Um possível efeito colateral logicamente inesperado da alta empatia: limitação do círculo social/A possible, logically unexpected side effect of high empathy: limitation of social circle

 Mais empático é o indivíduo, mais profundamente simpático ou afetuoso com os outros ele tende a ser. Só que, ao invés disso resultar em uma maior capacidade de se relacionar com os outros, pode acontecer o efeito oposto, de dificultar essa capacidade e acabar limitando a quantidade de pessoas com as quais consegue estabelecer contato permanente e/ou frutífero. Porque a empatia, em seu sentido associado com simpatia ou afetividade, não é apenas sentir carinho, ser respeitoso ou cuidadoso pelo ou com o outro, especialmente se percebe o mínimo de afinidade, mas também de sentir preocupação pelo mesmo, bem como de tomar suas dores. Além disso, outro efeito que também pode ter um papel negativo nessa finalidade, de se fazer amizades, é a percepção de carência do outro em relação ao mais empático, se a alta empatia tende a, pelo menos, tornar o seu "portador" mais aparentemente carente, característica que costuma afastar mais do que atrair pessoas. Pois não bastasse o que já foi comentado, o mais empático também pode desenvolver uma visão mais crítica e, portanto, rabugenta sobre o mundo, particularmente sobre o mundo humano, suas injustiças, crueldades... que também afasta mais do que atrai pessoas para o seu convívio. 

The more empathetic an individual is, the more deeply sympathetic or affectionate he or she tends to be with others. However, instead of resulting in a greater ability to relate to others, the opposite effect may occur, hindering this ability and ending up limiting the number of people with whom one can establish permanent and/or fruitful contact. Because empathy, in its sense associated with sympathy or affection, is not only about feeling affection, being respectful or caring for or with the other, especially if one perceives the slightest affinity, but also about feeling concern for them, as well as empathizing with their pain. Furthermore, another effect that can also have a negative role in this purpose of making friends is the perception of the other's neediness in relation to the more empathetic person, if high empathy tends to, at the very least, make its "bearer" more apparently needy, a characteristic that tends to drive people away rather than attract them. As if what has already been said were not enough, the most empathetic person can also develop a more critical and, therefore, grumpy view of the world, particularly the human world, its injustices, cruelties... which also drives away more people than it attracts to their lives.

About the perversity of lying to avoid offending and its consequences

What does it mean to be really good??

There's a film, "Florence: Who's That Woman?", from 2016, that I've never seen and it looks very interesting. Starring the legendary actress Meryl Streep, it tells the real story of an American granddaughter named Florence Foster Jenkins who, despite having no talent for operatic singing, believed in the opposite and, precisely for that reason, came to invest in an artistic career and present themselves publicly. She was even "successful" in her presentations or... gratuitous humiliations, as there were many people willing to pay to see her playing out of tune live. For this story can give us a lesson about kindness and truth, if it is about a woman who had a great delusion about herself and whose belief was further reinforced by others, not just those who wanted to see her humiliate herself and, perhaps, without any awareness of the role she was playing, but also by those who, feeling sorry for her apparent innocence, supported her dream (and without forgetting to talk about the possibility that she may have "wet the hand" of some to help her in your endeavor).

Realize that even this modern and popular idea that "empathy", as a synonym for kindness, is expressed particularly through the act of lying to avoid offending or to please, has its limits. Take the case of Florence, where those who lied to her, supporting her career, were no better or kinder than those who took pleasure in seeing her humiliating herself, if the right thing to do is to tell the truth, especially if necessary, because there are situations in which frankness may be optional. But, when it comes to intelligence, talent or competence, it is best to always tell the truth, no matter how harsh it may be. Here, it is still necessary to differentiate between subjective truth or what one thinks and feels and objective truth or what one perceives objectively.

To make matters worse, this habit of always lying to avoid offending is definitely no longer limited to the personal sphere, entering the world of politics, as it has been adopted by so-called "progressive" or "left-wing" parties and in relation to their "politically protected" groups " or, "relevant" to their power projects: historically or socially 'marginalized' groups. So, from the dictatorship of political correctness in the main institutions of most Western countries, based on an alignment of related ideologies: from egalitarianism to cultural relativism, it began to condemn any idea or thought that confirms potentially innate differences in cognitive performance and behavior between individuals and groups, even more so if it is about these "protected" groups. As a result, we have been living in a scenario similar to of Florence's story, in which most people have been emotionally coerced into believing that, for example, cognitive differences between men and women or between racial groups are due exclusively to cultural and social factors, and not because, perhaps, they are reflections of the intrinsic differences between them: lying so as not to "offend", it seems nicer to "blame" the environment than to endorse a more deterministic thought that justifies rather than problematizes certain differences in representation, for example, the disproportion of men working in the world of science and technology. And, in addition to discursive imposition, these groups or political parties have also created laws based on these beliefs, such as establishing quota systems for their "politically relevant" groups. But, if their differences are deeper, if they are not just products of privileges of one group over another, then individuals below the required competence are being hired, mainly because they are of the race or ethnicity covered (or another category). Therefore, we have a definitely anti-meritocratic or unfair situation that can still have serious consequences in the medium and long term, precisely because we are assigning important functions to people who are less capable or ideal for the position...

Empathy, the act of putting yourself in someone else's shoes, is an indisputable quality. However, it either seems to have been excessively valued and/or superficially understood, as I commented in this other text: "Pathological altruism or underdeveloped empathy?". Because, even if it is respectful to avoid saying certain truths or to avoid sincerity, not every situation will be the most correct habit, as seems to be the case with capacity or intelligence, since a complex society depends on these competence filters to function in a minimally adequate manner.