Why isn't it said that neurotypicals lack empathy?

Post Reply New Topic

The behavior examples I listed in the original post can indicate a lack of empathy.

I do see a difference though. I explained the differences I see in the sentences below. What part do you disagree with?

Ok,ok... now I see what you are saying. You are trying to prove that NTs lack empathy because they can be very cruel. Thus, you show examples of NT's cruelty to support this argument.
Again, your argument is based on the assumption that cruel behaviour indicates lack of empathy. This is not a valid assumption. Cruel people do not necessarily lack empathy. They may very well understand the suffering of the victim.

ok, I give up on that too

Last edited by Naturella on 17 Dec 2008, 1:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Maybe because some do have empathy. I've met some very nice so called "NT" females who were very empathetic with everyone.

They always tried to be cheerful, even if things weren't going too well. They were the archetypal "agony aunts" and "shoulder to cry on". They were protective of those in need.

They really did try to understand people to their best of their abilities. In fact they seemed focus their entire lives on making others happy. They are a rare breed though.

These are, perhaps, 2 forms of empathy. One is more low-level, where implicit meaning is extracted from your observations of someone's behavior and the other is more affective meaning... Oh hell, I don't know. I give up on this

Again, this means "compassionate".

There is no such thing as "affective meaning". Or do you mean "emotional implication" of the word "empathy" ?? I can hardly think of any... there can be emotional implication to a word "ret*d" (just for example), which is negative sometimes.
But an emotinal implication of the word "empathy".. hmmm.. I can't really think of any.
Ok, I guess, you were talking about the actual ways for people to understand others. And you distinguish two ways: one through reason and another - intuitive....
Well, suppose there actually are different ways to do that... So what? In what way does it support or belies the argument of this thread that "NTs lack empathy"?

I came up with those ideas based on my own experience and based on situations where I’ve heard other people use the word empathy. There’s more meaning to certain things than what is written in a dictionary definition. The dictionary definition of a telescope doesn’t tell you entirely what a telescope consists of, how one works, or that there are different kinds of telescopes that function in different ways. Also, I prefer to use my own experience and reasoning capabilities rather than just accept something I read as the end all and be all of a topic.

[edit]

Last edited by marshall on 17 Dec 2008, 3:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Questioning the validity of someone's logic ? That's fair enough.

Contriving to insert a thinly-veiled remark that questions the validity of someone's personal diagnosis ?
I'm not sure about your motives for that,it doesn't seem a logical observation to make.

I never actually said that a lack of sympathy implies a lack of empathy.When people have empathy they can choose
to either act in sympathy with the feelings they perceive in others or they can choose not to act in sympathy and instead
manipulate situations and other people for their own agendas. So called NTs have more capacity for empathy due to
their heightened awareness of eye contact,body language and willingness to discuss things more openly on a one-to-one basis. Thankfully,my experience is that most of them try to use their empathy to act in sympathy with others in general.
It's usually only when 'herd' mentality takes over that abilities to empathise are abused.

p.s. when I mentioned bullies I never equated it specifically with children or youths.There are
just as many adults who are bullies but they do it in covert ways,such as sly attempts
to put people down in front of others.

Ok, I regret wtiting that one. Sorry you have read it, cause I deleted this. I see your point. The word "form" do has some active component about it, where is the word "experience" does not necessairily means a voluntary act. Peace?

Last edited by Naturella on 17 Dec 2008, 3:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

OK. Thanks. I'll delete my part where I got upset then too.

Now I ll try to explain my irritation with the whole thing. Hope you will understand me.
The author of this thread had obviously read some stuff about the Asperger's. One of the things that he read was that Aspies lack empathy (actually there should be something like "The lack of demonstrated empathy".) While confusing the word empathy with sympathy or compassion he initiated the whole discussion about the empathy of NTs, in particular, that there are also a lot of NTs who lack empathy. So, his point is , obviously, that the lack of empathy is not a characteristic feature of Aspies , but rather evenly spread feature among all the individuals in general.
So my point is that the whole disscussion is not worth a penny because it was prompted by someone's misunderstanding of a word or a concept that he read.
Also, in case his point was that there is a lot of cruely in this world, then I also do not see any sense in arguing about that. This is true: yes, there are a lot of cruel people.
Ok, I guess, may be??? He wants to complain and needs compassion because someone in particular was nasty to him.. May be the author needs sympathy... In this case he picked the wrong place for expressing it so indirectly. Because one of the most common characteristics of Aspies - they do not read btwn the lines. If you need sympathy and support - so state it.. )))

Uppss, I never got to the actual point. Far be it from me to educate you on words and trying to show my superiority. But if the whole discussion is about one single word, then we do have to clarify its meaning, don't we?
So, you say.. you form your understanding of a word based on how other people use it (or sort of). But the problem is - this is one of those words that a lot of people do not use correctly.
Telescope is an object, a device.. In order to describe a device it is enough to depict its function and the way it works to have some idea.. Empathy is an abstract word. If you use it in your speach, you should have a universarly accepted definition of this word in mind. BECAUSE when you bring example of some scientific article mentioning that word - this is what THEY had in mind. They did not have in mind some popular and often misleading understanding of the word.
Ok, hope I did not bore people to death here)))

Ok, this is my closing statement here.

Ther question:
Why isn't it said that neurotypicals lack empathy?
was followed by a lot of examples of cruelty.

Ok. My answer:
who exactly and when should have said that neurotypicals lack empathy(which means compassion in your language)?

Don't you read books, newspapers, TV where there is a lot of complaints, cries etc.. against cruelty of the world in which at least 90 percent of people are NT?

Furthermore.. "Why isn't it said that neurotypicals lack empathy?"
lack empathy relative to who?
Aspies? Who should have said that? Most people I know even have not idea what Asperger's syndrom means. So, who should have said that and in what regard?
Ok, I am done with this now.

Not understanding empathy is a marker for abnormal psychology. So, a neurotypical that lacks empathy is not "typical". I've had this same problem, I think it's because if you logically approximate empathy in general situations you use the same process in person that you would over a thousand miles. If I see someone who has lost their house and is not crying I know what they are feeling, not because their face gives an indication, but because it is easy to figure out. Now if they were crying I might actually empathize with them, however the more subtle displays of emotion I don't see. I feel like NTs do not empathize with me, when I want to be left alone. And it's absolutely true, they don't, they don't even get it, to them being alone is like losing your house on a much smaller scale whereas for me, it is like finding a home in the first place. Thus the inability to empathize is two sided and I think a neurotypical and an autie can both read the same dictionary definition and walk away with different meanings, which is really a sort of foundational piece of evidence that the function is impaired. We can empathize amongst each other fine, we can empathize with typical pets as well like cats, dogs, birds, even fish, reptiles, and insects display what I think is a remarkable ability to communicate emotional state through action. In fact, you might say empathy with animals is almost pure, it is how animals seem to communicate after all. That isn't to say empathy with animals is perfect, smiling at a gorilla for example is a sign of aggression amongst that species and a sign of joy within our own, but I say the empathy is pure because if a human and gorilla are to communicate it will be direct communication via empathetic means. I once engaged in awkward eye contact with a circus lion for instance it was unnerving to notice that he was staring at me, once again with a bull at a rodeo who charged and stopped just short of the gate, dogs are different though and generally submit if you maintain eye contact. In every one of these three situations the proper meaning of eye contact was empathized, which is not the same as reading this description. Being happy, playing fetch with a dog is empathy, knowing that fetch makes dogs happy is just knowing a fact, believing that people should play fetch with their dogs so the dogs don't get depressed is a general application of abstract morality. It's weird to say Auties lack empathy as if it is not there, I think that's pretty rare I think the proper phrasing might be that empathetic ability is generally impaired amongst auties.