just configure. Okay, so Shannon and I are here we're going to we're working on a project on developing a typology of empathy. We don't know where it's going to go, how it's going to evolve, we're going to use the empathy circle process to discuss it, and we have about an hour. In this session, we'll be doing them weekly or, or however often we can. And so, yeah, that's for, you want to reflect that. And then we'll just get right into we're using empathic listening. So it is you said, a meta process, we're using empathy to develop the empathy typology.
Very cool. Um, so I'll reflect that back before responding. But so I hear you saying, we're working on an empathy project, we're working on developing a topology of empathy. And in order to do that, we're going to meet for a number of times to practice the empathy circle and see what comes up. And it's, you're recalling that I had used the word meta, and it is, in fact, a very meta process.
And it's also emergent, because it's not totally systematic, like, Hey, we got these, you know, this timeline, these, this very structured, it was more of a, just like an empathic listening, you know, the person just explores where they are. And it's sort of an exploratory emergent process, we'll see just how it's developed. I mean, that was my kind of what I was thinking of. And I'm open to other ideas, too.
Yeah. So that it's an emergent process, just like empathy itself, we go with what actually comes of it, kind of moment by moment. And that, as you know, similar to that you're open with to whatever else might emerge.
Exactly, yeah. And I hope we can invite others, I think, you know, four or five to the circle would be a good amount so that the participants who are speaking about this, you know, they're speaking but the others can be taking notes and, and be thinking about about the topic too. So I hope we can expand. So if you're out there, you're very knowledgeable. We want you to join us.
Yeah, so just sort of thinking about adding more people four or five. So there can be even no takers, as the silent listeners, inviting more people to come join.
Yeah, I feel fully heard. Great.
Um, so just a quick question is the idea that we would go back and forth with whatever time we need no time, kind of.
Yeah, it's just open ended. And you're just curious. We're sort of setting the framework right now. And you're just trying to get a sense of clarity that and yeah, so open.
Setting the framework getting clarity. Yeah, I'm just kind of letting my mind settle after the long day and thinking about I'm, I'm really excited about this metta process, just because in my experience of thinking about empathy from a more maybe for intellectualized purposes, for more from a more intellectualized place, there's only so far that I think you can get with it, that it really is about trying to examine both moment by moment, what emerges is what I'm starting to feel from being a part of the empathy circles that so many insights come from just emerging yourself in the process.
I'm hearing there, you've used sort of an intellectual approach for years seeing the benefits of an emergent empathic approach where there's so this emergent quality and it sounds like with the intellectual, there's also some kind of the limit to that process to that way of approaching.
Perfect. Absolutely. Because I think, obviously, I do a lot of striving to empathize with people in my work. And there's an immediacy to that, that if you try to recall what you were doing after that moment passes even an hour later, it only gives you the broad strokes of what happened. And so you miss out on just the very nuanced, almost nonverbal hunches that you might get or sensations that are quite fleeting.
Oh, yeah, I think you're saying that it's the sort of the empathic approach which you do in your work as a therapist. You're listening to others. And there's something about that quality of the moment to moment listening that there are some subtleties of insights that are more or deep or felt experiences that arise that you might not even sort of be aware after the fact.
Exactly, you're sort of kind of using whatever information you can glean at that present moment in order to see how you can be of service to the person in front of you without using such a meta process to examine what it is exactly that you're doing or how you're
so you're going moment to moment in the felt experience, how to contribute to the person without sort of being detached and an out of it meta sort of process, maybe an intellectual detached process. You're more in the moment, I think I'm hearing.
Exactly, yeah. I feel I feel very hurt by that. That feels like a complete thought for now. So. Yeah,
okay. So for me, it's, it's an absolute mess with empathy, the vote the dot the the definitions of empathy. It's like, I never know what anybody's talking about, even if they'll have some simple definition. But the definitions can be interpreted so many different ways that I think there's a there's a need for a very simple, accessible, definitely typology of how the word is used to serve anyone can can easily access and it's sort of there as a reference. So that's a little bit of what I'm thinking is, if I hear it something or somebody hears the word, they can go, and they can get a clearer sense of fitting in what does this person mean, and how does it fit into this typology?
Yeah. So you're saying, what I hear you saying is that the literature or the literature feels like it's a little bit of a mess on empathy. It's just there's so many kind of different ways of referring to empathy out there. And you're really interested in developing a more straightforward topology that people could use as like, a short reference, quick reference, to get a guide for how to empathize. kind of went
on. But yeah, that's it. And I don't know if you read the paper by Dan Batson, he's, he did one of the most, he was attempting at a typology of empathy, he had at least eight ways that the word is used. And he, he starts that paper off, saying all the problems with the definitions, you know, that all and that's all another thing is just explaining all the different people are using one word for empathy. And then, and then somebody else is using that as sympathy or, you know, they have like, personal distress and empathic distress is I mean, it's just, it's, it's just such a mess that the end, he goes through and just starts articulating what the mess is, you know, of definitions.
So you're recalling this paper by bats and Dr. Batson, and how he starts out with a definitions of empathy and discusses the ways in which it's a mess precisely because the same word might be used in different ways, by different people. And so that even complicates it even more than just having a lot of ways to define to refer to empathy. Those ways are used for different purposes.
Yeah, the phenomenon. Yeah. Is has different names by different people using in terms of I know, you use the word phenomenon, phenomenon meeting, as I understand it, something that's actually happening in our felt experience or experience that we can sort of point to it. I can point to point to something and kind of give it a give it a name. So yeah, yeah.
Yeah. It's just you're just stating phenomenon. Is it something that's actually happening? There's something that can be point to pointed to in the moment.
And yeah, exactly. And Batson uses an example of, I don't know if you've read the paper, but it he uses the example of two women talking I think one of them is having some kind of a problem, I think lost her job or something. And, and he points to different aspects of the relationship, to have that as the phenomenon and then pointing this is what I'm, this is what this means, you know, this word means this aspect of what's happening in the moment. So that's how he's trying to sort concretize concretize the definition.
So he uses the definition of two women And speaking about different things that have they have going on. And he uses that kind of as a way of that context as a way to define these different term these different form. Yeah, exactly. Yeah.
Different the different types of empathy. Exactly. Yeah. So different types of empathy. And what I was hoping that within the empathy circle, we could use examples within the empathy circle to point to something that is happening, for example, you're trying to listen, understand what I'm saying in the moment. And for me, that is empathy, trying to sense into what it is that it's happening in this moment. So you can sort of name the dynamics of what's happening here and give it a concrete example. Plus, anybody else can take part in an empathy circle and say, Oh, this is what's happening to me here in the moment, and they can have a concrete name for it.
So you're saying you're suggesting just as Batson use that reference point of the two women talking that we that if we were to work on a paper, we could use the empathy circle as the reference point for naming different types of empathy?
And that people could reproduce it to they could take part in an empathy circle, and they would be able to name that their their own experience, too. Yeah.
Yeah. So that once people take part in the empathy circle, they can identify it from the inside out. Are you like?
Yeah, a fun experience of it? Yeah. So yeah, I feel heard. So that's some some of my thinking. So far, I feel heard.
Yeah. Um, I'm just letting some of the what I've heard you kind of settle a little bit and, and kind of reflecting on the shifting in my own mind, as I'm kind of listening and imagining what you're referring to, and then getting ready to kind of offer my response, it's a sort of a shift that my mind has to go through.
Before so I'm hearing you're you're taking in what I'm saying. And somehow you have to sort of let that settle sort of take in what I'm saying. And you're noticing that there's sort of a shift happening in yourself, and you're just trying to get it on it. What you're collecting on it, there was no, instead of reflecting on it, reflecting on it, you're sort of reflecting on it, and just seeing what emerges.
Exactly. Um, and, gosh, there's a lot coming to mind. Um, see, I think this was part of what differentiates mutual empathy from therapeutic empathy, because with therapeutic empathy, I get to stay on the active listening side for pretty much the whole time. And so that's, it's a little, that's one of the things that differentiates, I think, like empathy, proper, or mutual empathy from that more therapeutic empathy.
So what I'm hearing there is you tend to be in sort of a therapeutic empathy, where you're listening to someone who has a certain mindset, sort of way of being, and now we're shifting into this mutual empathy and you're having to speak to and be heard. So it's a relational empathy. And it sort of sounds like it's maybe a shift for for a shift a bit you having to adapt to or,
but not that it doesn't pertain. Because I do even though I'm the one talking right now, I feel like I'm still in an empathy. I feel like I'm still empathizing, if that makes sense, because I can't completely divorce myself from you know, what you were saying before this, it's still kind of simmering in my own mind. So even as I talk, I'm kind of empathizing with what I've been hearing, if that makes sense.
Yeah. So you're listening to me and you're empathizing with it. But then when it becomes your turn to speak, you're, you're trying to sense to speak and be heard, but you're at the same time, you're also still empathizing with me at the same time. So it's not like you shift from listening to speaking, you're kind of like doing both at the same time.
Exactly. Like, it's not a sharp distinction, or anything like that. Um, so now that I've gotten that out, I'm the, um, I, you know, the stuff on different forms of empathy. And the idea about pointing to different parts of the empathy circle, I think could be really, really good. And if there was somehow a note in, in the article or on the list or whatever gets written up that in order to have the full experience of these different types, it's like highly recommended to actually partake in a circle because I Otherwise, otherwise, like the risk is that the problem that was that was happening before with people referring to the same word with different pointing to different phenomena to understand the same word might stands to still happen. But if we're understanding a word from both, kind of an intellect, intellectualized place and also from the outset, inside out, then we stand stand a better chance of really being on the same page.
Okay, so you're seeing a way of understanding, which is an intellectual kind of being outside of it. And that being outside of it leads to a lot of confusion in terms of definitions, and you're imagining writing something in the paper, if we write a paper on this, that it would be to explain that you have to experience it to experience this definition from the inside out. And so you're seeing sort of a differentiation between those two components?
Yeah. I feel I feel very hurt. I think that I think that covers it.
Okay. Well, that's in terms of a definition there is it's it is a simple definition is Oh, you're listening to someone else, is sort of this simplistic or sensing into someone else's experience, but you're sort of addressing the relational part of it. It's like, all these things are happening at the same time, we're sort of mutually empathizing with each other, at some level, even I guess, if you're in a therapeutic sense, the, the the client is even still empathizing, even if they're not focused, focusing, there's almost like levels of empathy of sensing into someone. So you're, you're kind of doing various levels at the same time. That's something I got from what you were saying.
Right? So you're saying like, when we talk about active listening, yes, that's true. But it doesn't capture the complexity of what's going on kind of between, you know, the two people are between you and I, it's not just sensing into, but there's more to it. And I think there was more that you said, but that's,
there's this empathy, this mutual back and forth, empathy happening at the same time, there's this ongoing, empathic relationship. And at one point, I'm focused, you're focusing on me right now with, you know, a deep focus, but I'm still empathizing with you, I'm seeing your head nodding, and I get a sense, I see your smiling, you know, I get a sense of what's happening for you, too. So it's sort of this, there's almost like always a mutual, almost always, I guess, can't say always, but pretty much you're always in a mutual empathic relationship of one sort or other.
So I hear you think you, I hear you reflecting on this mutual aspect of empathy. And that, even though you're noticing that even though you are the one talking that you have to, or I don't know, if have to say the word, but you're empathizing with kind of the nonverbal signals that you're getting from me that they're telling you something about what you're saying, back? I might have added that part.
Oh, that's it. Yeah, that's it. So that was Yeah. So they said, another aspect is coming up with sort of a self empathy too. So I'm now sensing into my own experience, right? It's like, okay, like, now I need to sort of settle into where I am, like, what's what's emerging? In Me, I, I have all these ideas. I've been thinking about this definitions. But you know, now I'm sort of saying, Hmm, now what has sort of a priority so since you're sensing into that, too,
so you start asking yourself the question of, you know, you kind of feeling into self empathy more and asking yourself, you know, what is up? What's most kind of rising to the surface? For me, I guess, of all the things I've read about definitions of empathy, and
yeah. And there's so many different things that come up like this. The there's a current definition that I think was popularized by Dan Goleman, of cognitive empathy, emotional affective empathy and empathic concern. And so there's definitions like that, that are that pop up, I think. And there's other academics that have created their own little definitions, constellations, and there's a whole bunch of them out there and so I just I just and I have my own. I have my own constellation. I think my cause is the better one. So yeah.
So there's, there's all sorts of different constellations or different groupings that theorists have come up with to try to parse out this, like, what is empathy? You know, and one is Dan Goldman, I think, he says, there's cognitive affective empathy and empathic concern, but then you have your own kind of idea or constellation of, of how you think about the various components of empathy.
Yeah. And it's like, I keep I get this all the time, everybody, there's, it's just like, I never know what people are talking about. Like, there's another model of empathy, which is the what's his name? Bloom, Paul Bloom, who wrote the against empathy book, and he has a model out there, which he is saying is, you know, if I'm, like, I'm feeling really confused here about, you know, about these definitions and where to go with that. And then you get take that on, so I'm all confused, too, you know, I'm feeling confused, you know, your confusion is kind of affecting me, I'm feeling confused. And then he's saying, Well, that would be empathy. Right? And, and it has has a whole book, and it's like, totally out there. It's all these magazines, everybody's like, Oh, this is all the problems with empathy. And it's like, that is even I don't even consider that empathy, you know, to put he's talking about, I just feel like that's, you know, taking on someone else's emotions or a response to, to what somebodies emotions our feelings are.
Yeah, so you're referencing this book by bloom against empathy. And that bloom is really talking about us against empathy, because maybe he's talking about simply taking on somebody else's entire mental state. So if I'm listening to you talk about confusion around different words for empathy, I would just feel confused and unable to come out of that. But that doesn't sound of course, you might be against that as well. That doesn't sound like empathy to you. That's not how you think of it.
There's a there's another aspect is these definitions, for example, you know, similar, he's calling that empathy. Other people are calling sympathy, empathy, which is I'm here in tears, then you start, you know, feeling sorry for me, that all those definitions, like sympathy, or emotional contagion, or whatever it is that Lim is talking about, they sort of start with empathy, and then they shift to what I would seek is a response, not empathy anymore. So there's that question to have, there's so like, empathy and everything. But there's other something else too, it's like a mixture of some sympathy would be a little bit of empathy, because you had to be able to be sensitive to the other person. And then then there's a response. And they're kind of mixed in together. So that's something I'm really seeing is it's hard to differentiate all these feelings, because they all get missed and wish together, you know, so.
Yeah, so, so I don't know if I caught all but I think I caught the ends of the essence is that you're saying that, then there's all these, there's these other set of definitions that talk about the next step, like not just focusing on the sympathy part of it, or the distress part of it, but the step after that, whether it be an empathic action, or I'm not sure, but you're kind of recalling those theories now. owe yourself
just is, is we win their sympathy to, for me to sympathize with you, if you're in distress, I have to first have a little bit of empathy to sense where you are. And then I have the secondary response, that feeling sorry for you. So there's something I would call empathy. And it's sort of mixed in with the sympathy, you know, so these terms aren't all clean, like their sympathy and empathy. They're, they're kind of like, mixed in together with each other.
Hmm. So you're saying that even before we go to sympathy, we need as a step before that to actually kind of empathize or at least come to know what the person's talking about?
Yeah. Yeah. I feel fully heard. Yeah.
It's really interesting.
So
I have a little bit of that confusion going on. But, um, you know, so I I think I did do the first step of empathy and sympathy at first with what you were saying. It's that confusion as much as it feels muddled, because i use i per separated for a little while when I was doing my dissertation around. Is it sequential? Like, is it a? Is it a? Well, these are my terms. Is it a feeling into somebody or resonating with someone's experience, or sympathizing with it? Like a two step motion, and then coming out of it regaining our balance and going back in? Is it like this? Or is it both of those things happening at the same time? And? Um, well, yeah, that's my first that's my first thoughts.
Yes, I was hearing a little bit of night confusion, but I can't remember the word you had muddled, muddled. Yeah, sense of something muddled, and what the, the, what you were looking at when you're doing your dissertation? Was it? How does empathy work? Is it like, first year empathize. There's a second step, what are those steps, so to happen simultaneously, and so differentiating that was just something you'd look at?
Right. And even I think this is the best chance to try to figure that out is like just talking about it and like, and doing this sort of meta conversation about it. Because I have a sense that it's difficult for everyone to tease apart, because a lot of things are happening simultaneously. A lot of cognitive processes have to be happening at the same time. And so that's my hunch, right? Now, I'm trying that on for size.
So you're just thinking that these processes happen at the same time. And that serious me sort of trying these these out? That's kind of your current thinking, and just trying trying that, that thought out?
Yeah, because in order to even have a, in order to even to actively listen to you, and also to share about my perception of this conversation, I have to sort of, I have to kind of take in what you're saying and check it against what I know. And at the same time, try to stay on track with kind of the goals and the tasks. And so there's a lot of complexity involved. There's a lot of things happening on different levels, it seems
to you're saying that when we are relating, like on this topic, there's a lot of things happening. At the same time you're taking in what I'm saying you're relating it to your own thoughts, and there's just so many different things, experiences, processes, feelings, thoughts kind of all happening simultaneously.
Yeah. And there's just one more piece to this thought, I think, and that's just that. In the psychotherapy, literature, there's something called the treatment Alliance. And that's comprised of the bond between two people, the task that they've agreed upon, and the goals that they've agreed upon. And somehow it occurs to me that just empathy, or having empathy and engaging in an empathic process or empathic circle almost involves all three of those also, keeping those in mind.
Yes, so with the, with an empathic process, you have the goal, there's different aspects, there's sort of the goal, the the intention, you have for, you know, being together, which is create this typology. And there's two others, so isn't
what they owe the task and the bond
on the bond. And that's the bond being the connection, the relationship.
Exactly, yeah.
Now as to if there was a
task, which the task is similar to the bond
role, but I go, Okay, so there's a task goal, and then the bond, there's three kind of aspects of the of it.
Yeah. And maybe empathy is being able to hold all those things, you know, I mean, I wouldn't be being very empathic, if I over emphasized one over the other right now, sort of thing.
So an empathic approach is to hold all of those at the same time and just to focus on one or the other.
I'm wondering, yeah, that's no question for me.
Just sitting with that question. Yeah.
I feel heard.
Yeah, there's something about empathy, I do feel it, it is sensing into the bigger picture somehow to the if there is a sensitivity to the, to a larger Gestalt or something, you know, so yeah, there is something to that.
Yeah. So you're reflecting that it's, there's something about empathy being sensitivity to the larger Gestalt not? Well, maybe you'll say more.
Yeah. And then I do have maybe that muddle meant or whatever is I feel muddled about this topic, because it seems like such a big topic. And I want clarity, but it's just seems like such a Gordian knot to sort of create clarity out of it. So I do feel kind of muddled about this topic. And that's one of the reasons I'm interested in it is, it's pretty handy. Good that whatever you're going to be talking about, like, I'm doing this whole thing on empathy, to have a pretty clear, you know, definition of what I'm talking about. So yeah,
right. So, continuing to reflect on what a not and how muddled it is to kind of tried to think about this topic. But by the same token, realizing how useful is going to be to kind of gain clarity considering you're so interested in a kind of pioneering this empathy circle program. So
it then another thing that comes up is a rough you're familiar familiar with focusing process by Jean gentlemen? So there's also an approach approaching this from a felt sense, right? There's, like, well, what's the felt sense I have about empathy or a typology, it's like, Oh, I feel pain. I feel anguish and pay in for a really I just feel it feels like a pain of this topic. You know, because I, it just, it's just such a mess. It's just, it. I just everybody I talked to them in the academics is even the worst.
Sort of taking the perspective of like Eugene Gamblin, and using focusing, it's like, what's on the outer edge of this? It's like, oh, I It's a pain to think about. It's actually you know, that it's not. There's something foreboding about the task.
Yeah. And it's just, I mean, I've talked, you know, there's this, another community is the Dalai Lama, you know, he came, and he talked to did all these tours around eight or nine years ago, around the states, and all these academics came and, you know, presented to him, and he had a big influence on bringing this whole notion of compassion into, you know, into the academic dialogue. And then, it seemed like the academics, at least, like the cognitive academics are alive. They, they understood the importance of empathy, and that they needed it for for compassion. But the compassion community seems to have an in for empathy somehow, it seems to me, it's like, they, they would like it to be dissolved. Just compassion, you know, forget empathy is my sense. So this is we're now getting some to my pet peeves. around this.
So after the Dalai Lama kind of toward it, the focus on in academia on on compassion kind of blossomed, and there became this kind of, I don't know, like, empathy was sort of devalued. And yeah, it's a compassion. And it's like
the compassion committee and the academics, they can't get rid of empathy. So they got to deal with it, you know, and it's more of the cognitive, the clinicals, you know, therapeutic, like yourself, I guess, are pretty grounded, because I have the felt experience of what it means to listen to someone. But this community has just done a lot. Oh, it's not compassion, fatigue, it's empathy, fatigue, empathy is bad, because I'll have all this stuff. And it just goes on and on. I have a whole list of all the attacks articles or empathy is horrible. You know, you gotta it's I don't know. It's a big frustration of mine to
saying, Yeah, so there's people in the cognitive group that value that that's where it's more that compassion is revered, and empathy is kind of put down, whereas with the clinical psych people, it's like, we have this experience of doing it and we know. Yeah, and so we talk about it more. Yeah,
it has to have the grounding, a better grounding, I think and they experience and, and when Paul Bloom would do his tours of his book, his book is his you know, against empathy for for rational cop rational compassion or something like that. So he's advocating for compassion. And the only people that seem to stand up to him in the Q and A's are the cognitive, or the clinical, the therapist, they would say, this doesn't quite sound like fe, we're calling efficacy in the work that I do. And then, you know, so it was, and then he's referencing work by Tanya singer, who's a German, you know, researcher, and her studies on empathy and compassion are just a total disaster as far as I'm concerned. So, yeah, kind of ranting here, but I have a bit of a was this dealing with all these folks?
So started airing, you know, some concerns around blooms work, and that, you know, when he's talking about his work with stroke, which is strongly rooted in more compassionate and against empathy, there, there are clinical psychologists in his audiences that are saying that's not really quite what we're referring to when we say empathy. And in fact, he's relying on this doctor singers work, which is, has some concerns. There's some flaws in the research. Yeah. So
and then the whole compassion committee references this one study by her where she's sort of diminishing, she's basically saying, well compare empathy doesn't. Empathy is sort of bad, you'll kind of get this burnout, you really have to have compassion. You know, so she's, she's kind of she's kind of disses empathy, and says, You gotta have compassion, and and all the, you know, the, you know, Stanford, you know, the, you know, the compassion Research Center, you know, they all reference this work, right? The David Richie, over in Wisconsin, or wherever, you know, he's got a compassion center. And they're referencing that one study is this one study just shows. And then the whole, their whole compassion is out, like, let's trash empathy.
So there's like a very heavy reliance on this one study by singer and there's like, a whole movement of research that's kind of built on that one study and turning against empathy and towards compassion. Yeah, that's how they justify it, I guess.
Yeah. And it all comes down again, to definitions. We don't know what the heck, I don't know, what the heck anybody's talking about when there could be that with the definition. So again, just my frustration, you know, talking about the felt the experience, just the frustration with this confusion out there, it's just it's just inhibiting that confusion is just inhibiting constructive, you know, rapid forward progress, I think with the with an empathy movement.
Yeah. So there's some frustration because the confusion about what it is really thwarts forward movement in from in the field.
Yeah, I feel fully heard. Yeah, thanks. Sure. That out?
Yeah, he's gonna clear it out. Um, yeah, I It's funny, because I maybe because you have I feel very clear all of a sudden, as opposed to times in the past when it was my turn to speak. And maybe it's because what you were saying felt? Like, you know, I felt very clear about the frustration that you felt underneath it, or maybe kind of the annoyance about kind of reading some of the stuff that that hasn't been commensurate with your experience. Like, there's no doubt kind of, for me, or not a lot of doubt about how you must have been feeling about that. And so I'm noticing I have a very clear mind.
Yeah, sounds like by hearing my frustration, my felt experience and what frustrated me about the definitions, that's create a sense of feeling of clarity for you to be able to hear hear that?
Yeah, I feel like I got, you know, I got to hit like a restart button with, you know, gaining some other, you know, relative certainty about what you were trying to convey.
Hmm. So is it you got a sense of more clarity about where I'm wanting to go with this, or the larger picture of the typology and maybe the motivations and the underlying, you know, reasons and stuff for it?
Yes, I think so. And, I mean, I think I got I think I understood different aspects of what you were saying due to
um,
I don't know, I think it had to do it has to do with my understanding of my own experiences and how things tend to get popularized, that may not necessarily reflect the most accurate phenomenon or phenomena that exist. But that kind of snowball or catch steam because of these various events that line up perfectly. From the Dalai Lama coming to speak to maybe this article coming out to then other people in the cognitive psychology realm kind of catching on to this certain stream of thinking.
So I think I'm hearing the this, this, this process of how the these terms, kind of these understanding happen, maps onto what you've seen, with how definitions terms get popular in the culture, they might not be the most nuanced, but there's these this series of just events that kind of happens to make this concept and a popular out in the in the culture.
Yeah, exactly. Um, and I felt good, I think in being able to reference some research that is also very kind of left brain rational. But that shows that like, research and social neuroscience that shows that different areas of the brain get activated in empathy, and some of them do have to do with personal stress, but a lot of them don't, a lot of them are related to self other differentiation, or cognitive empathy. And fMRI measures show that so I wonder what, what would be the response to work like that, you know, by people that are saying empathy is wrong on the basis that they're kind of thinking more of this personal distress sympathy?
So you're referencing fMRI are studies, so cognitive, physiological studies that show that different parts of the brain are activated with with empathy? And you're wondering how that sort of understanding would, how that would be understood by people who are sort of critical of empathy?
Yeah, I mean, are the other limitations to that social neuroscience research that maybe they would point to to say, you know, that's not you know, perhaps that's a possibility. Um, but,
so maybe some way of kind of conveying to them and understanding maybe of empathy.
Yeah. And that there's much more going on in empathy than just, there's so much more difficult to criticize something if it's, you know, like, empathy is more wide, more encompassing than just like one of these. One of these components like it's, I think it's much more difficult, then some definitions, would you lead you to believe like, there's all these people that people accuse Kohut, Heinz co Ed, of saying that empathy is more like emotional contagion, or just it's more of a sensory experience that we're just as, it's just a completely natural thing for everyone. And people were saying, well, that's, that's just emotional contagion, that's present within like, the first days of life, that can't be it. And then kowhai came back and said, No, that's not what I meant. I meant that it. There's different developmental levels of empathy. And so it was more complex, I guess, his critics, he felt his critics missed it, what he was saying, and he was actually saying, there's different levels of empathy,
though, coho would first use explain what he meant by empathy. People criticize that saying, oh, that's just emotional contagion. But what he really wanted to express this, there's different developmental levels of of empathy. And yeah, so.
Yeah. And that's when he said in a speech, like shortly before his death, I think in 1981, he came back and said that he said, you know, well, there's there is that level of empathy that children are capable of doing, you know, that they get, they see someone sad, they become sad, like there's an emotional contagion component, but hopefully, as you develop, and you have the capacity to also kind of make an interpretation, you know, feedback to somebody kind of what they said in different terms, or you're capable of more advanced levels of empathy. So
So he he's explaining that, you know, a child could feel sad if someone else is, is they're seeing that sad. But then there's other developmental, maybe having a bigger picture context of that sadness or have other levels that could be added that no, if I quite got all of that,
that's it like, and it ties into Rogers, it's like, knowing on a fundamental level that like, I'm listening to you, you might be feeling sad. And I feel sad, but knowing on a deep level that it's not my sadness, it's not my experience. It's as if I'm having as if I'm you reflecting on your experience. That's a developmental achievement to be able to do that. And so how to put that into words or, you know, so yeah, so that's what my mind's kind of whirling around.
Yeah. So one of the aspects of empathy is that, you know, sensing someone else's feelings, so that emotional contagion, but there's a differentiation, there's another level of you had that self other differentiation, that, Oh, I'm sensing the sadness, hey, it's not my sadness, it's the other person sadness. So that's another level of empathy is being able to differentiate self and other
Yeah, and not get lost in it not feel like, Oh, my God, this is reminding me so much of when this happened to me, I just can't, I can't even bear to, you know, continue that when that feels so distressed by this because my memory is now filling my consciousness and I can't even you know, now then when it's your turn to talk, I can't even here, I'm just so overwhelmed. You know, obviously, that's not empathic anymore.
So you're seeing another aspect is that if I'm listening to you, and I started thinking, Oh, this is reminding me of all the things, you know, my experience any trauma or something, it's sort of flooding my brain, I'm sort of becoming full of that, that I no longer have the capacity to reflect back, I've sort of lost, I become self absorbed, instead of being sort of present with with you and we're, you're going.
Yeah, so I feel very hurt. I think that was it for now. Yeah.
Okay. Yeah, I was thinking maybe I could start with how I'm defining empathy. And it's coming from Rogers. And from the origination of the word, you know, the, I'm feeling from the German, his two cents into the experience of someone else. So as I'm here, I'm seeing your focus, I'm sensing your concentration, your a sense, your acknowledgement, you know, your head shaking. So I sense it. And also I can sense the level, right, it's like how fast you're shaking your head, there's a level of energy that I can sense to from from you. So for me, the empathy is sensing into your experience is kind of a core of what I'm calling empathy.
Okay, so you're referencing on for long, which is the first I guess, usage of the empathy constructor, the closest thing to empathy that's been used, and it's really your, your idea is that empathy is sensing into somebody else's experience, like, not includes everything that they're doing or saying, even the listeners nodding or nonverbal acknowledgments. And so that that's sort of where you're starting with your definition.
Yeah, and it's the German to feel into it in feeling feeling so is to feel into and now I'll go into into the how the word was originally was more projection may projecting into the other person or the thing. But now it's, it's sensing into so that sensing into and especially the, you know, the thoughts feelings, but the more the deeper sense, the most are the felt, you know, the feelings of the other person is sort of a deeper sensing into the felt experience. I think that was the, that's sort of the core of it to be sensitive also to the felt experience and fence, that of it just being a cognitive trying to understand or analyze, but really, you know, be present sense into, you know, some one else or others or a group or what have you.
Yeah, so you're emphasizing, you're not going to go into the projecting into which was an originally started as a year to emphasizing that it's really into, it's really about sensing into the other person's experience as much as possible.
It's And then the other part, and that's what we do in the empathy circle to bring it around. And what we're doing now is by hearing the reflection, you know, what, when I reflect back, if I'm, if I'm reflecting back, if you're the speaker, that helps me in that process of sensing into it, it helps me to focus on you, it helps me to really sense get a sense. And it just, it's a little, it's a tool, it's a little practice that helps with that process. And what you're doing with me, it's helping, yeah, me too.
Right. So you're saying, your your reasoning is that what we do with the active listening is, we use that as a tool to help us to sense it further into what somebody else is saying.
And so that's the first part, I just call that empathy. For me, that's what empathy is sensing into. There's the self empathy, which is, so seeing what's emerging and myself sort of a sensing into my own experience. And it's like, is some of these ideas feelings sort of emerge out of somewhere? They come out of the void. Yeah, they just into into my awareness, and so that sensing into I would say is like a self empathy.
Mm hmm. Okay, so then after sensing into the other person's experience, through active listening, you sense into your own experience through self empathy? And sort of, you know, ask yourself, Where are these thoughts and feelings coming from and sort of start to kind of rummage maybe I'm adding, but
yeah, it's, it's more just sensing what's coming up. And they're happening, it's happening at the same time, right? It's like these, again, I think that was something we sort of talked about is that these phenomenon are sort of happening simultaneously. So like parallel processing, right? It's not like one thing or the other, it's a lot of processes happen at the same time.
So you're feeling like, or you're saying that the einfuhrung feeling into what someone's saying is happening pretty much at the same time as the self empathy or the sensing into oneself.
And actually, you being present. And just hearing me in reflect back is actually giving me space to sense more deeply into my own experience. So it's, it's creating a space and a presence and a companionship for me to actually not have to compete to be heard or whatever, and all that distraction, it's allowing, it's very supportive for me to sense into my own experience or empathize with what's going on with me.
So as you're being actively listened to, it's supporting you, and the self empathy and feeling more into your own experience, you're kind of becoming more grounded into your own experience, which is very, yeah,
yeah. And then the other aspect in terms of those layers that you're talking about developmental. The other one is what I would call imaginative empathy. which I like better than perspective taking and or cognitive empathy, which is sometimes they're kind of overlapping that the imaginative empathy is that I can imagine myself in a role, so I could speak now. Like, I am Donald Trump, and I want to own the world, you know, so I can sort of take on that. And I can just imagine myself being him or anyone else, or like Meryl Streep, imagine being, you know, who's a cook, Julia Child's, you know, step into that role. So we can we have the ability to step into a role. And imagine what it's like, I can maybe step into your role and just imagine what it would like, be like to be you, I can sort of imagine myself in the future, which I do all the time. Like, oh, I'm going to work on defense, which needs to be fixed. And I imagined doing the processes, and I, and I know what, oh, I imagine I feel the experience, and I know what tools maybe I need to get or, or something. So the imagine of empathy is being we can take any perspective, we can take a role and of any, you know, anything, I can be a banana, like, what does it feel like to be a banana? So that's what I'm calling imaginative empathy. And I think it's a sexier term than cogs. Like, everybody wants imagination? Who wants cognitive?
Yeah, so you're relating. You're bringing this other dimension besides feeling into einfuhrung and self empathy, you're bringing this third dimension in imaginative empathy. which enables you to truly put yourself in somebody else's whole way of being. So you could embody Donald Trump that you're talking about and, and all the grandiosity, you could you could even embody, or try to imagine what it would be like to be me or somebody, you know, right in front of you, and that might assist you in the process.
And myself in the future to I think that's a that's like a, that's an imaginative empathy that is not really talked about that. Yeah, we can take that role, too. So there's something about the role taking, there's an aspect of empathy, that's hugely powerful, and that we can take any role. And it totally creates a, you know, multi role, world that we can it's, and we can sense into, into into that so. And I think that that overlaps, you're talking about to dismantle a mental, that that sort of this, I don't know, if you really heard of the SallyAnn test were kids take the perspective of someone else. And that happens in about a year and a half for something where they can start role taking under so I think it overlaps with that developmental model you're talking about.
Okay, okay. So I so you're further saying that imaginative empathy, while you added on that, you know, another application is to empathize with oneself in the future, which is beneficial. But this is a really important aspect of empathy, because it's, it enables us to imagine what it would be like to be nearly anyone and through that process, we can, we can access empathy for anyone, if we can imagine themselves ourselves in their same role, or in their same with their same point of view.
It's very powerful. And then the other part would be relational empathy, which is what we were talking about, you know, as we're listening, we're kind of doing all these things that kind of like the same time, you know, so it's, it's sort of the perspective of the relationship for most of the definitions of empathy that I see. It's from a perspective of an individual, this individual empathizing with someone else, which is almost like a self individualistic perspective, perspective. And the the relational perspective, that we are in a relationship here, there's the cultural relationship, there's family relationships, that you can have a sense of the hole to, and you can take the perspective, not only can you take the perspective of a person, you can take the perspective of a group or, and so that's, again, that power of the, of that imagination.
Right? So you're reflecting that most of the theories are talking about empathy from the perspective of the individual towards another individual and this other terms like, imagine an imaginative empathy and relational empathy refer to kind of acknowledging that larger Gestalt? Yeah, getting the whole whole group or a whole population into mind even
Yeah, I feel very heard or heard.
Um so I'm just I'm like, I'm playing around with the separate terms in my own mind of the einfuhrung, the the self empathy, the imaginative empathy, the relational empathy, I'm just kind of playing around with those terms. But then at the same time, I'm also observing the shift in my own mind, as the dust settles from kind of listening and taking things in and and I guess, feeling into what was heard in a different way, kind of shifting into a more self empathy mode, like how Okay, so how does all of that what I just felt into how does that all fit with who I am? What I know what I think, you know, so yeah, like shifting from a bit of it's like, almost like standing on one side of the room and then looking at it from the other perspective, which really allows me to kind of take it in in a deeper way, kind of what you were saying.
So, you you're you were listening to what I was saying and there was these different concepts, you're sort of taking those concepts and, and you're in one part of the room sort of taking, that those concepts and Now you're stepping into another part of the room, which is your own models, your own experiences and trying to see how that model those feelings, those thoughts kind of fit with the so the models perspective pictures you have,
right? Yes, exactly. And I, so I, I resonate with the idea of einfuhrung sensing into. And then I resonate with the idea of self empathy. And I think I'm starting to get a handle of when each of those gets rises to the surface, you know, that when I'm listening, I'm really kind of feeling into as much as possible what the other person saying. And then when it's my turn to speak or mirror back, I feel like I'm really going into myself and what I think so that's pretty clear to me so far,
creating some differentiation between these experiences that when you're listening, you're seeing that that's sensing into someone's experience. And then when you're reflecting, you're kind of going into your own understanding to reflect back and seeing that self empathy, and you're kind of getting a sense of that. So.
Right? And that it's not that when I'm listening to you, all the other ones are not even present they are, but one just gets prioritize. But but but on an on, maybe a level underneath that there's still self empathy and imaginative empathy going on, but they're just not what's most active, what my mind's most actively working with? That's kind of what I'm thinking.
Yeah, so you're thinking or sensing is that all these different qualities are happening at the same time. But some one or the other gets focused on gets more attention, the other ones may be received back. And that's sort of a model you have of what you're seeing. So the dynamic of, of how this, how these qualities interrelate.
Right? And I'm trying, as I'm hearing you reflect that back, I'm wondering, but how do I know that? How do I know that the other types of empathy are still present, even if one is privileged? And I think I know that because I have to have certain reference points for what I'm hearing when I'm listening to it. So in order to feel into what you're saying, and actually understand it, I have to, I have to self emphasize at least a little bit, or imaginative empathy a little bit in order to kind of even know, you know, what is I'm working with type of thing, what what is the thing that I'm feeling into as I'm doing it? If that makes sense, yeah, you're
trying to kind of say, How did you know that this these, these qualities are happening at the same time? Like, What's the proof? Or is the how do you how do you sort of prove this, and you're, and you're saying that you're needing that self empathy to even take in and sort of be able to reflect back what you're hearing it is, it's needing some sense of yourself, your sense, your own experience, your own vocabulary, your own experience to be able to reflect that. So that's sort of like the proof that you can point to that this is happening at the same time.
Right? It all, it almost like becomes a filter for the other. Like, those things become a filter for the feeling into or something like that they, but they greatly impact. You know, what I am actively listening into what I choose to actively listen into, or feel myself into. Because if you say something, and I have no reference point, and I don't even know what those words mean, then I can't feel into them. Yeah,
yeah. So you're saying that sense of self is like a filter that influences what you're receiving from me. And it's filtering through your own experience. And if you don't have any context within yourself, it's hard to kind of you in reflect that Fuzhou has no context or no. Get something the reference.
Yeah. So. So from that standpoint, like I feel like I have a little bit more of a handle on when I feel into what you're saying, versus when I feel into what I'm saying. I think what I'm less clear about is when do I go to imagination? And so that just is remains a question, but that's kind of what I have for now. I think.
Yes, you're trying to integrate what was I was saying you're, you're referencing the The Empathy, the self empathy and finding sort of experiences in yourself that you can point to that make sense of that. And then you're just thinking of us the imagine of empathy. You know, where, where do I experience that you're thinking I just, maybe I'll just sit with it, and maybe you'll be able to identify that at some point.
Yeah, that's right. I feel very heard. I think that's all for now. For me. All right. Yeah.
Okay. So yeah, the, I guess I was interested in what your how you were using the word empathy. So you know, I kind of laid out some of the basic framework that I was using for it. So I'm wondering how have you been using it? In your in your studies and work?
So you were just you were laying out how you've been thinking about it. But you still have a question about, you know, how maybe I've been thinking about it or using it in my work.
Yeah. So I feel fully heard. Okay.
Do you want me to go now? Yeah. Okay.
Yeah. I'm sad.
Yeah. Yeah, that's a that's huge curiosity. So, I think I think that's why, for me, the two components of feeling into and self empathy resonate, because I have, that's what I came to, with my own thinking is those zeroing in on those two? And I think part of why I zeroed in on? Well, I don't know, I mean, I Well, I was just thinking about the dyad. And so then you're saying that? Um, well, also, I can add more to that in a moment.
Okay. So there was resonance with your own thinking about empathy, in terms of the sensing into as well as the self empathy. So from your research in your work, that's kind of where you were to sounds like that basic understanding or model was something that you had, yeah, been using.
Yeah, and part of how I came to that I know, we spoke about this before, so I won't say everything again. But I will add on to some of our conversation, because I've thought I've had some thoughts since then, that would be great to hear your thoughts about too. But part of how I came to that as an important model is because I observed that for myself, I think I would feel into what the person was saying, and then maybe, and then maybe make too many connections or assumptions about where they were going forward. And that ended up when I then started to speak, it ended up feeling on empathic, I think, or it ended up coming off as less empathic as as it could have, because it sort of missed the mark, it went further than the person was at. And so that was a way in which I felt that I had been feeling in too much to what they were saying, without regaining my balance. And I've met other people, trainees and people in my life that will go the other direction and sort of not meet the person where they're out because they are so regulated, or kind of hold back too much. And so that was like, the first thing that I noticed is that these are, this is the way that people err. And it's actually very deep rooted in who they are, how they were brought up. And, you know, for better or worse, like, very deeply ingrained type of proclivities or tendencies, I guess.
So you were, it sounds like in your work and your therapeutic listening, that you would you find that you had sense into but kind of go farther than the person was, maybe a couple steps farther. And it didn't feel empathic that there was something it was sort of missing. And some people you're seeing don't even meet people where they are, they're kind of like more withdrawn or, and that. So seeing that celebrate that dynamic was painful or uncomfortable, or you're noticing something was missing there. And so that's where you sort of develop that understanding of empathy, being sort of present with where the person is that
yeah, exactly. And being that that empathy necessitates in that we're intra psychically balanced, so
huh. So it's the other part is like, who is the listener and where are they in? What's their filters or their ballot? How balanced are they? What's their approach? So you're, and that's for this sort of the self empathy of the cell phone? Where is the person became for anklet?
Yeah. Yeah. Um, yeah, I feel heard, the only thing I would add is that this this idea, like another dialectic has a main definition, but also has a sub definition, which is like these, it talks about opposing tensions. And so that's where I came up with that empathic dialectic term, that the empathic empathy is like a dialectic or an ability to hold these two tensions without succumbing to one or the other. So I might be listening to you and you get very sad. And there's suddenly attention and in me before between regulating myself, so I don't go into that pit of sadness. And then the other side of that tension would be falling into that pit, and feeling, recalling my own memories that are similar to what you're saying, or something like that. And so if I'm able to hold that tension, effectively, then I can go between the two, like, I can actually say, you feel that and recalling memories of my own, but also you all but also, you know, soothe myself in a way that allows me to stay present in the moment.
So that you're you're looking at is the so that dialectic of, of the the the other person yourself and sort of the relationship having sort of a, I don't know if it's a bigger picture, or just having an awareness of the relationship, and then how do you stay grounded, adding that word, but not not being sort of overwhelmed by the other or vice versa? So there's a sense of holding the different, the dialectic and awareness of that dialectic. Yeah, in awareness.
100%. And I think I'm, as I'm listening to, you reflect back what I said, I think the way that our ways of thinking about empathy differ is that I feel like I was intensely focused on this, this, the, the, the therapists own mind, but also the dyad. And but even more than the dyad, the therapists own mind, and you're really kind of expanding this empathy to, to more culture, rather than to just a dyad. So that might change the way we talk about it. Therapeutic empathy. In fact, this is something I was trying to say might be different than empathy.
So you have there's a broader approaching the empathy from a broader cultural dynamic, where is the client, sort of a therapeutic empathy might have a smaller, narrower scope of experience? And that might be a difference there?
Yeah, I feel very hurt. That's
hmm. Yeah, I think of, you know, Carl Rogers, and he's, that's pretty much the work, you know, is doing is pretty much based on his empathic listening. Even, you know, his definitions and the experiences, he you know, he just defined, he kind of laid out the landscape that seems to me so well, in such simple language, like that paper you sent me, it's so accessible compared to, you know, the some of these academic papers with all the formulas and all that. So it's just, it's very readable. It's very accessible. So yeah, so I think there is the empathy. My definitions are, I think, are grounded in his work.
So you're saying that you gravitate towards Rogers, because it's just so accessible? And so you've grounded a lot of your work and your theory about empathy in Rogers? Kind of ideas?
Yeah. And it's, I think that what's missing? Yeah, so what, what came up when you're talking about the the therapist, the therapeutic empathy? I would call that emergency. That's the term I use. And if you're in the NBC community, they call it emergency empathy to is that when people are in high degrees of stress, that you know, you can't it's there you just know that you can't any you're yourself. You're grounded in empathy, you know that they don't have the capacity to listen, right? Because they're in such distress. So you bring them and emergency empathy, which is they just get the empathy back. they need. So yeah, so that I try to create that therapeutic empathy. And in this emergency empathy.
Interesting. So you're saying like, what I was describing is therapeutic empathy, you see more as emergency empathy, which you would use if someone's like, really super distressed, like, severely distressed?
Yeah. And I think that there's a one of the problems. I mean, I see the problem with the therapeutic empathy. Is that it? It's, so the model I've used is like World War One, right? It's like, there's all these millions of soldiers out there killing each other. And then the nurses and doctors and nurses come, and then they offer, you know, they'll help and whatever, they'll kind of help her deal with gas, right, the gas poisoning, and so they're helping in that, that distress, but they're not looking at the overall culture and all the political dynamics that's causing that, right. So the health care, in a sense, is just dealing with, its maintaining the social structures that are sort of antium empathy. And it seems to me that the therapeutic, that with the mutuality, is saying, Hey, I'm going to teach you how to do an empathy circle, I'm going to teach you these skills, go ahead and do it in your family. And let's sort of transform the the entire culture so that it has more empathy in the entire culture. So yeah,
right. Okay. So I think I have it so like, you're you're you're relating it to something like a war zone, World War One or something that, you know, immediate medical treatment by nurses and doctors on site, and it becomes very intensely about the patient, and maybe the therapist secondarily. But it's, it's totally isolated from the larger culture, familial or kind of societal in wish it exists. So there's no or minimal impact on that.
It's not addressing the upstream causes of all this, it's like, let's patch them up and throw them back into the floor, right? Where they'll go get beat up and shot up again. So it seems to me that the therapy therapy should be about teaching people how to do both sides of me of the empathy, there's the emergency empathy, like, Hey, this is a crisis, there's been an accident, you know, the person's falling apart, they're suicidal, you got to be there, present forum. And all those skills, you know, therapists have is, you know, for sort of emergency empathy, but then you kind of once they're grounded enough, they need to be learning the next, you know, the next level of being able to empathize with others, is if they don't, they're going to be in the same mess that they're in, to begin with in generalizations. Right? There's all kinds of some of these are just generalizations.
Yeah. So I hear you saying in, just kind of summarize is that one way of help of expanding the therapeutic context between patient and therapist of a larger context is by actually working with the patient to develop those empathic skills in themselves, because it stands a better chance of altering their physical, or their emotional social environment.
Yeah, if anyone had empathy circles with their family, who they're kind of feeling totally dysfunctional about is, you know, that that might actually start helping to heal those dynamics, which would be actually healing what it is that they're there with a therapist for.
So you're saying like, it's sort of empowers them? Most specifically, like you're pointing most specifically to the family context, and that it empowers them to kind of make a difference there, which is presumably what why they came or, you know, the origins of maybe their distress for being in therapy in the first place.
Yeah, so I guess I'm wondering, like, how does that land with you in terms of the therapeutic, you know, you're saying therapeutic, what would be the, the container of that therapeutic empathy, where there's just the therapist and the client, you know, besides like, emergency empathy, that people don't have the empathy in their family in their environment, the culture is beating the shit out of them. And, you know, the Yeah. So within that context, I guess I'm wondering what you're trying to hone in on what you mean by therapeutic empathy.
So I hear you asking, like, does it make sense the comparison that you're making between therapeutic empathy and emergency empathy? And, you know, Yeah, bigger
picture is bigger cultural empathy, they seem to relate. So yeah, so I feel fully heard. Right, great.
Um so I feel like that's a really good question that you asked at the end. And I was really tracking with you. As you're talking about this, it's helping me put some of my work and thinking kind of in a larger context. And well, that's my first. But I think so Okay, so here's what drives I think most of. So this is interesting, what you're saying. So when, you know, I tend to like gravitate towards psychoanalysis and psychodynamic approaches, and, of course, that, you know, Freud is kind of like the father of psychoanalysis. And he said, like, the therapist shouldn't really feel a whole lot or have a whole lot of countertransference, towards the patient. And, and so that, that really influences this whole concept of empathy and therapeutic empathy and what we do with it, you know, you're suggesting that the an ideal endpoint would be to move towards mutual empathy between the therapist and the patient. And I think, in fact, that is what happens in successful in the most successful therapeutic treatments. But I think it requires like, moving into contemporary ways of seeing therapy in a way from what Freud was getting at. And it requires the therapist to actually not only accept that they're going to feel things in response to what the patient says and does. But also it, it requires that the therapist can actually use those things to facilitate the treatment.
If I got this, so you're coming from psychoanalysis, Freudian sort of view, where the therapist is not sort of take on the feelings, so that would be kind of considered countertransference, or you're wanting to keep so that that distance, and you're, you're seeing that, actually, in terms of if you're doing therapy, it does start becoming relational. Over time, so that you do see that that progression happening, or,
you know, you got what I said, but I'm not sure what I said was 100%. Clear, like, so. Since Freud, the field has moved towards these more relational ways of seeing therapy, that that except that the therapist is going to have their own feelings, and that that suggests that the therapists should do their best to kind of use those feelings not to deny that they exist. And, and I'm hearing your, you're speaking about having a goal of moving the therapist and patient toward a space of more mutual empathy as being even more relational, as moving in a more even more relational direction. Then kind of, then even the more relational theorists,
okay, so you're saying that there is, it was seen as the Freudian is, but is more sort of detached. It's seen as listening. But there's this trend towards the relational. And now there's more, which sounds a bit in the theory and the practice, that the therapist his senses has their own feelings. And so he uses those in terms of in terms of the therapeutic relationship, and you're seeing what I'm talking about is even farther over. It's on a spectrum from counselor detachment, to individual detachment, client, therapist to relational there's sort of this spectrum and that, that you're seeing me way over on the word relational.
Yeah. But I think it's a it's a cool idea for paper almost, because it's like, even, you know, even relational theorists, like, contemporary relational theorists would say that empathy therapists empathy, so important, therapists should use their kind of transference and all that to empathize. That, but I don't know of anyone that mentions mutual empathy as being an important end goal. And that sounds really cool. I mean, I agree. Yeah,
yeah. So Screven ba A good topic for paper and mutual empathy as a goal, it's kind of pushing the, you know, pushing it way over to the relational side and in the whole field, maybe so it'd be maybe something unique and be a good topic.
Yeah. It even makes me consider that that term that you used a relational empathy is something that maybe grows over time. That that kind of Yeah. Yeah. I don't I don't know if I have more ideas beyond that. But like is, it's not it's not the sort of moment by moment thing that happens between self and other empathy, but it's something that actually progressively becomes more and more salient in the treatment through me.
Yeah, yeah. So there's this definition of empathy as moment to moment being sensitive to the felt experience of someone else. Whereas relational empathy has sort of a different definition that there's some other dynamics to explain what that dynamic is. You'd have to describe it differently would be more than just a moment to moment. Definition?
I think so. Yeah. Yeah, and I feel hurt by that. And I, I'm trying to think if there's anything else in there, I mean, you asked what do I think about this emergency empathy? And will so I guess, taking everything I've said so far, I mean, I would agree with you if we stay like strictly with the theory, but when I think about how therapy actually unfolds and happens, I think it's not, you know, it can't can't be strictly understood as like an emergency type, rigid. Empathy in quite the same way that it's a lot more complex, and things do open up to maybe a more mutual sort of empathy as the relationship builds over time.
Yeah, sort of saying about emergency empathy with her therapeutic is it's more complex than that. Yeah, it's not it because it's more complex, and it emerges, it develops the relationship emerges over time.
Yeah. And I appreciate this conversation, because it's made me realize that that's maybe another dimension, I hadn't thought about that over time that that empathy, they have an empathic process actually changes shape becomes more mutual, the therapist learns to trust you know, the therapist and patient learn to trust each other and then share more thoughts and feelings between one another, even if the therapist doesn't do full disclosures or anything like that, they might make more of their thoughts about what the patient's saying, known, they might feel safer to check things out and not as worried about how the patient will react. And so in that way, it becomes much more mutual.
So in that there is a sort of an emergence or a relational aspect within the client therapist, where it's, there is a development that's happening there. And how do you explain that longer term development? How would you define that? Or explain that? And so you're just starting to think about that?
Yeah. Yep. I feel very hurt.
Okay, I don't want to keep us on time, too. I think he said an hour and a half, I don't want to over you know, if you need to go they, I did want to mention that in terms of relational empathy, there was some work done by Judith Jordan, or if you know, her, at Wellesley, so they seem to sort of touch on relational empathy and start sort of mapping that out. And then suddenly, you stop hearing anything from them. So I don't know what happened to that group. But I did get a lot from reading their work.
Yeah, I've read a little bit about that, too. I'm okay. going till 745. If you want to make sure, yeah. Um,
you can reflect that back, just saying yes. To this relational aspect of you. I think that's really the I mean, that's what the focus, that's why I use the word culture of empathy to name that larger culture, that it seems to me that the the aspect of empathy, I mean, it's like gold was discovered by, you know, by Rogers and his work, and it just doesn't seem to be permeating he seemed like he had intentions to kind of spread it throughout the culture and in, you know, schools and work and, and other places, but somehow it didn't catch on. And I think that that's something I mean, that's what I think is needed, is that bringing these tools because it's a real foundational practice and terminology to the larger culture.
Yeah. So you're saying you've recommended this book by Judah Jordan two, that says more about relational empathy. So then maybe that would be your mutual empathy. But going back to Rogers that you think that really has the most applicability. And you're wondering why it hasn't been kind of mean, everyone, a lot of people have heard of Carl Rogers, but hasn't been taken up by schools and therapists in the way that Rogers had intended. And, you know, why is that?
Yeah, taking it out of the therapeutic area, still a lot in the therapeutic, and it's in the mediation, but it hasn't come into the political, social, you know, why is it not taught from the first, you know, grade and in, you know, in schools, we're just learning those skills. And so there's been some kind of a block, and I don't quite understand why it. And I mean, that's kind of what I'm wanting to do. I see the empathy circle as a practice to something that's just tangible, it's easy to, you know, bring into any context. Yeah. And that's again, I'll just add, that's why the definitions is so important. Let's so we can be talking about the same terminology here.
Yeah. Yeah, exactly. Um, so you're saying that this is empathy circle. And the empathy topology is one way to kind of spread the word that for some reason, for whatever reason, therapists and mediators picked up this Carl Rogers, empathy ideas, but it hasn't been spread in the way that it really could you don't think?
Yeah. And the empathic listening that he did is that client therapist relationship, that's what the empathy circle is, is just taking it. So the next step, let's do it mutually mutuality, the horrible. Hendrix are hunters a couple of A, they built on Rogers work in for relationships, they call it a Mago relationship. So they had, you know, tools and practices for, you know, relationships to use empathy. So they brought into the relational. And so I do see the empathy circle is just bringing it into kind of the next step. You know, let's make it really relational. So each person can speak and everybody gets heard, and but it's all using that same foundational active listening, and all the definitions that he you know, laid out. Were all very useful for that, too.
Yeah. So the empathy circle includes work by Orval hunt,
I know it doesn't it? Well. They use mutual listening. It's like they use empathic listening in couples is just,
Oh, okay. So kind of like sentiment of that. And not it? Yeah, it's just so you've created the empathy circles, which serves to kind of disseminate some of Rogers ideas. And yeah, and it's a way to practice these, this act of listening. And it's a way that can be quickly taken up by people, if they so choose, like, even in the first grade, you know, being taught these tools, and what a difference anyway.
And I think that's why, you know, I'm excited about the talking about the typology. I mean, typology is saying all the different ways people are using the term empathy, and then, but also be able to reference to, you know, what we're meaning or what I'm meaning within the context of the empathy circle to so that there's just some sort of clarity in terms of definitions, you know, so yeah, I think it would just help that movement, bring empathy into all these different contexts.
Yeah. Yeah. So it would just help the movement to bring these empathy circles into these different contexts and also have a topology that pointed out at each moment in the empathy circle what what kind of empathy is being relied upon or utilized?
Yeah, I feel fully heard. Cool.
Um Well, I have I'm really enjoying this conversation quite a lot, but I'm also feeling my energy level, you know, but yeah, so I'm realizing I'm coming up against my human limits right now. But it's, I don't know I just think this is can be very cool and and it's gonna be fun to try to discern, you know, what elements of empathy are most
are most manifest at certain parts of the empathy circle and when You know, when are they most manifested? And kind of how? And? Yeah, and for what purpose?
So you're feeling like you're coming up to your limits of interests. And but it's it's fun and and you're saying it'll be fun to explore this. And you're, you're looking at where does empathy manifest in the empathy in the context of the empathy circle too. So just thinking about how it maps the different phenomenon within the empathy circle?
Yeah, and I think I said, I mean, it certainly came to some new insights myself and kind of wonder, you know, I feel like it was a start. I know, you've been thinking about this for a long time. But I wonder if you've, you know, kind of agree or what part feels most muddled? Or maybe we'll get to more ground next time, you know?
Yeah. I just open it up. Just yeah, discussion without the reflection. Yeah, I find it very helpful. I had wanted to just, you know, you're very, you've got the experience, you've looked at all the literature. So I think it's really good person to talk to about this and explore this. And open it up to you know, a few others who kind of have some background and empathy to, you know, they can even watch the video or, you know, just pick up wherever, to have those multiple perspectives and just see what emerges. Without too much pressure right. Now, we got to make something kind of happen. So yeah, I'm enjoying it. And I've gotten a lot of insights, too. I think it's just helpful. I think the dialogic is just important to get clarity and explore and is it's fun. Yeah. So,
yeah, I'm looking forward to doing a little, you know, a little more reading of some of this stuff. Cuz there was some work that was mentioned that I haven't gotten into yet, so that'll be really good, too.
Okay, so what do you want to keep the same time slot? Or do you have a different
shirt? For me? Or even? Yeah, six is probably the best, best case scenario on Wednesdays.
Yeah. Okay. Then we'll see you next week. And are you coming Saturday? Or you're saying that it's hard to do both or?
Yeah, it's hard. Um, I'll probably have a lot of prep on Saturday, but um, I can double check and get back to you. Yeah.
Yeah. Okay, whatever works great. So see, otherwise, see you next week. And okay, thanks. So post this too. I'll send that off on YouTube.
