Simon Baron-Cohen wrote a fascinating piece in the Guardian considering the reality of cruelty in human affairs. He proposes the notion that there is a scale of empathy – a scale which reflects the amount of empathy a person feels towards others.
People said to be “evil” or cruel are simply at one extreme of the empathy spectrum. We can all be lined up along this spectrum of individual differences, based on how much empathy we have. At one end of this spectrum we find “zero degrees of empathy”.
Zero degrees of empathy means you have no awareness of how you come across to others, how to interact with others, or how to anticipate their feelings or reactions. It leaves you feeling mystified by why relationships don’t work out, and it creates a deep-seated self-centredness. Other people’s thoughts and feelings are just off your radar. It leaves you doomed to do your own thing, in your own little bubble, not just oblivious of other people’s feelings and thoughts but oblivious to the idea that there might even be other points of view. The consequence is that you believe 100% in the rightness of your own ideas and beliefs, and judge anyone who does not hold your beliefs as wrong, or stupid.
I think this is a useful concept – Ian McEwan, the writer, wrote after 9/11 that the terrorists were guilty of a “failure of imagination”. It’s true that imagination is the faculty we use to put ourselves into the shoes of others. If someone really does get into the mental state of “zero degrees of empathy”, then I can see that it is likely they would be capable of far greater acts of cruelty.
I like how he goes on to consider the value of empathy –
Empathy is like a universal solvent. Any problem immersed in empathy becomes soluble. It is effective as a way of anticipating and resolving interpersonal problems, whether this is a marital conflict, an international conflict, a problem at work, difficulties in a friendship, political deadlocks, a family dispute, or a problem with the neighbour. Unlike the arms industry that costs trillions of dollars to maintain, or the prison service and legal system that cost millions of dollars to keep oiled, empathy is free. And, unlike religion, empathy cannot, by definition, oppress anyone.
Empathy, is, I believe, crucially important in health care. Yes, I need good clinical diagnostic and therapeutic skills and knowledge, but empathy is what drives me to find the best for every patient. It also seems to make a lot of sense to me that empathy, as it involves, active, non-judgemental listening and a desire to understand and know another person, makes it more likely I will actually arrive at a “correct” diagnosis. Aren’t doctors more likely to miss a diagnosis if they have zero degrees of empathy? (By the way, I suspect empathy isn’t a constant. We probably all move up and down along the empathy scale, day by day, week by week. Makes it a good idea to reflect on where you are at the moment though, doesn’t it?)
