parker pyne;75014 wrote:
I said you can teach one to understand it, not feel it.
Really? Can you teach someone to understand an orgasm without their ever experiencing (feeling) it?
So yes, the notion of empathy is teachable.
'Notion' relates to understanding
like the rote knowing of a dictionary definition of orgasm relates to the 'understanding' of direct experience?
In that context, yes, one can certainly teach the dictionary definition of 'empathy' (or orgasm).
Yes, I cosider it to be an emotion, since we can feel it.
I feel hot, I feel thirsty, I feel comfortable, I feel like a sandwich, I feel tired, I feel like going to the park, for a swim, I feel angry, I feel itchy, I feel like working today, I feel like starting right now, etc...
Are all of these things mentioned 'emotions'?
To 'perceive' something is to 'feel' it, in a way. We 'feel' our sensory input. The two terms might well be describing the same 'thing' from different Perspectives.
When we identify with another's emotions, we also feel what they feel.
If we are truly identifying with someone, that someone can only be one and the same 'self'. One. One cannot, by definition, identify with anything other than 'self'. 'Self' is one's identity.
You and I feel the same
feeling at the same time, as one.
Empathy can happen with a thought also. Empathy is not limited to feelings alone. Two (or more) can 'feel'/'think' the same thought, synchronously. An event of perception of Oneness through shared 'feelings' and/or 'thoughts'.
Empathy is a mirrored emotion; I see nothing wrong with that claim.
The only weakness in your claim, as far as I can see, is the use of 'is', turning your statement into some claim of a 'Now and for all Universal Truth'. I don't think that is actually your intent, so i mention it.
Otherwise, as I said above, I can hang with that, as long as we don't limit empathy to just that (emotion, as that would be inconsistent with experience).
When I cry, I usually don't intend other people to feel empathy for me.
Perhaps you mean (the judgemental ego wank of) 'pity' or 'sympathy' or worse, the vulgar (egoically vain) notion of 'charity'?
For an empathic 'link' to exist, you are both feeling/experiencing the exact same
emotion and/or thought, simultaneously.
(No possibility of misunderstanding!)
No one feels empathy for
another (as there is no 'other' in that 'place'). One can, as is usual, have no trouble manifesting 'compassion' as a corollary of an empathic 'connection'. Empathic experiences show us our oneness, all are self, we just experience that truth in dribs and drabs, an empathic moment here, an empathic moment there...
(as I understand and experience it) means that we recognize their need for their present condition, and give them our love and understanding."
The direct empathic experience of oneness
can transcends all feelings, all imagined limitations. Sometimes one can have an empathic link with many people, simultaneously. Gets a bit 'wierd' sometimes... The understanding od 'self' certainly changes.
(Long live the Borg! *__- )