Empathy is too close to sympathy, lyrically and poeticaly. Empathy does not require pity, sorrow, or ruth. Empathy, according to the Cambridge Dictionary, is simply:
"the ability to share someone else's feelings or experiences by imagining what it would be like to be in that person's situation"
Some contend that we have societally lost the capacity for empathy. They see our society challenged and beset, perhaps irretrivably so. Their culprit is the great evil of technology in the broadest sense, but the greatest focus is on the ever-present, oft-misinterpreted text message.
We send a great many text messages. Statista says that in the U.S. in 2021, users sent 2 trillion text messages per day, 228 million an hour, 3 million per minute, 63,420 per second. That is each second, every second, all day, every day. That's a great volume. The corollary is as clear: fewer calls, conversations, and personal interactions. Too often, people even have excuses.
Text messaging is not "ubiquitous" only because that term isn't strong enough. We might say they are immeasurable, but we can count them. They are not fathomless, though the numbers are extreme. Text messaging is perhaps best characterized as unbounded and approaching infinite in its breadth and volume. And it is paced with social media expression that is as soulless and disconnected.
Last year, Dr. Salvatore Mangione (no relation to the alleged shooter of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson) published The Empathy Gap in The American Journal of Medicine. It focuses on the current state of our society and our "loneliness, sadness, and rudeness." Expounding on these, he argues that we should be focused on the failure of empathy.
He assigns blame to text messaging, which he contends "cannot create empathetic communication." The argument is based on neuropsychology and the conclusion that "empathy requires the reading of emotions." Emotions are present in the way people look, sound, and express. There is no such experience in the text message, despite the presence of some 3,790 emojis, according to Emojipedia (yes, that is a real thing).
Despite the ubiquity of such expressions (most of which us mere mortals cannot and do not understand), there is no visualizing a person in the world of text messages. There is no auditory perception. We cannot possibly assimilate that someone "looks" or "sounds" sad, excited, angry, or disappointed. We cannot empathize because we cannot visualize or sonify.
There is imperfection in so many interactions. We cannot see someone's face over the telephone. We cannot read facial expressions in a letter, email, or facsimile (an ancient method of point-to-point document transmission popular in the 20th century). And yet, there is a "special place" for fault in the infinite text messages.
Why?
Part of the Mangione hypothesis is in singularity. There are many in our society that use text messages exclusively. The doctor cites studies and conclusions that demonstrate the frequency of text messaging. Regrettably, it is the tool of "choice of a new generation" (that was a tagline for a soda in the 1980s). This is not an indictment of the tool, an acceptable alternative, but a criticism of frequency, acceptance, and complacency.
That is the real point: complacency. If we are comfortable with the Joe Friday ("Just the facts m'am," Dragnet, Walt Disney Studios, 1951-1959) and with the lack of emotion, personality, and texture, then so be it.
Dr. Mangione notes the emerging primacy of text messaging. It is the preferred method and is gaining strength as the more courteous and appropriate interruption of someone else's day. HE notes that it is only the old folks who will answer the "unannounced social calls to mobiles." We imagine we are being courteous and gracious. He contends instead that we are being self-possessed, isolated, and insulated.
He believes we are preventing ourselves from experiencing the potential for auditory or visual input. Humans are increasingly less interested in the drama, the emotion, and we have found a tool that facilitates our avoidance. We can circumvent the looks and sounds of those around us. We can ensconce in our emotionless bubbles and throw words and images at each other. We can molify and believe it is efficiency.
The result - our diminishing empathy is further eroded. Emotion is deflected. Humanity is foregone.
The implications seen by Dr. Mangione are troubling. He perceives evidence of dehumanization, polarization, division, and tribalism. The argument is that it is all too easy to be detached, desensitized, and worse when our only connection is the written word. This may explain the proliferation described in Keyboard Attacks (October 2024) and the posts cited there.
In the end, there is an imperative for human interaction. We must build genuine and holistic relationships that extend beyond "just the facts," "straight to business," and empirical efficiency. We must regain and value our humanity. That will happen when we are together, perceiving more than the written word or the demonstrable facts. When we know each other, see each other, and hear each other, our chances of dealing with each other increase.
Through our reliance on texting in the world of litigation, we are exacerbating disconnection. There is less chance for discussion, compromise, and resolution. Even if communication is not successful in resolving differences, the human voice (telephone) and, better yet, face and voice (video call) are far more powerful, humanizing, and productive.
Dr. Mangione notes that
"In the end, the most important step toward rekindling empathy is the awareness that we are, in fact, losing it."
That is close to the old mental health saw, "step one is admitting you have a problem." Can we convince our peers to engage in conversation? Can we make that phone call and interact? Can we begin with humanity ("how was your weekend," how about those Dodgers," "This is some weather, huh") and enjoy knowing each other before we get down to business?
Interaction is critical. I use that poor, bland, and trite word only because I can find none better. Critical is such an understatement. We must find a way to rekindle our humanity, interaction, and empathy. Without it, we are as disconnected as the Tweet, as disengaged as the text, and as angry as the next person. We have a small window to reverse course. Perhaps it is not too late.
