Mishlei 14:10 - True Empathy

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.

Mishlei 14:10 - True Empathy

משלי יד:י

לֵב יוֹדֵעַ מָרַּת נַפְשׁוֹ וּבְשִׂמְחָתוֹ לֹא יִתְעָרַב זָר:

Mishlei 14:10 – True Empathy

The heart knows its own bitterness, and no stranger will share in its joy. 

The questions are:

(1) What is the rationale of the hava amina (the false assumption which this pasuk aims to refute)? Apparently, Shlomo ha'Melech assumes that the reader of this pasuk would be inclined to believe that "the heart knows the bitterness of other hearts" (judging by the second half of the pasuk) and "strangers can share in its joy." What does this mean? Why would someone assume this? 

(2) What is the basis of the pasuk’s conclusion? Why is the hava amina wrong? Why does the heart only know its own bitterness? Why can’t a stranger share in its joy? 

(3) Why does the pasuk focus specifically on bitterness and joy? There are plenty of other emotions.  Why did Shlomo ha'Melech choose these two? 

(4) Who is the "stranger"? Does this refer to someone with whom one is not acquainted? Does it refer to an "outsider" - whatever that means? Or does it refer to anyone who is not oneself? 

(5) What practical decision-making idea do we learn from this pasuk? This is another one of those pesukim in which it is unclear what Shlomo ha'Melech is advising us to do or not do. Since Mishlei is a book about practical decision-making, we need to understand how the idea being taught by this pasuk is translated into action.

[For best results, stop here and think about the pasuk and these questions before reading on.]

Here is my four-sentence summary of the main idea:

Two people can see the same object or hear the same sound, but they cannot experience the same feeling; each individual is confined to the solitary world of his or her own emotional experiences. The most we can do is to observe the other person’s behavior and make inferences about his or her internal state based on our own previous emotional experiences; true empathy (i.e. actually feeling what another person feels) is impossible. Therefore, you should exercise caution when assessing the emotional states of others and remember that you are not actually perceiving their feelings, but are making inferences about their feelings based on your own experiences – inferences which are prone to error and subjective bias. Likewise, it is unreasonable to expect others to automatically feel the emotions you are experiencing, and it is unfair to burden them with that demand. 

The need for this idea is evident from colloquialisms, such as: "I feel your pain" and "I feel for you." It is impossible to actually feel someone else's pain. The most you can do is observe someone else in a situation, infer based on that situation and/or the person's behavior that he or she is in a state of pain, relate that pain to your own experiences when you have been in similar situations, and assume that what this person is experiencing bears a resemblance to your own experiences. It is obvious that such an analysis might be totally off base. 

One of my favorite examples of this can be seen in the genre of inspirational speeches given by people suffering from unusual medical conditions (e.g. Claire Wineland, who suffers from Cystic Fibrosis, Nick Vujicic, who has no limbs, Sam Berns, who suffers from Progeria - which causes him to "age" prematurely). When we see these people we are quick to project our own feelings onto them. We think to ourselves, either consciously or unconsciously: "If I were in that position I would be miserable; therefore, this person must feel miserable." But as these speakers demonstrate, such assumptions are false.

Another common example of this mistake can be seen in parenting - especially with parents of younger children. When a young child cries, the parent sometimes overreacts. This overreaction is based on an a faulty line of reasoning: "Since I only cry like that when I am in a state of unbearable pain; therefore, my child must also be in a state of unbearable pain, and I must address it by doing everything in my power to make that pain stop." In reality, the child's internal world is completely different than that of an emotionally mature adult. Yes, an adult would have to be in a state of terrible suffering to break down in tears, but for a child, it might take nothing more than a minor annoyance. Similarly, an adult might underreact to a child crying. In reality, the child might be experiencing a horribly traumatic experience, but the adult assumes: "What's the big deal? If something this trivial happened to me, I'd get over it in a second; therefore, my child is the one who is overreacting, and had better get over it - pronto!" Both mistakes stem from a lack of awareness that the parent is interpreting the child's behavior based on the parent's own experience.

This phenomenon also occurs in cases involving joy. When we witness someone achieve a success or attain some benefit, we are quick to conclude that this person must be elated. In reality, maybe this person is unhappy, and we're just projecting what we would feel if we were in that situation. Perhaps this is why Shlomo ha'Melech chose to focus on "bitterness" and "joy" - one negative emotion and one positive - to show that this mistake occurs across the emotional spectrum. 

Another practical ramification of this mistake occurs when we unfairly hold others responsible for knowing what we are feeling. For example, one spouse might assume that the other spouse knows exactly what he or she is feeling, and become hurt or angry when treated a certain way, saying, "How dare you say/do something like that to me! Don't you know that I'm in a bad mood?!" - as if one's internal state were as easy to perceive as the color of the wall or the temperature of water. Ironically, this accusation of "lacking empathy" itself stems from a lack of empathy - the failure to recognize that the other person's emotions, experiences, and assumptions might have caused him or her to misinterpret the behavioral signs that he or she observed. Again, the key is to recognize that the most we can do is interpret someone else's emotions - not perceive or experience them.

Mindfulness of the idea in this pasuk is the key to avoiding misguided empathy, and developing true empathy - that is, the closest thing to actual empathy that human beings are capable of.