Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4/2016

29.02.2016 | Scientific Contribution

From empathic mind to moral behaviour: the “who”, “why” and “how”

verfasst von: Marie Challita

Erschienen in: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy | Ausgabe 4/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

In this paper, I start by suggesting a new definition of empathy. I go on by answering the question of “Who feels empathy?”. I list some examples of people, illustrating how the level of feeling empathy differs from one category of people to another. It’s actually almost everybody who feels empathy: the baby, the good Samaritan and the other two priests, the tax evader, the psychopath, the judges, juries, lawyers, the politician, the bully adolescent, the therapist, etc.… Then I explain, “Why empathy is experienced/felt differently?”, by drawing on some neuroscience data, and some literature in psychology or philosophy along with some personal suggestions or assumptions. Just to mention one plausible data: we know that the human brain is half developed at birth. It takes twelve to fourteen years for the brain to fully develop. And the frontal lobe continues to develop until the third decade of life! I suggest we must attend to these phases of brain development to learn empathy since that is when the plasticity of the brain and the learning kick-in. Hence, the third section of the paper demonstrates “How can we develop an empathic mind/behaviour given the nature of our empathic brain?”: with some supportive research and studies, I justify the statement that “ideally from early age, and all the way up to adulthood, empathy can be learned through nurturing, education, imitation…, through alternative realities such as mindfulness and awareness, and through therapy, memory improvement, training programs, etc.…” In the conclusion, I assert, using some philosophical thoughts and analogies, that a fully developed empathic behaviour, that embraces all three aspects cognitive, affective and compassionate empathy, being the opposite of indifference, is the vehicle to a peaceful, harmonious and just society.
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Baron-Cohen, Simon, O. Golan, E. Chapman, and Y. Granader. 2007. Transported to a world of emotions. The Psychologist 20: 76–77. Baron-Cohen, Simon, O. Golan, E. Chapman, and Y. Granader. 2007. Transported to a world of emotions. The Psychologist 20: 76–77.
Zurück zum Zitat Blair, R.J.R. 1995. A cognitive developmental approach to morality: Investigating the psychopath. Cognition 57: 1–29.CrossRef Blair, R.J.R. 1995. A cognitive developmental approach to morality: Investigating the psychopath. Cognition 57: 1–29.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Blair, R.J.R., and Karina S. Blair. 2009. Empathy, morality and social convention: Evidence from the study of psychopath and other psychiatric disorders. In The social neuroscience of empathy, ed. J. Decety, and W. Ickes, 139–152. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRef Blair, R.J.R., and Karina S. Blair. 2009. Empathy, morality and social convention: Evidence from the study of psychopath and other psychiatric disorders. In The social neuroscience of empathy, ed. J. Decety, and W. Ickes, 139–152. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Challita, Marie. 2014. The empathic brain as the neural basis of moral behaviour—Presented from interdisciplinary perspectives. Roma: Regina Apostolorum. Challita, Marie. 2014. The empathic brain as the neural basis of moral behaviour—Presented from interdisciplinary perspectives. Roma: Regina Apostolorum.
Zurück zum Zitat Feshbach, Norma D., and Seymour Feshbach. 2009. Empathy and education. In The social neuroscience of empathy, ed. J. Decety, and W. Ickes, 85–98. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRef Feshbach, Norma D., and Seymour Feshbach. 2009. Empathy and education. In The social neuroscience of empathy, ed. J. Decety, and W. Ickes, 85–98. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Goleman, Daniel. 2007. Social intelligence: The new science of human relationships. London: Arrow Books. Goleman, Daniel. 2007. Social intelligence: The new science of human relationships. London: Arrow Books.
Zurück zum Zitat Kohut, Heinz. 1977. The restoration of the self. New York: International University Press. Kohut, Heinz. 1977. The restoration of the self. New York: International University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Polansky, Ronald. 2007. Aristotle’s de anima. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Polansky, Ronald. 2007. Aristotle’s de anima. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Prinz, Jessy J. 2011. Is empathy necessary for morality? In Empathy: Philosophical and psychological perspectives, ed. A. Coplan, and P. Goldie, 211–229. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Prinz, Jessy J. 2011. Is empathy necessary for morality? In Empathy: Philosophical and psychological perspectives, ed. A. Coplan, and P. Goldie, 211–229. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat van Baaren, Rick B., et al. 2009. Being imitated: Consequences of nonconsciously showing empathy. In The social neuroscience of empathy, ed. J. Decety, and W. Ickes, 31–42. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRef van Baaren, Rick B., et al. 2009. Being imitated: Consequences of nonconsciously showing empathy. In The social neuroscience of empathy, ed. J. Decety, and W. Ickes, 31–42. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
From empathic mind to moral behaviour: the “who”, “why” and “how”
verfasst von
Marie Challita
Publikationsdatum
29.02.2016
Verlag
Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy / Ausgabe 4/2016
Print ISSN: 1386-7423
Elektronische ISSN: 1572-8633
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-016-9694-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2016

Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 4/2016 Zur Ausgabe