In our last post we discussed how cultural and individual/personal conditioning can conspire to derail a student's normal development of empathy toward other humans who suffer in pain and misery. Now we will focus on how we as teachers can help to re-awaken our students' potential for empathy.
Following are some approaches -- not the only approaches -- that we can employ in the classroom. I invite readers to share (in the "Comments" section following this post) their opinions about these suggested approaches and all other ways in which our students can be helped in this often difficult process.
The possibilities suggested below have been intentionally stated in a very general manner. Global teachers wishing to pursue any of these suggestions should select the specific avenues most suitable to their students' situation.
(1) The first step should normally be to provide solid information to the students about the human condition around the planet. What is the extent of human suffering in the world? How many men, women and children suffer from destructive poverty, chronic hunger and malnutrition, lack of the most basic health services, elementary education, or other elements that we consider essential to a meaningful life as a human being? What human rights are not respected around the world? What is the condition of women around the planet?
How do the students feel about the answers to these questions? Are they comfortable with the status quo? Rarely will the answer be "yes." Students need to know what the state of the world is; often, they will be astonished at the extent of suffering among their fellow humans.
(2) A follow-up line of questioning: Do all humans start life from the same starting point, in the same level playing field? Do some of us have a head start over others? Why? What did we do to deserve that head start? What did the disadvantaged do to deserve their handicapped beginning and their very limited potential?
Let's bring the issue to a very personal level of reflection. If your parents had lived in a Mumbai slum, or a favela in Rio de Janeiro, would you be in this school today? Would you have the same potential that you now have? What would your life be like? What would your parents' and your siblings' life be like? How would you feel about your lot in life?
Would your disempowered and disenfranchised condition be your own fault? Do you think that you would want a better chance at life? How would you view those who enjoy all the material benefits that in fact you actually do enjoy today?
(3) Let's engage the power of the informed imagination. Ask your students to sit comfortably, close their eyes and allow themselves to be transported to an alternate reality that you will construct and narrate to them -- a reality that in fact reflects the real world of millions upon millions of humans around the planet.
Building on solid data known to you, ask students to imagine themselves living for 24 hours in the world of the downtrodden. Slowly narrate this verbal fantasy to your students. Describe the world that they would face as they wake-up in the morning. Take them with your narration through a day in the life of their new selves, somewhere in the world. Describe the details of the life they encounter. Slowly, let them face their new reality as you describe it.
At the end of the imaginary experience, ask them to explore their thoughts and feelings as they "lived" that imaginary life. Ask them to write them down, without discussion. Then, ask volunteers to share what they have written; allow discussion from other students.
This can be an enlightening experience for those students who allow themselves entry into their vicarious life.
(4) The power of good literature can be extraordinary. A good writer can make an unknown world come alive to his/her reader. Select, from the multitude of relevant options available, which books should be read by your students. Part of your assessment should be a written personal reaction to the existential plight of the disempowered characters in the book. After this has been written, a class discussion could expand the potential for empathetic understanding.
(5) Within the world of literature, poetry offers the most potential for affective growth. Choose the poems that would be most relevant for your objectives and situation. Have students familiarize themselves with the poems and then read them aloud in class. Explore, in class discussion, the relevant affective elements brought up by the poems. There is no need to overdo it. Let the truth of each poem speak for itself.
(6) We should not underestimate the power of music. From the "Ode to Joy" of Beethoven's 9th Symphony, to some of today's socially committed rap artists, great composers and performers have already communicated affective truths to our students with greater success than a brilliant scientist could.
Ask your students to identify music of any genre that communicates the plight of the dispossessed and the disempowered. They could bring a CD to play in class, provide copies of lyrics for reading and discussion, or -- in the case of the more musically gifted -- perform the piece for the benefit of the whole class.
(7) Many countries (like the USA) wisely forbid religious instruction in the public classroom. However, we can inquire into the social morality directives promulgated by the religious faiths of our students. All the major religious faiths clearly and powerfully enjoin their followers to care for their fellow human beings. Justice and charity are at the core of all major faiths, even if followers often ignore the teachings. (Unfortunately, the social doctrine of any religious faith is often the least emphasized message in sermons, writings, etc.)
We can ask our students to reflect on the directives of their faiths. What is the social doctrine of your church? What does your religion say about caring for others unknown to you? What is the place of justice? What does your religion say about charity? What does your religious faith say about the suffering of others? What does your religion ask of you when it comes to helping your human brothers and sisters?
We should be careful not to assume that all our students have a religious commitment (in the USA, 30% of the population -- and growing -- claims "no religious affiliation.") In the case of these students, ask them to reflect on what the application of social ethics might require. (You may need to explain the difference between "morality" and "ethics.")
(8) Ask students to share stories of individuals personally known to them who, through no fault of their own, lived lives of misery or despair. Discuss in class: Are people normally responsible for their own misery? What is the normal, human response to the misery of others?
(9) Discuss in class, "What kinds of things can interfere with our normal human capacity to develop Basic Human Empathy?" "What can we do to help develop our human potential for empathy?"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
We can only help. Our students must do the hard thinking and the "hard feeling" for themselves. They have to be ready, willing and able to challenge any remaining insensitivity that remains like a hardened shell around their sense of empathy. Are our students capable of this? In the case of the great majority, yes!
Showing posts with label basic human empathy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label basic human empathy. Show all posts
October 10, 2009
October 4, 2009
CAN WE HELP OUR STUDENTS TO DEVELOP EMPATHY? -- PART II
In our last post we proposed that the normal, healthy emotional and intellectual development of adolescents would lead them to develop "Basic Human Empathy." We defined Basic Human Empathy as "The intellectual and emotional ability to feel the joy and pain of others who are not personally close to us." We also raised the questions of whether we as teachers could help in the development of Basic Human Empathy and how we could do so.
We will now try to explore what factors intervene to thwart the normal development of Basic Human Empathy. Two such factors are: (1) cultural conditioning, and (2) individual, personal conditioning.
(1) By "cultural conditioning" we mean the sum total of the conditioned learning provided by the culture or sub-culture in which we live, injected unconsciously into our minds through associative learning. Some sub-cultures glorify individualism and denigrate (at least in practice) normal human concern for others. In the USA, for instance, there is a profound theological / philosophical under-current among some religious groups which minimizes the value of empathy as it glorifies an emphasis on individualism. This under-current is sometimes mistakenly referred to as "the Protestant ethic." This is an unwarranted term, as most major Protestant denominations do not subscribe to it. More accurate terms are "the Puritan ethic," or "the Calvinist ethic."
As dogmatic practitioners of strict Calvinism, the Puritan settlers in what would become the United States of America believed that their God had already predestined all human beings to either eternal heaven or hell, and that the human experience on earth correlated to this divine judgment. The "saved" would enjoy riches and benefits on earth; the "condemned" would not -- they would experience want and despair.
While this "Puritan ethic" is not always consciously embraced in American culture, it has undoubtedly had a major impact on the ethos of American culture due to the importance of the Puritans in the American story. It is an under-current that pervades many sectors of secular culture (such as the business world) and is predominant in some religious subcultures.
The practical effect of the conscious or unconscious spread of this Puritan ethic is the logical conclusion that (having accepted the predestination premise,) if God has condemned the unworthy person to hell for his/her iniquity, why should I care about his/her well-being on earth? Thus, the poor are condemned for their poverty, the weak for their own powerlessness, and the sick for their sickness. The Puritan ethic blesses our indifference and our lack of caring. It undermines the normal development of Basic Human Empathy.
We must stress that many or most Protestant denominations -- among them Lutherans, Methodists, Anglicans and many others -- do not subscribe to this theology or its consequent social doctrine of non-empathy. Neither does the Catholic church, whose social doctrine is among the most empathetic of all, even if most Catholics are blissfully unaware of their own church's social teaching.
Due to its historical importance as a foundation stone of American culture, the Puritan ethic has created a powerful under-current of insensitivity in American society -- even among members of religious groups that do not support the Puritan theological premise or conclusions.
Other nations and cultures have their own historical and philosophical barriers that interfere with the development of Basic Human Empathy. We each need to explore our cultural and historical contexts in order to identify what variables are at play.
(2) Individual, personal conditioning often builds on cultural conditioning. Continuing the USA example, wave upon wave of immigrants struggle in the "land of opportunity" to reach the "American dream." Those who reach the dream of material welfare, unaware (and uninterested) in the real difficulties faced by others, often assume that if others haven't found the same level of material success it must be due to their lack of trying, some moral failing, or some other internal weakness.
The adults in American society who hold such views may intentionally or unintentionally condition their children to believe that if others suffer, it must be due to their own avoidable failings, or lack of hard work. Didn't they, recent immigrants, reach success through hard work? Therefore, why waste time, energy and money worrying about the downtrodden?
We can now explain how, in the richest large country in the world, we accept homelessness, poverty, lack of access to health care or legal care, etc. and do not appear to be particularly motivated to take political steps to bring about greater social justice.
Often, adolescents reach our schools carrying the huge burden of non-empathetic cultural and personal conditioning. This conditioning has been unconscious and not requested. They usually have not stopped to reflect on their own mental schemas about empathy, economic success, and how pain and suffering can come to those who do not deserve it. That is the beginning of our work as teachers.
In our next post, we will explore some specific avenues to help our students breakaway from any residual cultural or personal conditioning and recover their potential for development of Basic Human Empathy.
We will now try to explore what factors intervene to thwart the normal development of Basic Human Empathy. Two such factors are: (1) cultural conditioning, and (2) individual, personal conditioning.
(1) By "cultural conditioning" we mean the sum total of the conditioned learning provided by the culture or sub-culture in which we live, injected unconsciously into our minds through associative learning. Some sub-cultures glorify individualism and denigrate (at least in practice) normal human concern for others. In the USA, for instance, there is a profound theological / philosophical under-current among some religious groups which minimizes the value of empathy as it glorifies an emphasis on individualism. This under-current is sometimes mistakenly referred to as "the Protestant ethic." This is an unwarranted term, as most major Protestant denominations do not subscribe to it. More accurate terms are "the Puritan ethic," or "the Calvinist ethic."
As dogmatic practitioners of strict Calvinism, the Puritan settlers in what would become the United States of America believed that their God had already predestined all human beings to either eternal heaven or hell, and that the human experience on earth correlated to this divine judgment. The "saved" would enjoy riches and benefits on earth; the "condemned" would not -- they would experience want and despair.
While this "Puritan ethic" is not always consciously embraced in American culture, it has undoubtedly had a major impact on the ethos of American culture due to the importance of the Puritans in the American story. It is an under-current that pervades many sectors of secular culture (such as the business world) and is predominant in some religious subcultures.
The practical effect of the conscious or unconscious spread of this Puritan ethic is the logical conclusion that (having accepted the predestination premise,) if God has condemned the unworthy person to hell for his/her iniquity, why should I care about his/her well-being on earth? Thus, the poor are condemned for their poverty, the weak for their own powerlessness, and the sick for their sickness. The Puritan ethic blesses our indifference and our lack of caring. It undermines the normal development of Basic Human Empathy.
We must stress that many or most Protestant denominations -- among them Lutherans, Methodists, Anglicans and many others -- do not subscribe to this theology or its consequent social doctrine of non-empathy. Neither does the Catholic church, whose social doctrine is among the most empathetic of all, even if most Catholics are blissfully unaware of their own church's social teaching.
Due to its historical importance as a foundation stone of American culture, the Puritan ethic has created a powerful under-current of insensitivity in American society -- even among members of religious groups that do not support the Puritan theological premise or conclusions.
Other nations and cultures have their own historical and philosophical barriers that interfere with the development of Basic Human Empathy. We each need to explore our cultural and historical contexts in order to identify what variables are at play.
(2) Individual, personal conditioning often builds on cultural conditioning. Continuing the USA example, wave upon wave of immigrants struggle in the "land of opportunity" to reach the "American dream." Those who reach the dream of material welfare, unaware (and uninterested) in the real difficulties faced by others, often assume that if others haven't found the same level of material success it must be due to their lack of trying, some moral failing, or some other internal weakness.
The adults in American society who hold such views may intentionally or unintentionally condition their children to believe that if others suffer, it must be due to their own avoidable failings, or lack of hard work. Didn't they, recent immigrants, reach success through hard work? Therefore, why waste time, energy and money worrying about the downtrodden?
We can now explain how, in the richest large country in the world, we accept homelessness, poverty, lack of access to health care or legal care, etc. and do not appear to be particularly motivated to take political steps to bring about greater social justice.
Often, adolescents reach our schools carrying the huge burden of non-empathetic cultural and personal conditioning. This conditioning has been unconscious and not requested. They usually have not stopped to reflect on their own mental schemas about empathy, economic success, and how pain and suffering can come to those who do not deserve it. That is the beginning of our work as teachers.
In our next post, we will explore some specific avenues to help our students breakaway from any residual cultural or personal conditioning and recover their potential for development of Basic Human Empathy.
September 28, 2009
CAN WE HELP OUR STUDENTS TO DEVELOP EMPATHY ? -- PART l
When we consider current global issues in our classrooms, a question arises regarding our students' ability to feel and understand the pain and suffering of others around the globe. How can middle or upper-class students feel the pain of hunger, or the hopelessness of poverty? How can they relate to totally disempowered human beings around the world? The ability to personally feel the impact of these powerful situations, unknown to them "in the flesh," is critical to a thorough understanding of the global reality. So, how can we help our students develop empathy for their fellow humans? Let's start at the very beginning.
Psychologists tell us that when we as infants first develop our awareness of others as beings not directly linked to us and not part of "our group," we respond with concern, rejection or fear. (Aunt Sally can attest to this, as little Jimmy begins to cry when she first visits the family and picks him up.) This is an understandable evolutionary reaction to a possible threat to our well-being. To the infant, others are present only to meet his/her needs or as possible threats. An infant has no sense of empathy for the welfare of others.
As we gain confidence in ourselves and in our environment, we lower our guard and become less insular; we are more accepting of new faces. We begin to develop our social self and learn to interact productively with others. We begin to accept the existence of others in our world.
Although we remain self-centered as children, we normally begin to develop a rudimentary -- but very real -- concern for fairness and justice. We automatically reject obvious perceived injustices perpetrated against our siblings and our social group. As we reach what Jean Piaget called the "Concrete Operational Stage" of cognitive development, we reject specific examples of perceived wrongdoing against those close to us.
A little later, we reach Piaget's "Formal Operational Stage" and we are able to internalize abstract concepts that we can apply to specific situations; concepts such as "justice," "fairness," and "empathy." We now have the tools to develop empathy toward those who are personally unknown to us.
The specific attributes of human nature have been a matter of considerable philosophical and psychological debate over the years. I am going to be on the side of those who believe that in a normal, non-threatening environment, all humans begin to develop "basic human empathy." I am going to define "basic human empathy" as "the intellectual and emotional ability to feel the joy or pain of others who are not personally close to us."
Not everyone develops basic human empathy. In very threatening environments, some children/adolescents cannot get beyond the evolutionary dictates of self-preservation-at-any-cost and do not develop a sense of empathy; this is not normal human development. Fortunately, most humans do develop empathy as we develop cognitively and morally/ethically.
In those cases when our environment and our conditioning conspire to thwart normal development, the result is an adolescent or adult with an under-developed capacity for empathy. Several questions arise: What specific factors can interfere with the development of the human capacity for empathy? Can we as teachers help our students develop their normal potential to become empathetic human beings and care for both the pain and the well-being of those unknown to them? If so, how can we do it?
In our next post we will explore some possibilities....
Psychologists tell us that when we as infants first develop our awareness of others as beings not directly linked to us and not part of "our group," we respond with concern, rejection or fear. (Aunt Sally can attest to this, as little Jimmy begins to cry when she first visits the family and picks him up.) This is an understandable evolutionary reaction to a possible threat to our well-being. To the infant, others are present only to meet his/her needs or as possible threats. An infant has no sense of empathy for the welfare of others.
As we gain confidence in ourselves and in our environment, we lower our guard and become less insular; we are more accepting of new faces. We begin to develop our social self and learn to interact productively with others. We begin to accept the existence of others in our world.
Although we remain self-centered as children, we normally begin to develop a rudimentary -- but very real -- concern for fairness and justice. We automatically reject obvious perceived injustices perpetrated against our siblings and our social group. As we reach what Jean Piaget called the "Concrete Operational Stage" of cognitive development, we reject specific examples of perceived wrongdoing against those close to us.
A little later, we reach Piaget's "Formal Operational Stage" and we are able to internalize abstract concepts that we can apply to specific situations; concepts such as "justice," "fairness," and "empathy." We now have the tools to develop empathy toward those who are personally unknown to us.
The specific attributes of human nature have been a matter of considerable philosophical and psychological debate over the years. I am going to be on the side of those who believe that in a normal, non-threatening environment, all humans begin to develop "basic human empathy." I am going to define "basic human empathy" as "the intellectual and emotional ability to feel the joy or pain of others who are not personally close to us."
Not everyone develops basic human empathy. In very threatening environments, some children/adolescents cannot get beyond the evolutionary dictates of self-preservation-at-any-cost and do not develop a sense of empathy; this is not normal human development. Fortunately, most humans do develop empathy as we develop cognitively and morally/ethically.
In those cases when our environment and our conditioning conspire to thwart normal development, the result is an adolescent or adult with an under-developed capacity for empathy. Several questions arise: What specific factors can interfere with the development of the human capacity for empathy? Can we as teachers help our students develop their normal potential to become empathetic human beings and care for both the pain and the well-being of those unknown to them? If so, how can we do it?
In our next post we will explore some possibilities....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
