Do you need Sonder to feel Empathy?

[Ashton]

Quick video explination:

 

 

 

Dictionary explination (For you non video watchers)

 

Sonder - n. the realization that each random passerby is living a life as vivid and complex as your own.

 

 

So my question is, Do you need sonder to feel emapthy?

 

I want to express my opinion, but i'll hold fire to that for the time being, to allow people to express theirs without the taint of my own.

[rock siles barcellos]

by that definition it seems to me that sonder is an extension or a step further in the process of empathy, actually I'm not so sure wich one comes first perhaps, if that makes any sense  hehe

 

But I get that impression because in that definition there are details included that go beyond just empathy, but they are certainly related 

[PhotonTurtle]

I would argue that empathy is not predicated on sonder. Claiming that sonder is required to empathize does not account for the fictional characters I (and possibly others) feel emotions for/relate to. I know personal accounts are the weakest form of evidence but I will use one anyway. The last book series I read was "A Song of Ice and Fire". During the time spent reading I began to relate to certain characters and develop emotions for them (admiration, hate, etc). All of this occurred despite the fact these characters did not exist. Sonder seems to be unnecessary for empathy.In hindsight one could argue that sonder is necessary even with the example of fictitious characters as the illusion that they carry on complex lives results in my empathetic reaction. I'll leave this for someone else to expand upon but I remain unconvinced of this notion at the moment.

 

PS: First post...yeah!

[AudreyM]

I think it would make sense to say that someone who experiences sonder is universally empathetic. However, I don't think it is necessary to sonder in order to feel empathy. Referencing the video, one could easily feel empathy for their surrounding cast without feeling empathy for passers by or the billions of people we know exist but will most likely never come into contact with.

I think the ability to empathize is a fantastic skill to have, but I wouldn't want to be a persistent sonderer (lol, is that a word?), I imagine that would be pretty darn exhausting. Then again wouldn't it be possible to hold such an awareness without thinking constantly about the feelings and lives of other people? There's probably a healthy middle path. 

 

Interesting topic, thanks for posting!

[Wesley]

Sonder - n. the realization that each random passerby is living a life as vivid and complex as your own.

Empathy

1.

the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.

I don't know if this is the best definition, but it is the one I got when I typed it into Google.

 

I would say that I can empathize with the feelings and desires of my dog, but I would say that he does not have as complex or as vivid or as mine or any human just because we have more going on between the ears.

 

I also would say there could be people who are disabled in their mental capacity, or even mostly brain dead who I could empathize with when it would maybe even be difficult for them to know what they are going through.

 

I think you get the idea of what I am saying that complexity of other's emotions or thoughts is not necessary for empathy.

 

I have a problem with the idea of equality of people's inner experiences in complexity and the need to have this feeling for each passerby, as I am sure I do not think about it with the average person I see in the grocery store, but I have empathy for people I care about or know more about.

 

I would be interested as to what your thoughts are in the abstract and what your thoughts are as in what this topic may mean to you personally or emotionally.