But what is, after all, this thing called empathy?

As I mentioned in my text published in July 2022 when I talked about the "golden rule", every once in a while, I will make use of phrases and examples of wisdom applied by old Benedict, the character of my book "Bread & Joy", to illustrate and enrich the subjects I will be addressing. Today Benedict's chosen phrase is the following.

" To understand my neighbor, I will put myself in his place and will feel his pains and joys. "

Evidently, we are talking about the ability to feel empathy. A concept mentioned by many (perhaps all) religious and spiritualist leaders but, unfortunately, little explored in its essence, and that is our ambition today.

And for starters, I'd like to ask: what is, after all, this thing called empathy?

If we decide to consult the good old dictionary, we will find some definitions. To facilitate my approach, I chose the following: Empathy is the ability to put yourself in another person’s place, seeking to act or think the way that person would act or think. Or: Empathy is the ability to identify with the other, feeling what he/she feels, desiring what he/she desires, learning the way he/she learns.

By observing these two definitions, which in my modest opinion complement each other, we can understand that in order to empathize with someone, we should not simply "put ourselves in their place." We have to transport ourselves to the situation in which this person finds himself and seek to replicate in our minds and hearts all the conditions in which that person finds himself immersed.

It's very common to see individuals saying: "Oh, if I were in the place of such person, I would have acted differently, I would have done this or that." As we revisit the above definitions, it is not difficult to conclude that this observation does not pass the test. There is nothing of empathy there, for what such an individual is doing is putting himself in such situation, and not effectively positioning himself as if he were the other. He continues to think with his own head, interpreting facts with his own vision of the world. Do you understand the difference? I will try to exemplify, and to facilitate such an effort, I will create a fictional character named José.

Let's imagine for a moment that José lives in a shantytown somewhere in Latin America or even a ghetto in NY. His mother became pregnant by accident, and when she learned of the pregnancy, his father left, never to return. As his mother cannot feed him, she sends José out early in the morning, so that he, alone, may find a way to eat and take care of himself. José never attended school consistently and never received any religious or spiritual guidance. He learns the facts of life from the older boys who live on the street and know little about the values of a family. José doesn't really know what love is.

In the midst of this situation, José is offered the option to study. However, one of his "friends" approaches and offers him a crack stone, arguing that the school will do him no good, and that the drug will bring immediate relief to his hunger and loneliness. In the midst of tiredness and the insecurity that he will not be smart enough for school, José makes the wrong choice. He rejects the study and clings to crack, from which he never finds a way back.

If we look at the above situation and judge with our eyes of educated people, loved by our families, raised in religious and spiritual precepts, we can never understand José's decision, for we will be putting our own selves in his place, and that won't really help us empathize with him.

According to the definitions, we have to "think as he thinks, feel what he feels, desire as he desires, learn as he learns."

Now close your eyes for a moment. You're José now. You don't have your father's presence, nor have you ever met him since he abandoned you before you were born, and your mother also does not help. At 8:00 a.m., she sends you out of the house, but not towards a school, but to the savagery of the street. You're hungry. You're thirsty. You feel alone in the world and are not prepared to go to a school, where you fear being rejected once again. You are not prepared to deal with this possible new rejection. Your "friends" only teach you violence and how to defend yourself in this "jungle." There's no way out for you. There's no prospect. There's no future.

Do you begin to understand José now? For this, it is necessary to feel with José's heart, think with José's unprepared and confused mind, have his life references, his street culture, his family (or lack of), his absence of love and a belief in God, and the unpromising expectation of a future with some significance.

Once this exercise is done, we may begin to understand, even if very remotely, how José thinks, feels, processes the world around him and makes his decisions. And judging him is no longer such a quick and elementary exercise.

If you were able to do such exercise of empathy and could really see the world with José's eyes, I invite you to do it again several times, especially with people you judge negatively and/or look down to. Try to see the world from the perspective of the person involved, and I am sure that your judgment over him/her will naturally demand being reviewed. And only then, as Mother Teresa said, if you can stop judging that person, maybe you will find the necessary space to be able to accept and love him/her.

Only true empathy, permeated through humbleness and kindness, has the power to provoke this kind of magical transformation, because, when we change the way we look at things, the things that we look at, change.