Opinion

Selective empathy

Empathy is an honest response, and when it involves strangers it is, I think, an honest measure of our prejudices. In my column in The Herald today I refer to the nine killed in the plane crash near Kokoda in Papua New Guinea this week as an illustration of that. Well, 13 people died in on that mountainside, but four of them were not Australians. Three of them were Papua New Guineans and one Japanese, and their life was lost as completely and as tragically as the life of any of the Australians.

But is nationality the primary measure? What if the nine Australians had been Pakistani Australians or Lebanese Australians? Would your empathy have flowed as freely as it did for the families of the nine white Australians? I think not.

Aha, but that is assuming that you are white Australian. Presumably a Pakistani Australian or a Lebanese Australian would be as distressed about the deaths of their respective countrymen as white Australians are about their white countrymen. Does this mean, too, that Pakistani or Lebanese Australians are less empathetic about the Kokoda deaths of the white Australians?

Is your concern for a young man facing a death sentence in Vietnam reduced if he is a Vietnamese Australian? For Rio Tinto's China-born Stern Hu in a Chinese jail less than if he were a white Australian?

Why are we immeasurably more concerned about saving the life of a child in Australia than in Africa? Indeed, why are we immeasurably more concerned about the shooting of brumbies in Australia than we are about the slaughter of people in other countries? A kitten that has been the victim of cruelty prompts a torrent of outrage and sympathy while the rape and murder of children in Africa provokes not even a trickle.

Most of the factors that go to our empathy are illegal if they go to discrimination, yet they not only exist, they flourish unchallenged. Or are you prepared to challenge them?

Posted By: Jeff Corbett on 13/08/2009 6:04:00 PM | Comments (19)

Share on
Facebook

Tweet on
Twitter

Email to
a friend

comments

Date: Newest first | Oldest first

I reckon it's not only our own prejudices (tendency to discriminate) that influence our empathy. It is also proximity, or connectedness, to the subject matter. Of course we will be more affected by events that are more connected to our lives, physically or otherwise, partly because we feel some ability to influence them. Nationality surely engenders some feeling of kinship? So, if someone of your nationality or ethnicity is hurt or killed, you are more likely to take notice and care. Our frames of reference in life are strongly determined by our life experience, so we can't separate that from our natural reactions and become objective, clinical automatons. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with these biases we have. We can't change the fact that they exist. We can hide it, and ensure that they don't result in discriminatory behaviour, but we should appreciate the differences. I think we all do feel some grief over the appalling things tht happen to people in other parts of the world, but we are constrained in therms of what we can actually do to change that. We can influence what happens closer to home.......

Posted by Abundance, 14/08/2009 10:39:59 AM, on The Herald

I see no need to challenge them, and I'm entirely comfortable with the moral settings underpinning my empathy. Yes - I would spend thousands to save the life of my cat, but I wouldn't kick in $10 to save the life of somebody in Africa. Anybody claiming otherwise on this blog will be a liar - demonstrably so as most Australians blow enough on take-away coffee each day to save several people from malaria or diptheria or blindness. People care about the people (and animals) that are important to THEM - that strike a chord on a personal, cultural, religious or other level. The rest of the human race can go hang - literally. Bleeding hearts howling about the deaths of children in Africa whilst living it up in the West are no different to greenies driving carbon-belching Kombi vans. Hypocrites.

Posted by Scott Hillard, 14/08/2009 10:57:36 AM, on The Herald

john rabe – nazi saviour of the chinese in nanjing. People who will go further to protect others -that is endanger their own lives -these are very rare persons. True empathy will encompass humanity and vise-versa. The same feeling is in most of us -unless we have been dehumanised by false values,"Lust", "Gluttony", "Greed", "Sloth", "Wrath", "Envy", and "Pride". and all other other distractions to being a good person. The resolve and ability to do something about it is what may differ from person to person but that doesnt make anyone lessor or greater than another -just at a time more able.Incidently I believe that animals and the environment also rank in what is part of our natural empathy capability -unless we have been "desensitised' by some means or other. The question of what we are able to do and what we wish to 'tuneout' from doing (deny) is another matter .Selective empathy is perhaps another form of selective denial meant to preserve our own comfort through not taking too much on board so we should not feel too guilty or be feeling bad about not being able to solve all the worlds inhumanity. Its only our fault if by some way or other we encourage or support wrongs.

Posted by rare people, 14/08/2009 11:39:43 AM, on The Herald

when major disasters happen world wide it's usually a matter of hours before the jokes start. As comedian Akmal Sali puts it "Tragedy + distance + comedy". does this mean we are an uncaring mob? I don't think so, but think your suggetsion that a means of relating to the victims determines in part the level of empathy. Somehow it makes it seem more "real".

Posted by fista, 14/08/2009 11:58:03 AM, on The Herald

Jeff, interesting questions, and as i'm sure you expected, I need to have my say. Naturally, your assertations are correct in your blog above. Yes As they are White Australian victims of the crash they get pleanty of empathy from me. Would i have as much empathy if they were Packistani or Lebenese Australians. Well, No, not unless i knew them or their family personally. I believe Packistani or Lebenese Australians would feel the same (only in reverse). With the kid in Vietnamfacing the death penalty for Drug smuggling. Either way i have no empathy for him, White blacke blue or green, face the consequences for your actions. Now Stern Hu is a different case all together, I don;t care if he is chinese, or whatever, I believe he should be set free and brought back to Australia. He is not a criminal, he is a buisinessman. And i hear a chinese company owned by the Chinese government will be buying a mine in the hunter valley, i think that is very dangerous and not in our best interest. But thats a topic for another day.

Posted by Nafe, 14/08/2009 12:05:14 PM, on The Herald

At the end of the day, if there is any chance of race / nationality not being a part of everyday thinking, then the titles of Lebenese Australian or Chinese Australian must go. If you don't identify yourself as Australian first, your loyalties lie somewhere else. You can be an Australian from Lebanon, or Australian with lebanese heretage, but if your Lebesese Australian, then obviously it appears Lebanon is where your loyalties lie. Its all about perception,.

Posted by Nafe, 14/08/2009 12:08:06 PM, on The Herald

It is called "tribalism", i.e. the identification with and empathy towards individuals who belong to the same or similar tribe as ourselves. It's part of our human social nature. It is not fair, but then again, life itself is not fair. The same argument goes about killing a cockroach as opposed to killing a bird or a kitten. Which life is more precious (if any)? Which killing is ok? Or what about eating beef vs eating dog or cat?

Posted by Jeff the Perthian, 14/08/2009 12:27:51 PM, on The Herald

There's only so much to go around you know Jeff.We need a certain reserve store for really overwhelming important things like Michael Jackson carking,Angelina's love handle crisis,Bec& Leighton misery,Britney,Paris ,Rove ,Kyle,Shane(maybe we are over Shane----Warne that is).I am exhausted by all this truly tragic stuff-then there are all those greedy pensioners that did their Super on BrisCon or whatever.Sheesh!

Posted by Snooze, 14/08/2009 12:37:08 PM, on The Herald

We read every day about the corruption that is Africa and other similar nations around the earth and we all know that donating money to these causes invariably ends in the pockets of the despots and dictators. We see foreign persons coming to these shores and bringing their hates and prejudices with them, forming gangs and preying on the weaker and vulnerable people in our society.Due to media reporting, this is in the main the total vision of all of these nationalities. The world as a whole, decries the transgressions and reported atrocities but in the end, accomodation is found for the transgressors on the basis of Politics. As an example after all the reporting, Mugabe is still in power and no doubt continues his homicidal rampages. In Australia, with the abused kitten or mountain brumbies, we can get reports and can see action and this sooths our righteous indignation and makes us feel like we are important in the scheme of things.

Posted by MizJasper, 14/08/2009 4:49:37 PM, on The Herald

Unfortunately, Jeff, most people are only interested in their "own". Their own family, own children, own friends, own club, own team, own town, own state, their own country and things that affect them personally. Also, many people are far more concerned about animals than human beings. I note that in a recent blog about "loneliness of the aged" you only received about 3 responses that were on subject but received over 60-100+ responses on "animal rights" type issues.

Posted by helper, 14/08/2009 6:33:09 PM, on The Herald

1 | 2 | next >