sweetkamie, I agree with much of this too!
I've been a lot less happier having allowed cycnism to steal what joy there is in anticipating good and seeing what good there is around me...
Cynicism would have come from high hopes becoming bitterly disappointed and as you say would imply no longer enjoying the good. So me expecting less, but getting more is a miracle.
Yes, and just because it is hard to do something doesn't mean it is impossible. Just because someone finds something hard to do doesn't mean they get a free pass to treat others exactly as they wish...
Excellent: Definitely possible to get people to learn empathy, definitely can be tried to change, to learn, to teach, and definitely no free pass!
This is exactly the same as the difference between passive submission and the "radical acceptance" concept. For us to accept our own pain does no way mean not to do anything about it, quite the opposite - because we are not losing energy by being caught up in denial, opposition etc., we have more energy to change things.
That's us with our own pain. Same goes for us regarding others' empathy/belief of our pain: Accept, but then lovingly "fight", according to the Serenity Prayer, i.e. always questioning my wisdom of decision what I can change and what I can't and choosing my battles. Or as fighting imagery is prone to being misunderstood: I put my energy where it'll have more effect. This is in my experience the way to maximize change. Desirably like in this case change to the good.
But you are totally right in that sense and to that purpose an "expectation" of how something should be, a measure for it is necessary. It's helpful and also normal to know that it would be good for everyone to be empathic, whether we are actually working for the good, for love in the world. Again there are people I think who expect empathy, but are not working for the good.
(Here your pointer above to me to "out of what nature" we are doing things is totally appropriate, but I also think it can be adapted to other mindsets too.)
As to the moral aspect of "free pass": I can and do play a big part in encouraging and discouraging (incl. suitable consequences) empathy & belief, but knowing I'm not the only and not the final judge or jury. My 'expectation' about empathy/belief do give me motivation to do something about it and if you put it that way, I'd think I don't give people a free pass unless I can't judge well why they are doing something. Not sure.
But I think your point is confirmed that generally 'free pass' would be a big problem.
(An example I'm in at the moment is how I'm answering an organization that has made a decision which to them seems empathetic for 11 people vs. 4 people, for someone else.
I also wonder if being frustrated/disappointed because someone doesn't believe me is sufficient reason to change whether I expect someone to believe me when I say I'm in pain. Am I really gaining from this?
Well, most of my trauma came from my expectations to get love and care from those who are "expected" to do so, and in hindsight nothing could have changed or can change them. So it firstly harmed me to have these expectations, which as a kid is perfectly understandable. But growing up, the only way out of that is to stop expecting, to let go.
It harms if we don't and we have much to gain if we can. But I'd be glad to hear what exactly anyone gains from this expectation, maybe then I could share it.
Everyone here has told me to drop the people that don't believe me when I request them to believe I am in pain. Don't we encourage each other to drop people that refuse to believe what we are saying?
Very interesting example, let's see if we can unravel it.
I'd think we've meant dropping people is actually more like stopping our
expectations.
What you now mean is that dropping people is
holding on to our expectations.
I think this apparent contradiction depends on the attitude with which we drop them.
Dropping them because they have disappointed our expectations isn't the same as letting them go. So it doesn't lie in what we do, it's how we do it.
Empathy does not require feelings at all in my opinion. I think it requires intellectual understanding though...
Well -pathy comes from the Greek for physical affection / passion / suffering. I do get that in certain contexts it seems more about 'understanding'. It's not quite clear yet if mirror neurons are the physical part to our empathy, but the tendency is towards that (again in a 2022 study). When I was over-empathic, my eyes used to form tears when someone else's were, even when they weren't actually crying. That's I spose far below (or above?) 'understanding'?
What we're talking about here I agree doesn't need someone else to feel any invisible pain we have, but as you've said it's about believing that people wouldn't generally lie about this and it's not appropriate for others to think that. And that would be understanding. However I'm not sure about that or about the intellect. Our grandkids need to be told that I can't do much despite my seeming mental energy and nothing to see, but partly so do our kids.
Whilst pets seem to do a better job of that than people, is that praps an aspect?
So as said, I think all your points are a valuable part of the discussion, and all needed to be sorted out - and maybe this wasn't even enough, let's see.
