Appendix III
Empathy or
Metriopathy?
[Appendix III is from Survey of the Book of Hebrews, by
Professor George Alder, which I transcribed from his recorded lectures in 2003]
This exploration was inspired by Professor
Alder’s discussion regarding forms of pathēin [paqein] used in Hebrews
4:15 and 5:2. There he discusses apathy (without feeling) and sympathy (with
feeling), and talks about metriopathein (moderated feeling, “bear
gently” in 5:2). This made me curious where the word “empathy” fits into such a
progression of degrees of feeling.
It is interesting to note there is no
distinction made in the Greek NT between sympathy and empathy. I could not find
a form of path that began with “em” in the usual NT sources. This
surprised me, as its form is obviously a Greek construction. Since it did not
appear in the NT and since it became more emphasized in Christian counseling
ministry in the late twentieth century, we might suppose empathy has a modern
etymology. Such a recent development may have been necessitated by the lack of
sincerity we have developed in caring for others, in our use of the word
sympathy.
For example, one source put it this way,
“In 1598 it [sympathy] meant ‘moving’ or ‘stirring’. By 1798 it still aroused
pity. Now it is simply woeful.” Who wants to be consoled by someone who laments
our loss and sorrow? Well I think that would suit me just fine but, as I found
out, it was not good enough for modern psychotherapists.
Professor Alder points out
sympathy means to “feel with”. You are weak and suffering, so I feel weak and
suffering with you. Moderns do not like this idea because, first of all I am
concluding that you are in some pitiful state and I need to lower myself to be
of any help, and secondly I become so overwhelmed with despair that I cannot
help you. Being overwhelmed is an obvious pitfall for those who wish to help
others. However, the first point, this lowering process, came to be associated
with shame, guilt, co-dependency and all sorts of modern taboos.
Well, if empathy is so
important for ministry and it is not found in the NT, where did it come from?
In their paper called “Empathy and Analogy”, Allison Barnes and Paul Thagard
tell us,
“The concept of sympathy has a long
history (Aristotle used it), but the term empathy is quite recent. In the late
nineteenth and early twentieth century, the German term "Einfühlung"
was used by Rudolph Lotz and Wilhelm Wundt in an aesthetic doctrine, which was
then elaborated by Theodore Lipps. For Lipps, Einfühlung is a mode of inner
imitation. When empathizing with a work of art, the beholder physically
imitates the object and imaginatively projects himself into the object. Lipps
also extended Einfühlung to the domain of interpersonal understanding. E.G.
Tichener, a student of Wundt, coined the English translation
"empathy" in 1910. [emphasis mine]
“The German "Einfühlung" has a
distinctive meaning of "feeling into" something. Unfortunately,
Einfühlung was often translated as "feeling with", which is the usual
meaning of Mitfühlung (sympathy). M.F. Basch (1983) notes that in the Greek
derivation of empathy, the prefix em- means "in" or
"within", while the prefix sym- means "with", "along
with" or "together". Etymologically, therefore, the term
sympathy means to share an experience with someone else. When one sympathizes
with others, one "feels with" or shares their suffering. In contrast,
Einfühlung is a more extensive concept than sympathy. It signifies the ability
to comprehend another's state without actually experiencing that state. The
term sympathy, then, refers to our awareness and participation in the suffering
of another person, while empathy refers to the attempt to comprehend either
positive or negative states of another.
“Sympathy is performed with altruistic
ends, but empathy may or may not be motivated by good intentions. Indeed, one
may empathize solely with narcissistic ends. It is said, for example, that
Hitler empathized with the Jews in order to annihilate them.” [1]
Well given that final statement, are we not all
very glad that the writer of Hebrews chose a different expression? Barnes and
Thagard begin their exploration of the meaning of empathy by stating simply,
“Since its inception, the sense of the term ‘empathy’ has wandered.” Yeah, well
I guess so. Although the thought of stretching out on the couch of a therapist
named ‘Dr. Hitler’ has a certain adventuresome quality to it, I think I would
rather go visit my dentist. But remember, empathy has been a big deal in the
world of counseling for a while now.
The authors of this paper set the stage for the
problem of meanings, by citing the work of psychologist Robin Dawes. In 1994 he
published the result of a study on the effectiveness of psychotherapy which
they summarize:
“He determined that therapy does help
people, but that the training and approach of the therapist have no
statistically significant influence on the success of the therapy. Length of
therapy is also unrelated to success. Dawes concluded, however, that "empathic"
therapists are more effective, although he did not provide an account of what
constitutes empathy. “[1] [2]
In conclusion, I think it significant that
Christians can claim a far more precise word for that fruitful space between
not caring at all and caring too much, as given by the writer of Hebrews in the
use of metriopathein. Perhaps we could call it “metriopathy (mĕt-rē-ŏ-päth-ē):
a metered or measured response of caring.”
[1] “Empathy
and Analogy” by Allison Barnes and Paul Thagard, University of Waterloo,
Ontario, Canada, 1997
[2] House of Cards:
Psychology and Psychotherapy Built on Myth by Robin M. Dawes, New York,
Free Press, 1994
