| | | Tenchu's Thoughts: Empathy vs. Sympathy - Why Charlie Kirk had it backwards
Hey Brumar, that op-ed you posted from Steve Wood contained more than just the usual "Orange Man Bad" arguments that are often brought up when people talk about leaving the Republican Party.
Instead, the author gives a very strong defense of empathy, why Charlie Kirk is wrong to reject it, and the fact that Christianity and empathy need to go hand-in-hand. I won't repeat anything that he said. Instead, I recommend reading his entire op-ed in its entirety, because it is a wonderful defense of empathy and how it runs counter to the Republican Party platform these days.
In any case, let me share what I think Kirk meant by his "empathy vs. sympathy" argument, why he said it, and why I think he got things completely backwards.
What did Kirk mean and why did he say it?
I continue to believe that Charlie Kirk lived by the social media algorithms and died by the same algorithms. When put in that context, his words kind of make sense.
He basically believes that "empathy" has been weaponized by the political left. It's basically an appeal to emotion. It gets people to emotionally support some interventionist government policy no matter the cost.
For example, let's take universal health care. Empathy would compel people to support universal health care, because so many people struggle to pay for health insurance. And this empathy takes precedence over concerns on how to pay for it. If you're empathic enough, you will find a way to pay for it.
Let's not forget how the political left will accuse their political opponents of not having empathy. Remember, they "care" more than their opponents do, and they will vote accordingly.
However, that whole "sympathy vs. empathy" thing was likely a brain fart on the part of Charlie Kirk. That's why he said it without elaborating, presumably due to time constraints. Of course, AFAIK he never got around to elaborating on it. Or maybe he did but no one can find any evidence of it.
Basically it was his way to reject politicized empathy without actually rejecting the entire concept thereof. It was his way to disarm the political left without telling his supporters to completely reject empathy, or sympathy, or whatever.
What's the difference?
In general, empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another. This is actually a good thing. It's a human thing. It's a Christian thing. It's what motivates humans to share in the suffering of others so that we can all come out ahead.
Basically empathy is human nature.
Sympathy, on the other hand, is a feeling of pity and sorrow for someone who has suffered bad luck or misfortune. It's very similar to empathy, EXCEPT ...
"Thoughts and prayers"
To me, sympathy is more impersonal. It's basically the equivalent of "thoughts and prayers." It doesn't compel people to take action as much as empathy would.
I've been taught by my church that pity is the feeling that remains when people have lost love. For example, you might pity the homeless man out on the street, but you don't have enough love to do something about his condition.
The Good Samaritan
The New Testament parable about the Good Samaritan is a perfect example of sympathy vs. empathy at work. After the poor victim in the parable was robbed and beaten to an inch of his life, twice he was approached by random strangers. The first one completely ignored him. The second one looked at him, took pity (i.e. sympathy), and continued on his way.
However, the third stranger, a man from Samaria whom the Jews disliked at the time, came and helped the man. He treated his wounds, took him to a nearby inn, and paid for the innkeeper fees as well as any other expenses necessary to help the man recover.
In short, the Good Samaritan had empathy. He demonstrated love in action. And Jesus commanded his followers to go and do likewise.
Conclusion
In short, while I don't think Charlie Kirk really thought out his "empathy vs. sympathy" argument, I think ultimately he argued the complete opposite of what Christians ought to believe.
Christians should strive for empathy, not sympathy.
And although I'm not a big believer in weaponizing empathy for political reasons, I do believe that we are all responsible for our own actions. We will be all judged for what we do in our own lives regardless of The Powers That Be.
And the Lord won't give one hoot about social media algorithms.
Tenchusatsu |
|
