by SyntheticWould you call someone who is capable of cognitive empathy an empath/empathic person?
Why or why not?
Yes.
If someone is capable of cognitive empathy, they are incredibly empathic.
Would you call someone who is capable of affective empathy an empath/empathic person?
Why or why not?
If you say yes to one and no to the other, why?
Empathic person, but not an empath.
.
.
.
An Empath is someone who can experience the emotions of those around them via transmission of the magnetic field produced by the heart.
Modern science does not believe there are such things as an Empath, nor is it widely accepted as a word. It falls under the same category as a psychic does, and telepathy. Empaths are often seen in science fiction.
In these parts, we often hear people compare sociopaths to empaths, and how a sociopath has an edge on an empath. But seriously. A real empath, by definition of course, would have dealt with sociopath long before the sociopath even knew what they were gonna do. I think a sociopath would have a hard time even getting to talk to these people to begin with.
Are empaths even real ? In this dimension, I'd reckon it would be too rare for most of us to say.
I don't think it's as simple as either having the ability or not having the ability to experience them. There are probably some people who can experience certain types empathy under certain conditions, for example in only certain situations or for certain people. It is still empathy, but would it make them an empathetic person? I think to be considered a true 'empath', one would probably have to have the ability to feel both types of empathy in every situation. Which would no doubt be exhausting.
by Spatial MindAn Empath is someone who can experience the emotions of those around them via transmission of the magnetic field produced by the heart.
Despite of the 'quasi-ethereal' ramblings of "Spatial Mind", I would agree with a lot of what the entity says.
We are what we allow ourselves to be provided with, through our interactions with what others allow themselves to provide us with.
Despite the fact that we can provide ourselves with whatever we need, without the consideration for others.
The idea of empathy needs way more research, than what is being done so far, as to provide an adequate answer as to what constitutes the understanding of the needs in order to survive, the needs in order to share and the needs in order to sacrifice of yourself.
The heart produces an electromagnetic field which transmits different signature expressions based on the beholder's mood. An Empath as far as we're told will absorb the emotions of those within close proximity of them.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
- Mahatma Gandhi
Know thyself my dear.
Would you call someone who is capable of cognitive empathy an empath/empathic person?
No, i would rather call him an understanding person. Helpful one. Because he can understand you and help you. Or not help you. But he will understand you, so he actually has the potential to be useful.
Would you call someone who is capable of affective empathy an empath/empathic person?
Yes, because thats what i understand the meaning of an empath/empathic to be. Someone who gets the same feelings as the people around him. He might not understand these feelings and/or why the other person gets them. I imagine he could even get the wrong feelings if he reads the other person wrong. Then all of his decisions will be influenced by these emotions. He could be very unreliable and/or unstable.
If someone is both, then i would say he is a very reliable and stable person. Because he would be able to help you, would want to help you, he is useful. And he wont be too influenced by his emotions, because he can understand them. I guess he would be an empath/empathic person. Most people are like this
If someone lacks the second and has the first, then he could be very manipulative. But he can be bargained with and easier to predict, sometimes.
You never fail to amuse me. Was that video an attempt at producing some kind of scientific evidence? It's a fucking advert! For an organisation called HeartMath, where if you want to find out anything more about them, like what research they've actually done and what journals it's published in, you have to purchase a year's membership for the bargain price of $200 (if you want full access to the pdf files).
You must get taken advantage of a lot in real life.
This is a tough question because I don't know if I'm capable of either.
Affective - I feel like it's all just luck. I have seen people in emotional distress, crying and I know that I need to act with "there there it'll be ok". But other times I'm really, really bad at being appropriate. I have a friend that has banned me from talking when someone is emotional distress because I can say really wrong things. So if you constantly can do this right a good percentage of the time, no.
Cognitive - no. At least I don't think so because I am trying to think of another emotional state right now and I can't. Right now I'm pretty content. When I look at someone who's not content I have a hard time identifying beyond describing words what that is. I've felt depressed before and I can't even remember for myself how that was. Trying to put myself in someone shoes puts me in complete confusion. It's really an abstract idea.
