[From Bjorn Simonsen (2007.04.14,18:55 EUST)]
Empathy
1 : the imaginative projection of a subjective state into an object so that
the object appears to be infused with it
2 : the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and
vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another
of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and
experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner; also : the
capacity for this
I think the definitions found in Merriam-Webster are in harmony with the way
I understand Empathy.
How does PCT explain Empathy?
If I become informed that my brother-in-law is injured in a car accident ( a
thought example). Is it possible for me to e.g. imagine that my own wife is
injured in the same way and experience an approximately emotion that my
sister feel? Or is Empathy only something we wish to master or something we
think we master?
I have problems when I shall imagine a really unpleasant perception (goal).
I have problems when I shall imagine blocked actions and I am uncertain if I
really reorganize.
Anyone who will convince me that Empathy is real?
bjorn
In a message dated 4/14/2007 11:53:42 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, bjornsi@BROADPARK.NO writes:
How does PCT explain Empathy?
Does PCT have to explain everything, including empathy? Isn’t empathy an internal state, not a behavior controlling perceptions? If we take empathy a step farther and link an empathetic state to a reference signal and a resulting error signal, empathy could be related to PCT. But I don’t see that PCT needs to explain empathy, which can be considered as a sensor signal.
As far as explanations of empathy, the activation of mirror neurons are hypothesized by some to be a basis for empathy.
With Regards,
Richard Pfau
···
See what’s free at AOL.com.
But I don’t see that PCT needs
to explain empathy, which can be considered as a sensor signal.
As far as explanations of empathy, the activation of mirror neurons are
hypothesized by some to be a basis for empathy.
[From Bill Powers (2007.04.15.0-930 MDT)]
Richard Pfau (2007.04.15) –
I agree with Bjorn that empathy is NOT a sensor signal, but an imagined
perception. One person can’t actually sense the feelings another person
is experiencing. It’s possible to infer from sensory evidence what
another person might possibly be feeling if that person’s experience is
like that of the observer, but that’s very different from sensing it. The
only emotions we actually experience are our own. If you don’t agree with
that I’d like to hear your reasoning.
Best,
Bill P.
In a message dated 4/15/2007 10:37:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, powers_w@FRONTIER.NET writes:
But I don't see that PCT needs to explain empathy, which can be considered as a sensor signal.
As far as explanations of empathy, the activation of mirror neurons are hypothesized by some to be a basis for empathy.
I agree with Bjorn that empathy is NOT a sensor signal, but an imagined perception. One person can’t actually sense the feelings another person is experiencing. It’s possible to infer from sensory evidence what another person might possibly be feeling if that person’s experience is like that of the observer, but that’s very different from sensing it. The only emotions we actually experience are our own. If you don’t agree with that I’d like to hear your reasoning.
Sorry Bill for my using dated terminology. When I used the term “sensor signal” I was glancing at an earlier version of your model (1973), that showed the “Sensor signal” as an input into the “Comparator”. A later version of your model (2005) uses the term “Perceptual Signal” rather than “Sensor signal”.
So yes, I agree that “empathy,” or more precisely “the feeling of empathy,” is a perceptual signal. The feeling is hypothesized by some to be the output of mirror neurons that are being activated (i.e., “resonating” – to use a metaphorical term) after a person has seen or otherwise learned about another person’s behavior or situation.
The point I was trying to make is that PCT theorists and practitioners don’t need to explain perceptual signals such as the feeling of empathy. It would be nice if we could, but such explanation does not seem to be a necessary part of the PCT model. An explanation of the perceptual signal of empathy seems to fall outside the domain of the PCT model – but might be a nice supplemental addition to it.
With Regards,
Richard Pfau
···
See what’s free at AOL.com.