Slashdot Mirror


Empathy Represses Analytic Thought, and Vice Versa

hessian sends this quote from a Case Western Reserve University news release: "New research shows a simple reason why even the most intelligent, complex brains can be taken by a swindler's story – one that upon a second look offers clues it was false. When the brain fires up the network of neurons that allows us to empathize, it suppresses the network used for analysis, a pivotal study led by a Case Western Reserve University researcher shows (abstract). ... At rest, our brains cycle between the social and analytical networks. But when presented with a task, healthy adults engage the appropriate neural pathway, the researchers found. The study shows for the first time that we have a built-in neural constraint on our ability to be both empathetic and analytic at the same time. The work suggests that established theories about two competing networks within the brain must be revised. More, it provides insights into the operation of a healthy mind versus those of the mentally ill or developmentally disabled."

58 of 293 comments (clear)

  1. Oblig by Konster · · Score: 4, Funny

    [spock]Fascinating.[/spock]

    1. Re:Oblig by Antipater · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do that many people give a shit or have feelings for strangers they happen across / first meetings?

      The fact that people can successfully panhandle suggests yes.

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
    2. Re:Oblig by Antipater · · Score: 2

      Now we're quibbling semantics. I never said a majority. The question was "Do that many people give a shit...?" "That many" to me doesn't mean a majority, it means "enough" - and enough people do give a shit. To you, it might mean different. /shrug.

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
    3. Re:Oblig by almitydave · · Score: 5, Funny

      The "spock" tag has been deprecated in favor of the less implementation-specific "eyebrow" tag. Optionally use the "height" attribute with the following values: spock, jeeves, therock, connery, or scully.

      --
      my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
      I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
    4. Re:Oblig by Noughmad · · Score: 4, Funny

      The "spock" tag has been deprecated in favor of the less implementation-specific "eyebrow" tag. Optionally use the "height" attribute with the following values: spock, jeeves, therock, connery, or scully.

      You forgot Teal'c.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    5. Re:Oblig by rtb61 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It breaks down like this.
      Empathy, we are part of a social group and we continue to survive as part of that social group. Hence the normal social human brain is hard wired to support the group over individual survival.
      Analytic thought. Screw the group, how will I as an individual best be able to get ahead by victimising the rest of the group. A minority of broken people are hard wired to see human society in this way. You can imagine what happens if the majority attempt to function in this manner.

      A majority psychopathic society that lacks empathy, is no longer a society. It completely breaks down to core individual survival, no longer primates in empathic social groups but reptiles looking to feed off each other as readily as any other creatures in that environment.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  2. Finally explains it by Gothmolly · · Score: 3, Funny

    So this is why girls aren't good at math?

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:Finally explains it by nschubach · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because girls were raised to empathize? I'm not sure I buy that male/female is "better" at either. Just more experienced.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    2. Re:Finally explains it by vlm · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think this explains why conversations on facebook back when I used to have an account were ridiculous stupid and conversations on /. are usually well above room temp IQ but perhaps lacking in some civility.

      FB: "Boo hoo I think I'm catchcing a cold, ironically; I can't figure the first derivative of 1/x"

      FB: Oh you poor baby lets play farmville together till you feel better, have you tried aromatherapy yet for the cold?

      /. : "Boo hoo I think I'm catchcing a cold, ironically; I can't figure the first derivative of 1/x"

      /. : "You Fing idiot you can't even spell catching, don't know what irony is, and if you could spell google correctly instead of spelling it as /., you'd see its -1/x^2"

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:Finally explains it by rve · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Raised" you say. When I drop my kids off at daycare, the little girls my son's age come to check out his baby sister. The little boys are too busy playing and couldn't care less. At that age (barely verbal) kids just do what comes naturally, and not really what society expects of them.

      Mind you, this doesn't mean the GP isn't full of manure. Girl's lack of aptitude in math compared to boys is a matter of culture, not nature. It's not constant over different cultures or in the same culture over time.

    4. Re:Finally explains it by TitusC3v5 · · Score: 2

      I'm sure that has nothing at all to do with the fact that little girls are generally given what amounts to replica babies to play with while boys are given action-oriented toys instead.

      --
      And the masses cried out, "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0!"
    5. Re:Finally explains it by samoanbiscuit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Kids are gendered from birth onwards. I have a little cousin being reared in the house next to mine, and he's treated roughly (not painfully, just roughly) because "he's a boy and he needs to be tough". He's only 6 months old. If that's the kind of conditioning he's receiving, of course he'll be a rough and tumble terror when he's a toddler. He's also encouraged, at 6 months old, to exert himself and roughly handle/break things. I don't think he'd be encouraged to do such things if he were a female.

    6. Re:Finally explains it by war4peace · · Score: 4, Funny

      With such mad parents, they would probably have the baby wear thongs and make-up if born a girl.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    7. Re:Finally explains it by samoanbiscuit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's much more subtle than I make it sound, and I've noticed it with a lot of parents, with boys you see it with their fathers, girls, their mothers. Gender policing is something innate and automatic to most people, and many people don't realize they're doing it, they just think their children magically acquire these traits out of the ether, and so jump to conclusions about gender that don't have all the data.

    8. Re:Finally explains it by sFurbo · · Score: 4, Informative

      You are right, the causality is mostly the other way. The tendency can be registered from three months of age by tracking how long time babies of different sexes opens looking at various objects. While there is certainly large variations within each sex, the average of each sex is clearly distinct and biologically determined.

    9. Re:Finally explains it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Celsius, of course!

  3. Observed this many times in women... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just swap empathetic with emotional (Yeah different, but related definitions.) and all I have to do is look/listen to my spouse in the morning to see what wife I will spend the day with.
    If she is overly emotional, no amount of logic or analysis with help with anything. It's gonna be a rough day for me.
    If she is overly analytical of what I do or say, there is nothing I can do or say, even gifts of chocolate, will not sway her from her incorrect analysis of my mistakes.

    Women, you can;t live with 'em.

    (Posting as AC becuace my spouse reads slashdot and this post will cause her to fly off the handle.)

    1. Re:Observed this many times in women... by Ironhandx · · Score: 5, Funny

      Slashdot husbands of even semi-suspicious wives around the world have to hide now thanks to this one AC.

      Well done sir.

      (Posting to hopefully clear my own name)

    2. Re:Observed this many times in women... by vlm · · Score: 5, Funny

      (Posting to hopefully clear my own name)

      Yeah that's exactly the kind of post I'd write to clear my own name if I was the OP. Unless she knows that I know that she knows... I believe this is a recursive trap we've entered here.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:Observed this many times in women... by elfprince13 · · Score: 4, Funny
    4. Re:Observed this many times in women... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just swap empathetic with emotional (Yeah different, but related definitions.) and all I have to do is look/listen to my spouse in the morning to see what wife I will spend the day with. If she is overly emotional, no amount of logic or analysis with help with anything. It's gonna be a rough day for me. If she is overly analytical of what I do or say, there is nothing I can do or say, even gifts of chocolate, will not sway her from her incorrect analysis of my mistakes.

      Women, you can;t live with 'em.

      (Posting as AC becuace my spouse reads slashdot and this post will cause her to fly off the handle.)

      I know it's you: we will discuss this VERY carefully later today. Now, take the trash out.

    5. Re:Observed this many times in women... by girlinatrainingbra · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Yeah, but have you observed any sort of noticeable cycle or pattern to it, perhaps a biorhythm that maybe seems to entrain to the phase of the moon? ;>) (joke)
      .

      For the not joking part of this comment, I have to say that I'm not (yet?) experiencing the monthly moody emotionalness that I observe in many of my female peers. I do have the physical water-retention, the physical pain that ibuprofen cannot solve, and the aches, but not the emotional stress aspect. Maybe that happens a little further in life? Or is it a psycho-social thing: you expect it to happen so you make it happen... The packs of women/girls roving together in a high-school do form cliques and do reinforce each others' behaviours and attitudes...

  4. Sooooo..... by robinsonne · · Score: 4, Funny

    So people that work in IT gain less and less empathy for their users? Hmmmm....

  5. Paradox. by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rational analysis will lead to better outcomes than emotionally driven behavior. So if you want good things to happen to the most people, which most empathetic people would, then you should eschew empathy and be as rational as possible.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Paradox. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Empathy is the capacity to recognize feelings that are being experienced by another sentient being, not necessarily to want good things for them.

      You can imagine what it is like to be in another person's shoes without caring about the person currently in them.

      No Paradox.

    2. Re:Paradox. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If I always followed my rational mind, I would miss out of the greatest opportunities in my lifetime, and I consider them far greater than any mean or average you see the world through. I pity such small-mindedness, however, I also disagree with this research that empathy and rationality are opposed to eachother, just that the majority of people have neither noticed- or nurtured the skill to balance empathy (inspiration) and rationality (vehicle).

    3. Re:Paradox. by LateArthurDent · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Why do you assume that? If anything a rational person would better understand the concept of the greater good than an empathically driven person.

      It's not about understanding the concept, it's about subscribing to it.

      For example, you can rationally understand that cooperation from individuals can lead to increased success of the species. However, rationally, why is the survival of the species important to you? Why is anything that happens after you are dead important to you? You're not going to be there to see it, or to experience it, or to suffer from the consequences. The only thing you have to tell you that it would be bad to selfishly care only about your own well-being at the expense of others is by putting yourself in their shoes. In other words, empathy.

    4. Re:Paradox. by scamper_22 · · Score: 2

      Not having empathy can lead to one missing out on many facts and understanding of people... and thus hurt empathy.

      You really need both to make a good decision.

      As a very simplistic example...
      A 'rational' medical professional might think that we should ban soda because it is unhealthy.

      But someone with empathy will recognize that people feel and don't like being told what to do.

      Similarly, we see what is happening in Europe right now. The politicians are pushing austerity. But they are not empathetic to how people feel... the hopelessness, the insecurity...
      Ignoring empathy like that can result in a worse outcome... social unrest, collapse...

      Someone without empathy will not take people into account and in doing so are not really rational as they ignore one of the biggest variables in the equation.

      It is irrational to not have empathy and still expect results.

  6. E-mail by StripedCow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Never send an important e-mail when you've just been coding for several hours.

    --
    If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
  7. Not a Paradox by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think your proof falls apart with your first statement "Rational analysis will lead to better outcomes than emotionally driven behavior." This might be evidence of the opposite. That empathic behavior is more likely to get you laid and produce children than rational behavior.

    1. Re:Not a Paradox by HyperQuantum · · Score: 3, Funny

      But then again, him reproducing may not be what's best for everyone.

      --
      I am not really here right now.
  8. All you complainers by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Funny

    See all of you kept crying about how all our C?O and Political leaders are psychopaths were wrong. You should be happy about that. They are better at thinking than you are and no doubt producing more optimal solutions than you could.

    Thank goodness we have these unfeeling psychopaths to lead us.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  9. Nothing new here... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

    I'm sure that con artists have been subconsciously using this for millennia.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  10. Re:the Democrat party by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

    Then how do you explain Rethuglicans?

    Fetal Alcohol Syndrome.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  11. Re:Stupidity Represses Insight by arisvega · · Score: 2

    Can I have my Phd now?

    If you showed it "for the first time", sure you can. With a publication on a "high-profile journal" on the side.

    --
    The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
  12. Re:the Democrat party by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most religious conservatives are NOT analytical thinkers. The same is true of conspiracy nuts (ex: birthers). The majority of both are Republicans.

  13. Faulty Jump by erik.erikson · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems a faulty jump to go from the observations that the study participants did not use the two elements of cognition together to the assertion that one cannot use both capacities at the same time. At the very least it should be theoretically possible for neural connectivity to be established between the two sub-networks and as a result to activate both capabilities concurrently. Certainly we should be able to imagine circumstances where having such an ability would be advantageous, such as the processing and understanding of the experience but also wise and healthy reaction within the emotional interactions we engage in with our loved ones.

  14. Re:the Democrat party by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually if you note their campaigning methods you'll see that they spend most of their time attempting to play to emotions rather than facts and logic. It is no coincidence that their talking points focus on issues more likely to provoke a visceral reaction in the public such as religion, abortion, don't tread on me, and military/defense.

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
  15. The Fear Factor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I guess that explains the constant focus on fear by conservatives. If you focus on that most powerful emotional response, people lose the rational ability to question the long term consequences of those actions. Like say, for example, starting a useless protracted war in a middle east nation, or cutting back at personal liberties to 'protect from the terrorists'.

    1. Re:The Fear Factor by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 2

      However, it doesn't explain what would suppress both empathy and analytics, something clearly evidenced in this post.

      "Laziness" is an easy claim to generalize, but it not always so easily stands up to scrutiny. Other possible explanations are: insufficient education, insufficient opportunity, and to risk being politically incorrect, insufficient IQ. Sufficient ambition may be able to counter some of these in some circumstances, not all. And someone who would think everyone who does not pay taxes is lazy and shiftless could hardly be less analytical.

  16. Re:Liberal vs Conservatives by DragonWriter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That explains the thought process of Liberals vs Conservatives.

    Well, except that it doesn't.

    Liberals think more with feeling and emotion, less with logic. Conservatives think more with logic and reason, and less with empathy.

    If it were as you suggest, emotional, non-rational appeals to tradition, religious values, nationalism, etc., would be particularly ineffective in motivating conservatives. In the real world, both groups are diverse and include both more-analytical and and more-emotional thinkers. There are plenty of studies showing indications of various cognitive differences between conservatives and liberals, but the particular one you suggest isn't one of them.

  17. Re:the Democrat party by RabidReindeer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Conservatives, so the old tradition went, have heads but no hearts. Liberals have hearts, but no heads.

    Somehow, somewhere, something went terribly wrong.

  18. Re:Liberal vs Conservatives by Kreegalor · · Score: 2

    I think you might be mixing up feelings and emotions with empathy.

    Empathy is the ability to recognize the feelings experienced by others.

    So
    Liberals tend to have more feelings and emotions and be more empathetic to others, so they make illogical and unreasonable decisions based on feelings and emotions..
    Conservatives think more with their own feelings and emotions but their level of empathy is lower, so they reason out a logical solution from unreasonable and illogical starting points.

  19. Re:A sucker born every minute by dpidcoe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As someone who played eve many years as a scammer (of the variety that didn't spam local chat), I can tell you that both empathy and anger have the effect of making people dumber. I went for empathy when I was trying to get someone to give me stuff. After they fell for the scam and realized they'd been had, I'd switch over and do everything I could to make them raging angry. Once they were sufficiently mad, I'd block them and then figure out a way to get them to to meet my other character in what appeared to them to be a chance encounter, then appeal to their sense of anger and convince them to take out a bounty hunter contract with me to "kill" my first scamming character.

  20. Empathy != social cognition by h5inz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you read the abstract of the article then it states that the tasks presented to the subjects where -"tasks requiring social cognition, i.e., reasoning about the mental states of other persons, and tasks requiring physical cognition, i.e., reasoning about the causal/mechanical properties of inanimate objects". Social reasoning does not equal empathy. Empathy requires one to share and understand others feelings while social reasoning is something a sociopath could do.

  21. Re:the Democrat party by dmatos · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you look at some rhetorical theory (ie, theory of rhetoric), you'll find that there are three main kinds of arguments, which are effective against three different categories of people.

    Amongst your supporters, logical arguments have the most significant impact.

    Amongst the undecided, emotional arguments are more likely to sway their decision.

    Amongst your opponents, moral arguments are just about the only thing that can have any effect.

    Ask yourself who they're trying to win votes from when they campaign, and I think you'll have the answer as to why it's all full of emotional arguments.

    --

    It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
    --Scott Adams
  22. Won't someone PLEASE think of the children! by retroworks · · Score: 2

    How can you all debate this study from Case Western! We have to do something!!!

    --
    Gently reply
  23. Must be a third factor.... by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 4, Funny

    The existance of conservative Republicans proves there must be an additional factor, something that suppresses BOTH empathy and analytics...

  24. Re:Teachers / Salesman by marcosdumay · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yep, I've also first taught about sales pitches.

    The worst kept secret on the world is that it is way easier to sell if you put something you client emphatises with in front of him. The web is full of testimonials because of that, also salesmen try to dress correctly, use the words the clients are used to, and so on. There is an entire crop of salesmen that'll throw poersonal stories around every time, and it seems to work.

  25. Blaise Pascal knew this... by Diamonddavej · · Score: 2

    "The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of." - Blaise Pascal (1623-1662).

  26. Re:Liberal vs Conservatives by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let's change this to be a bit more accurate:

    That explains the thought process of different political groups.

    People who disagree with me think more with feeling and emotion, less with logic.
    People who agree with me think more with logic and reason, and less with empathy.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  27. Re:Conservatives vs Liberals by idontgno · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Show me a young conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains."

    --Georges Clemenceau (approximately)

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  28. Re:the Democrat party by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Really? I've never seen any evidence of that.

    Okay, what about the notion that rape is what god intends? That the female body just shuts down in case of rape? What about all the people who believe the earth is 6000 yrs old? that dinosaurs and man coexisted? and ignore science fact. That evolution is "just a theory" with no evidence to support it? That they insist on less government EXCEPT when it comes to enforcing their moral beliefs and dogma on everyone else?

    (ie, caring for the poor/disadvantaged/discriminated against). As it's a quality that I've personally always recognized as the fatal flaw of Liberal Ideology

    The best way to experience empathy is by personally going through the hardships that others have been through, in which case, you will understand their pain. Don't think it can't happen to you. I was poor a few years ago, largely because of outsourcing and the state of the economy. There was really nothing I did (or neglected to do) that put me in that situation. I had to bust my ass to climb out of it and return to financial stability and independence. So, what's wrong with having empathy? I strive to be balanced. I empathetic. I'm also analytical...and you'd be hard pressed to argue against that, knowing that I'm a successful electrical engineer and software developer. I really don't understand how you can call empathy a weakness but, if you enjoy being a robot who doesn't get laid, knock yourself out.

  29. Emoting isn't social cognition by DragonWriter · · Score: 2

    Actually, it does do a fair job of explaining why most voters seem to eschew reason in their decisions, as well as why it's so easy for politicians to distract from real issues that need analytical thought applied, by appealing to voter emotions.

    Actually, it doesn't, since its about "social cognition" not "emotions"; while there may be other research findings about emoting inhibiting analytical thought, this research is about social cognition ("reasoning about the mental states of other persons") inhibiting analytical thought (or, rather, inhibiting "physical cognition, i.e., reasoning about the causal/mechanical properties of inanimate objects.").

  30. The Monkeysphere by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Do that many people give a shit or have feelings for strangers they happen across / first meetings?

    Yes they do, it's instinctive behavior for most primates, and the more the stranger looks and acts like a member of your "tribe" the more empathy they get. But who's talking about strangers? - This finding goes a long way to explaining why I tolerated my ex-wife for 20yrs. ;)

    Empathy travels in both directions, although I suspect your question was rhetorical, the fact that you asked it reduces the initial empathy I had for you. This is probably because at 53 I'm the "silverback" of my own little tribe and subconsciously judge you as a prospective associate from a similar tribe. Competition for resources (particularly territorial resources) dictates nobody can have the same level of empathy towards everyone but the tribe is always looking for social/political alliances to boost their standing in the neighborhood. You can see the same thing at work in the royal families of Europe both past and present, they were so busy using their children to seal territorial alliances that many of their descendants now suffer complications from inbreeding. In many ways our brains simply were not built to handle the civilizations we create, for example most of my tribe live more than an hour's drive away. Excluding my parents my own tribal elders live on the other side of the planet and are more or less strangers to me. I can't even name all my Uncles and Aunt's, I just know I had ~20 of them somewhere in the UK, I've met a few and a few are already dead. As a child these people were replaced by adult neighbors and family friends, in fact back then children were expected to address adult family friends as "Uncle" or "Aunt" as a sign of respect, similar as to how US kids today address adults as "Sir", etc.

    Citation: The Monkeysphere

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  31. Re:the Democrat party by mdenham · · Score: 2

    Considering that Republicans use emotional arguments for their supporters, moral ones for the undecided, and incoherent ones for their opponents... well, that looks like they're trying to keep their supporters convinced and are trying to bludgeon the undecided, and that they therefore don't actually believe anyone is their ally.

    In other words, they're acting exactly like sociopaths would - they're convinced that given half a chance, their "supporters" will screw them over in a heartbeat, just because they'd do the same thing.

  32. Re:The proper solution comes from Dexter by YttriumOxide · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Always be analytical but fake emotions as appropriate. Also never be open with what you are thinking, nobody wants to hear the truth.

    Examples:

    wife: (some inane story about something that happened during the day that I'm not interested in)
    incorrect answer: I have no interest in what you were just talking about
    correct answer: thats interesting

    My wife: (some inane story about something that happened during the day that I'm not interested in)
    Me: You know I have no interest in that topic; can't we talk about xyz that we both like?
    My wife: Sorry hon, my bad. But I actually don't like xyz, how's abc?
    Me: abc? Cool, yeh!

    The secret to a good relationship is not lying all the time... one day, that'll fall down like a house of cards and you'll end up hating each other. My wife and I knew from the start we've got our differences and we accept those. We can then spend our time together REALLY enjoying each others company instead of one of us faking it and resenting the other.

    Note that I generally suck at empathy. I require my wife to tell me if I'm being an arse; or boring; or otherwise inappropriate. She'll happily do so; and I learned to happily accept her doing so. It works out better for both of us that way.

    --
    My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
    Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
  33. Re:the Democrat party by justthinkit · · Score: 2

    Conspiracy nut, n; Someone with conspiracy theories different than my own.

    --
    I come here for the love