Empathy

The Psycho-Physical Individual – Psychic

I would just like to have a rough sketch of what an individual is, the subject of experience. For Stein, the individual is a psycho-physical individual. But for the purposes of analysis, I will separate the two elements of the individual, and focus on the psychic. The physical aspect is tackled here. The following are based on Edith Stein’s On the Problem of Empathy.

The Pure I
The individual is “‘itself’ and no other.” What it is is different from the “he” or “she.” It is, thus, just a “qualityless subject of experience,” a recognition of the subject’s uniqueness. For Stein, the individual is an individual, precisely because others are facing it.

The Stream of Consciousness
The “I” is not merely a qualityless subject of experience. Instead, it is also a stream of consciousness. Stein indicates that the “I” does not have just one experience, but many experiences, past and present. An experience of the individual is set against the many experiences the individual has already gone through.

The Soul
The soul is simply the “bearer” of experiences. It is the principle of unity for all experiences of the individual. The soul characterizes the subject’s “own,” and therefore unified, consciousness, separating it from the stream of experience of others.

Empathy as a Lived Experience

One day, I heard my 4-year old niece cried so loud because her mother would go out to meet up with someone. Upon leaving, her mother asked me to assist my niece who was crying non-stop. I went to my niece who was on the floor shouting. What I did, however, was just to sit beside her.

It was my niece’s own experience. But I knew what she felt.

Image by PublicDomainPictures from Pixabay

Empathy is an experience of the other person’s experience. I want to focus on this experiential aspect of the act of empathy. What is unique about empathy is that it grasps the experiential attributes of the other person. I might have heard a loud cry from my niece, but without empathy, I would not have known what she felt while doing it.

Agreeing on some of Lipps’ ideas, Edith Stein would say that empathy is “a kind of act undergone (Stein 1989, 12).” This means that in empathy, the subject goes through the experience of the other person. With empathy, I do not just settle in knowing that the other person is feeling this or that. Instead, I am called to share what he or she is feeling. And if I respond in the affirmative, I would be experiencing the other person’s experience because I would be in the other person’s shoes, so to speak. This makes empathy so special.

Empathy, therefore, is a lived experience. When empathizing, I am living the experience of the other person. It is as if I am the other person, itself, experiencing. Though I still preserve my individuality, I share the feelings of the other person to the point of being one with him or her. Meaning to say, what the other person feels, I know directly. Empathy, after all, is the foundation for sympathy (feeling with).

References:
Stein, Edith. 1989. On the problem of empathy. The Collected Works of Edith Stein. 3rd Rev. ed. Translated by Waltraut Stein. Vol 3. Washington, DC: ICS Publications.

The Three Acts of Perception (A Picture)

My mentor drew an illustration to show how the three acts of perception are different from each other.

The act of outer perception grasps the physical attributes of things.

The act of inner perception grasps one’s own psychic life.

The act of empathy grasps the other subject’s psychic life.

Outer Perception, Inner Perception and Empathy

My mentor told me to differentiate the three acts of perception: outer perception, inner perception and empathy. Below is the text I sent to my mentor.

On her On the Problem of Empathy, Edith Stein presents three acts of perception. These are empathy, outer perception and inner perception. These three acts are acts of pure consciousness.

Outer perception is a form of perception that grasps the physical attributes of concrete beings. This is what Stein said about outer perception: “Outer perception is a term for acts in which spatio-temporal concrete being and occurring come to me in embodied givenness. This being has the quality of being there itself right now; it turns this or that side to me and the side turned to me is embodied in a specific sense. It is primordially there in comparison with sides co-perceived but averted (On the Problem of Empathy, 6).” Outer perception, then, is an act that announces to the subject that there is another embodied concrete being before it. This is without mediation. Through the act of outer perception, the subject directly recognizes the object. The object is “there itself right now” before the subject. The object is directly present before the subject. Moreover, the act of outer perception grasps the whole object, its whole embodiment, even when there may be parts not shown. The subject, for example, may see a ball from a certain angle, so it has a limited view of the ball, but the subject is directly aware that it is seeing the whole embodiment of the ball. Through outer perception, thus, the subject can directly recognize embodied objects.

Inner perception is a form of perception that grasps the psychic life of one’s own self. Stein said, “To consider ourselves in inner perception, i.e., to consider our psychic ‘I’ and its attributes, means to see ourselves as we see another and as he sees us (On the Problem of Empathy, 88).” This means that inner perception is an act that directly perceives the subject’s psychic life. It is making oneself the object of one’s own inquiry. When it does this, it discovers its own attributes. The attributes that are perceived are the subject’s capacities. Remembering, perceiving, willing and moving are some of these attributes. Stein said, “Further, I may view my experiences in such a way that I no longer consider them as such, but as evidence of the transcendence of my individual and its attributes. My recollections announce my memory to me; my acts of outer perception announce the acuteness of my senses (not to be taken as sense organs, of course); my volition and conduct announce my energy, etc. And these attributes declare the nature of my individual to me. We can designate this viewing as inner perception of self (On the Problem of Empathy, 29-30).” So, when the subject perceives its own self through inner perception, it perceives its individuality and the attributes of this individuality.

Empathy, according to Edith Stein, is a sui generis form of perception. Even if it is still a perception, it is a class on its own, and therefore it is not an outer perception nor an inner perception. Empathy is the act that grasps or comprehends the other subject’s psychic life. The object, then, of empathy is the other subject. “Empathy is the form of perception in which ‘foreign experience is comprehended’ (Stein 2008). The object of empathic experience is consciousness that belongs to an I that is not the empathizer’s own (Burns, From I to You to We, 3).” In this sense, empathy would mean direct access to the experiential life of the other subject. When one empathizes with another subject, the empathizer grasps the experience of this other subject. Empathy, then, is a unique act because of the fact that the experience of the empathizer is primordial, while at the same time, the content of this experience is non-primordial. The content is non-primordial in the sense that the psychic life that is grasped is foreign in nature. Empathy, thus, is a pure act announcing the presence of another subject.

Empathy is similar to outer perception, but different from inner perception, in the sense that empathy’s object is another subject. In other words, what is being grasped through empathy is a concrete being other than oneself.

Empathy is similar to inner perception, but different from outer perception, in the sense that empathy targets the psychic life of the other subject. In other words, what is being grasped through empathy are experiences, but that these are not one’s own.

P.S. Surprise! I’m back to my blog! No need for a lengthy explanation. 🙂
P.P.S. The above text is my attempt to differentiate the three acts of perception, and therefore might be inaccurate or outright incorrect.

Empathy as a Response

“[In sensual empathy,] the bodily expressions of the other person draw me into her presence and by way of this process I not only attend to but also spontaneously follow her experiences through (Svenaeus 2018, 757).”

I want to briefly reflect on this supposed reality, that in empathy, the other person, through her bodily expressions, draws me to her. There is thus an invitation coming from the other person. It is a presupposition, then, that the other person is inviting me to share with her experience. Empathy is a kind of response to this kind of invitation.

In empathic experience, the other person asks me (not necessarily literally) to come and be with her. She invites me to experience what she is experiencing. She expresses that I should understand what she is feeling.

If I see my friend smiling, for example, and eager to talk about how blessed she is, I may understand that she is joyful. But even without her telling me to come to her, I would be drawn to share with her experience because of empathy. Through this “invitation,” I may thus follow her experience and may become joyful myself because she is joyful. I am responding to her experience.

The same thing happens if I see one of my friends crying in the corner. Without her seeing me, I am drawn to share with her experience. I may now come to her and ask, “What’s wrong?” Then she may open up to me about her problem. I am merely responding to the implicit invitation to come to her and understand what she is feeling.

Empathy, then, is a kind of response because I am responding to the other person’s invitation to share with her experience.

References:
Svenaeus, Fredrik. 2018. “Edith Stein’s Phenomenology of Sensual and Emotional Empathy.” Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 17 (4). Springer Netherlands: 741–60. doi:10.1007/s11097-017-9544-9.

“Have a Matrix of Categories”

“You must have a matrix of categories.” This is what my mentor told me when we met last Saturday.

Despite that we met an hour later than agreed because of miscommunication, at least I gained some insights from my mentor’s guidance. He asked for my progress, so I let him see the mind map I created, the “bits and pieces” of meanings of Edith Stein’s empathy, and the articles I already read and will have to read. I also told him that I was focused on re-reading Edith Stein’s On the Problem of Empathy.

He asked for clarification of terms. I satisfactorily answered some, but he rebuked me for my understanding of the other terms. He said that there are a lot of nuances carried by those terms. So, he strictly advised me to be exact in my understanding of those terms because Edith Stein used or understood those terms in a specific sense. For example, Edith Stein uses the word “perception,” but there is not one specific meaning for this term, for philosophers use this term in different senses. So, I must be exact by what Edith Stein means by perception when referring to empathy. Overall, then, I gained excellent guidance from my mentor.

For our next meeting, which is probably this Saturday, he said that I should present to him a matrix of categories. This is so that I will know exactly how empathy is to be understood in Steinian sense. For instance, because empathy is understood as a “cognition,” I must understand what exactly is cognition in Steinian sense, and what are its types. After knowing the meaning of cognition, I must know the similarities and dissimilarities of its types. Then, I must see where Edith Stein would put empathy on the categories (e.g., that empathy is a “sui generis” perception). My mentor told me to go on with this matrix, until I get a broad picture of what Edith Stein exactly means by empathy.

Time to read now!

What I’ve Understood So Far

Just a few minutes ago, I emailed my mentor a summary of what I have understood so far in my readings. Below is the content of the doc file I attached in the email. I will now await for his comments, insights and corrections.

Sir, so far, this is the summary of what I have read and understood in my readings. I have written in words what I have made in a mind map.

Empathy is an experience of another person’s experience. So, it is first of all an experience. Indeed it is a primordial experience (coming from the “I”) of a non-primordial experience.

Is the experience here a cognition or affection? The primordial experience is a cognition, rather than affection.

If it is a cognition, is the experience an imagination, contagion, simulation, inference, or a perception? Experience is a perception.

If it is a perception, is the experience an outer perception, inner perception, or a different kind of perception? Experience is a sui generis kind of perception. This means that what is perceived by the primordial experience is not physical, but rather the emotional states of another person.

Empathy thus has its object the emotional states of another person. In other words, what is being perceived are feelings. These feelings are non-primordial in nature since they are not mine, but rather the other person’s.

Feelings have four dimensions. These are depth, reach, duration, and intensity. In depth, there are five different kinds of feelings of the other person. These are sensual feelings, general feelings, moods, spiritual feelings, and sentiments.

Only the spiritual feelings (emotions) and sentiments disclose the value systems of the other person. Spiritual feelings disclose world values, while sentiments disclose personal values.

Empathy has three levels. First level is called awareness, where I see or apprehend the person before me. This is done through the senses. The second level is called focus, where I am moved to follow the person’s emotional experience. And the third level is called comprehension, where I have a relatively complete understanding of the person’s emotional experience. Empathy, though, doesn’t have to include the three levels. I may stop on the first or second level, due to various circumstances (e.g. apathy on my part, busyness, or the other person doesn’t want to be disturbed).

Empathy has two types. The first type is sensual. The second type is emotional. Empathy always starts in the sensual type, grasping the other person’s body language. Emotional empathy may happen when I have reached the third level of empathy. The third level of empathy is said to be a springboard for emotional empathy.

I will have to read again and read more, sir. I might have misunderstood some of the concepts. I haven’t dwelt into detail the meaning of emotional empathy, the four dimensions of feelings and the kinds of feelings. I have to read about values and their connection to feelings and empathy, in general.

Enrolled!

Finally, I’m enrolled for my thesis! This is the beginning of the end (Get the pun? Never mind. Just smile.).

Thankfully, the Finance department allowed me to pay less than the stated down payment. How could I pay it fully when the amount was huge! I didn’t have enough money for the amount. The secretary of the Philosophy department was even shocked. Just imagine that fully paying the down payment would mean settling 80% of my balance. She explained to me, though, that it’s because of Thesis Direction. Thankfully, Finance was considerate.

I’m also grateful because I was able to meet with my mentor. We talked for two hours. He presented and explained to me a thesis book to let me see how a thesis is formed.

His advice to me is, for now, to read and explore the different concepts involved in Edith Stein’s empathy. He strongly suggested that I begin with the basic questions of “What is empathy?” and “What is a value?” He also reminded me to focus only on Edith Stein’s understanding of the concepts, consulting her works, and the works of people who specialize in her. My mentor told me to read, read, and read, so that I can discover a problem worth pursuing.

What a great day!

Husserl’s Tragedy (A Brief Reflection)

Edmund Husserl (1859 – 1938) may be the founder of phenomenology, but one aspect of his life was that he felt sad and alone. And I find this unfortunate.

I read a portion of the book by Dermot Moran entitled Introduction to Phenomenology. The portion was about the life of Husserl and his development of phenomenology. While reading the last part of the chapter, I couldn’t help but feel for the founder of phenomenology. It was a short account of Husserl’s loneliness. It described how Husserl viewed himself as a “leader without followers.” This was so in his life because most of his students did not stick with him. They learned from him, but they diverged in their way of understanding phenomenology.

Moran (2000, 89) noted, “[H]e felt himself increasingly intellectually isolated, convinced that his work was being undermined and his discoveries credited to other philosophers.”

Though I can’t judge the whole situation, the fact was that Husserl was not happy. I can’t comment as to who’s at fault. It is already history.

This shows the reality of life that not everyone will be at your side, no matter the influence you have on them. It is not far from possibility that this will also happen to us. We may have influenced our family and friends by our ideas, decisions, and actions, but they also have their own way of settling things, which may not be favorable to us. So, I think the best way is to accept the possibility that one may be left alone in life. It would be hard, but this is a reality, and it should be accepted.

This is merely a brief reflection of Husserl’s life. I didn’t include the various information as to why he felt alone because it would take my time listing and explaining them. My reflection is just a glimpse of Husserl’s life.

P.S. Edith Stein (1891–1942), one of Husserl’s earlier assistants, was one of those who rejected Husserl’s further developments of phenomenology. She espoused the realism side of phenomenology, rather than the idealism side.

References:
Moran, D. (2000). Introduction to phenomenology. Routledge.

Not Yet Enrolled Sigh

I was unable to enroll today for my master’s thesis. The secretary of the Philosophy Department of the Ateneo de Davao University said that they are currently not offering the graduate course Thesis 1 for the upcoming 1st semester.

But she assured me that the department will offer it now because there’s at least me who will enroll. She told me that she will text me when the course is formally open for enrollment, which will probably be this week or next week.

Thankfully, the visit to the University was not a total waste. The thesis course will be opened. Hopefully, I won’t be the only one to enroll. I expect 3 of my friends also to enroll.

While there, I visited the chapel and prayed.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: