, PhD Candidate of English,聽听补苍诲听, Assistant Professor in Literature, the Environment, and Climate Change,聽.
During on Joe Rogan鈥檚 podcast, Elon Musk levelled a critique at empathy, calling it 鈥渢he fundamental weakness of western civilization.鈥�
If your first instinct is to brush this off as another example of , we suggest you think again. As journalist Julia Carrie Wong noted in The Guardian in April, Musk鈥檚 comments have appeared
A diverse coalition of figures have taken up this 鈥�,鈥� including pastor Joe Rigney, conservative podcaster Allie Beth Stuckey and marketing professor Gad Saad.
Each has coined their own meme-able phrase: 鈥�,鈥� 鈥溾�� and 鈥�,鈥� respectively.
You may find a war on empathy perplexing 鈥� even downright dangerous 鈥� given that our contemporary global historical moment is one marked by , and .
Doesn鈥檛 this moment call out for more empathy rather than less?
What is empathy anyway?
But first, we need to know what we are talking about.
Some recent criticisms of empathy have been premised on bad definitions. For instance, Albert Mohler, the president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, that empathy is 鈥渄estructive鈥� for immigration policy because 鈥渆mpathy means never having to say no.鈥� This definition is not accurate.
, empathy is simply the ability to feel what someone else might be feeling. 鈥淚magining yourself in another鈥檚 place,鈥� writes neurologist , 鈥渋s the basis of empathy.鈥� Coming from a different angle, defines empathy as 鈥渁 vicarious, spontaneous sharing of affect鈥� that 鈥渃an be provoked鈥� even by reading.鈥�
The word . Previously, what we today call 鈥渆mpathy鈥� fell under the name 鈥渟ympathy.鈥� For instance, writing in the 18th century, as the imaginative capacity to 鈥渆nter as it were into [another鈥檚] body, and become in some measure the same person.鈥�
With the discovery of 鈥渕irror neurons,鈥� modern neuroscience has in a sense validated Smith鈥檚 theories. As neuroscientist explains: 鈥淭he mirror system builds a bridge between the minds of two people,鈥� showing that our brains are not only 鈥渄eeply social鈥� but also 鈥渕agically connected to each other.鈥�
Put simply, we are hardwired for empathy.
Sympathy and social contagion
In our research, we have explored literary depictions of , and sympathies. We recognize some parallels between and conceptual debates of the past, parallels at times interesting and worrisome.
, Saad criticized Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde鈥檚 on behalf of undocumented immigrants and those in the LGBTQIA+ community, suggesting it was indicative of the 鈥減arasitic idea鈥� of open borders and an example of 鈥渟uicidal empathy.鈥�
, Canadian pop-psychologist Jordan Peterson echoed Saad and told Rogan that today鈥檚 political left is vulnerable to those who 鈥減arasitize empathy.鈥�
This association between empathy and parasitic contagion is not at all new.
, in the 18th and 19th centuries, sympathy was 鈥渦nderstood as a disruptive social phenomenon which functioned to spread disorder and unrest between individuals and even across nations like a 鈥榗ontagion.鈥欌��
As an example, Fairclough quotes the author Thomas De Quincey, who opined that 鈥渕any a man has been drawn, by the contagion of sympathy with his own class acting as a mob, into outrages of destruction.鈥�
The writer Mary Shelley literalized this notion of contagious sympathy in her , which depicts a (perhaps ) plague pandemic. The novel paints sympathy as a method of mass control and societal dissolution just as the plague.
But unlike De Quincey, Shelley also as our most valuable and effective collective resource in times of crisis. This celebration is most notable in the character of Adrian, who devotes his life to 鈥渂ring[ing] patience, and sympathy, and such aid as art affords, to the bed of disease.鈥欌��
The uses and abuses of empathy
Much as Shelley suggests for sympathy, research shows that empathy must be properly channelled so it isn鈥檛 used to divide and manipulate.
that empathy is not impartial. People tend to empathize more easily with those who share their racial or social background, and less with those who are perceived as different. In other words, racial prejudices may bias our instinctive empathetic responses.
At the same time, empathy has been linked to and , where members of dominant groups claim to identify with marginalized people in ways that often reinforce power imbalances rather than dismantle them.
But MAGA鈥檚 approach to empathy is less a well-meaning critique than an all-out war and comes at the issues with a far less benevolent set of assumptions and goals. As Wong noted: 鈥淲e are witnessing the construction of the ideological architecture to excuse violence and suffering on a mass scale.鈥�
Consider what Musk said to Rogan regarding immigration:
鈥淚 believe in empathy, like I think you should care about other people, but you need to have empathy for civilization as a whole and not commit to a civilizational suicide.鈥�
This comment is strikingly similar to the idea of 鈥溾�� endorsed by eugenicist thinkers in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Racial suicide was a concept rooted in the xenophobic fear that one鈥檚 own ethnic population would be replaced by another racialized population that happened to have a higher birth rate.
As the , 鈥渆ugenic morality鈥� was 鈥渢o be guided by sympathy construed as sympathy for the whole of society鈥� rather than towards individuals. For the eugenicists, this ideology justified extreme measures, such as forced sterilizations and racial segregation. The are well documented.
Despite these history lessons, , however, seem unperturbed and even about repeating history.
Much can be said about empathy鈥檚 potential limitations alongside its many virtues. But while MAGA supporters may have balked at her speech and her call for empathy, we would do well to remember :
鈥淲e should be merciful to the stranger, for we were once strangers in this land.鈥�
This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .