, there are those who argue for a “tough love” approach, claiming that we are overly coddling, especially with the younger generation. However, I think these individuals often misunderstand what empathy truly is, and I want to explore these misconceptions today.
The BBC article cites researcher Paul Bloom, who wrote a book called “Against Empathy.” I have previously commented on an article based on that book. Bloom makes a distinction between empathy and compassion, explaining that empathy is about feeling what another person feels, while compassion involves concern and a desire to help without necessarily sharing the same emotional pain.
Bloom correctly identifies the difference between empathy and compassion. Empathy involves recognizing and feeling another person’s emotions. For instance, hearing about someone’s tragic loss doesn’t need an act of imagination to feel empathy; the news itself can evoke an empathetic response. Compassion goes a step further by propelling us to alleviate that suffering, stemming from the Sanskrit word “karuna,” which means “to do.”
While the BBC article questions the value of empathy, Bloom illustrates a scenario where an adult comforts a frightened child. He argues that the adult does not need to share the child’s fear to be compassionate; it’s enough to want to relieve the child’s distress.
However, it’s not that simple. Imagine an adult who lacks empathy entirely—they might find the crying child annoying and react by shouting, only to make the situation worse. This adult doesn’t understand the child’s fear or the need for reassurance, which requires empathy.
This illustrates that empathy is essential even in Bloom’s scenario. An empathetic adult is aware of the child’s feelings and needs, driving their compassionate response. The notion that empathy requires us to re-experience another’s fear is misleading.
People often say someone is “too empathetic” when empathy leads to negative outcomes like emotional paralysis. However, I think this is a misdiagnosis. No virtue is complete on its own. For example, generosity is usually good, but giving away essential resources can harm those you intend to help. Prudence and wisdom balance generosity by considering the consequences of giving.
Similarly, “empathic distress” occurs when empathy becomes overwhelming, rendering us ineffective in helping others. This isn’t true empathy at work; it’s indulging in excessive grief, which Buddhism views as failed compassion.
Skills like wisdom, ethical awareness, and self-compassion balance empathy. Bloom notes that people might empathize with one person and ignore others who may need more urgent help, emphasizing the need for a broader perspective. Ethical awareness prevents us from harming others even if we feel compelled to act out of empathy.
Self-compassion is crucial, teaching us to manage our own emotions and recognize when we’re overburdening ourselves with others’ suffering. This balance prevents empathy from becoming toxic.
The “downsides” of empathy described in the article result from a lack of these balancing virtues, not from empathy itself. Empathic distress is harmful, but it doesn’t define empathy. Caring about and helping others doesn’t require imagining their exact suffering, but it does require genuine empathy.
It’s great that Bloom and others highlight the issues of unbalanced empathy. However, the real problem lies in the underdevelopment of complementary virtues like wisdom, ethics, and self-care.