Empathy seems like a good quality in human beings.
同理心似乎是人类的一项美好品质。
Pure and simple.
纯粹又简单。
It allows us to consider the perspective of others — to put ourselves in their shoes and imagine their experiences.
它使得我们能够考虑到别人的视角——让我们自己站在他人的角度，想象别人的感受。
From that empathetic vantage point, only good things can come, right?
从这种同理心好处的角度来看，它是有利无弊的，对吗？
Not necessarily, according to author Fritz Breithaupt.
然而在作家弗里茨.布里绍特看来，并不一定。
"Sometimes we commit atrocities not out of a failure of empathy but rather as a direct consequence of successful, even overly successful, empathy," he writes in his forthcoming book The Dark Sides of Empathy.
“有时候，一些恶行的出现并非因为缺乏同理心，恰恰是因为有同理心甚至是同理心过度，”他在自己即将上市的新书《同理心的黑暗面》中写道。
Breithaupt, who directs the Experimental Humanities Lab at Indiana University, argues that empathy is a morally ambiguous capacity, one that can lead us astray if we don't understand its many sides.
布里绍特是印第安纳大学人性实验室的主任，他认为同理心是一种道德层面比较模糊的能力，如果我们没能全面地认识它可能会把我们引入歧途。
"Empathy is a riddle," Breithaupt says.
“同理心是一个谜，”布里绍特说道。
While it can enrich our lives, Breithaupt says our ability to identify with others' feelings can also fuel polarization, spark violence and motivate dysfunctional behavior in relationships, like helicopter parenting.
尽管它可以让我们的生活更丰富，布里绍特说，我们能够感觉别人的感受这种能力也可能会带来各种关系汇总的两极分化，引发暴力，或者引发行为紊乱，比如溺爱子女。
Breithaupt, who reviews the cultural and scientific history of empathy in his book, explains that empathy is a relatively new concept.
布里绍特在书中回顾总结了同理心的文化和科学历史，解释说同理心是一个比较新的概念。
The term only emerged in 1909, when it was translated from a German conception of "feeling yourself into a work of art," he says.
这个术语在1909年才出现，它是从德国的“把自己融入艺术品”的概念翻译过来的，他说道。
In the past 40 years, it has risen to prominence as evolutionary biologists started to explore its role in shaping the human brain.
在过去四十年间，它开始得到了重视，因为进化生物学家开始探讨它在改变人类大闹方面的作用。
Since then, it's become a core psychological concept, and part of what biologists think makes us distinctly human.
从那以后，它开始变成了一种心理学的核心概念，也被生物学家们认为是使人成其为人的部分原因。
Since empathy is baked into our very being, Breithaupt argues that we must be aware of the good and bad it can enable.
既然同理心根植于我们人性之中，布里绍特认为我们必须要认识到它可能带来的好处和坏处。
Jonathan Lambert spoke with him about empathy's biological and moral dimensions.
乔纳森.兰伯特跟他进行了同理心的生物和道德层面的谈话。
The following interview has been edited for length and clarity.
以下是这次采访的简要归纳。
How does science define empathy, and what light does that shed on on more philosophical conceptions of it?
问题一：科学界是如何定义同理心的，这对其哲学概念又有什么提示呢？
For a while neuroscientists thought there was an empathy center in the brain, some little spot somewhere.
曾经神经学家们认为大脑中有一个同理心中心，是位于某处的一个点。
They thought we could understand this spot and then understand empathy.
他们以为理解了这个点，就能理解同理心了。
But then they came to a much larger realization: Empathy is not in one place in our brains; it's everywhere.
但后来他们有了更多的认识：同理心不是大脑中孤立的点，而是遍布其中。
Imaging studies showed that we use every part of the brain both for our own actions, our own feelings, but also for the observation of other people.
图像研究表明我们会用到大脑的各个部分来指导我们的行动，我们的感觉，同时也用于观察别人。
So basically the whole brain does empathy.
所以整个大脑基本上都参与了同理心。
That changes a lot of things.
这带来了很多事情的改变。
It shows us that empathy affects all our thinking.
它表明同理心会影响我们所有的思维。
It's with us every moment.
它无时无刻不伴随着我们。
I think that means that empathy is so important to us that it's something we can't neglect.
我认为这就意味着同理心是如此重要以至于我们无法忽视它。
Yes, we're biologically primed for it, but we also have to cultivate it, and cultivation is something that can [be a] lifelong learning task.
是的，我们从生物学上天生就有同理心，不过我们也需要对它进行培养，而这种培养是终生的任务。
It never ends.
永不停止。
So science seems to suggest that empathy is sort of baked into our being. I think most people might assume that's a good thing. Why is it not necessarily?
那么科学似乎表明同理心从某种程度上根植于人性之中。我认为大部分人可能都会认为这是件好事，为什么你说并不一定如此呢？
I'm not going to try to convince you to say that empathy is bad or that we should be against empathy.
我并不打算说服你同理心是坏的或者说我们应该逆同理心而行。
I think it's fundamental for us.
我认为它对我们来说是非常重要的。
It's absolutely something that we have to understand to know how we operate.
我们肯定得理解它才能知道我们是怎样行为的。
I also think that in most cases empathy does more good than bad things.
我还认为在大部分情况下同理心都是利大于弊的。
I want to put it in proportion — there are dark sides to empathy.
我只想把它按比例划分——同理心也是有不好的一面的。
People assume that empathy is good because it is good for the recipient of empathy — I'm actually skeptical about this.
人们认为同理心很好是因为它对同理心的接收方有好处——而我实际上很怀疑这一点。
Empathy might be a little bit more selfish than many people assume.
同理心其实比大部分人以为的要更自私一点。
The empathizer feels less alone, they share experiences, they learn something.
给出同理心的人会更感觉不那么孤独，他们会分享体验，学到东西。
So we should ask for whom is [empathy] good?
所以我们应该问，同理心到底是对谁有好处？
It's actually the empathizer in most cases.
实际上在大部分情况下是对给出同理心的人有好处。
How is empathy good for the empathizer?
那对于接收方同理心有什么好处呢？
Beings without empathy live in their own world.
没有同理心的人会处于自己的世界之中。
They can't really understand that other beings are out there with minds of their own.
他们不能理解周围的人也有跟他们类似的思想。
But beings with empathy understand that there are all these different minds around [that] have different experiences and different feelings.
但是有同理心的人就可以理解周围的人有不同的思想，不同的体验和不同的感受。
They can participate in them.
他们就可以参与其中。
Someone with empathy lives more than one life.
有同理心的人不止过着自己的生活。
Of course, sometimes that means that you have to carry the suffering of others, but in many cases their joy becomes your joy.
当然，有时这就意味着你也要感受到别人的遭遇，不过大部分情况下别人的快乐也会成为你的快乐。
So it's a richer, much more complex life.
所以你的生活会变得更加丰富多彩。
And in that sense,of course empathy is wonderful for you.
按这个道理说来，同理心当然对你有好处。
But there's a flip side too, right? In your book you talk about something you call "vampiristic empathy." What do you mean by that?
但它也有反面，对吗？在你的书中，你提到了一个“吸血鬼式的同理心”概念，这是什么意思呢？
Vampiristic empathy is a form of empathy where people want to manipulate the people they empathize with so that they can, through them, experience the world in such a way that they really enjoy it.
吸血鬼式的同理心是指的这样的同理心，就是人们想要操纵他们所同理的人，以便于通过他们，能够体验到自己喜欢的方式。
An extreme case of this is helicopter parenting.
这方面的极端的例子就是父母的溺爱。
Helicopter parents are constantly trying to steer their kids in the directions they think are the right directions.
溺爱的父母总是想把孩子导向他们认为正确的方向。
Of course they want the best for their children.
当然，他们也是为了孩子好。
Very understandable; I have kids and I want what's best for them too.
这是让人非常理解的，我也有孩子，我也想要给他们最好的。
But I think there's something else seeping in.
但我想这里还掺入了其他的东西。
There's this sort of living along with the kids, imagining how it must be like to have a life that's marked by successes, where obstacles disappear and life can be enjoyed.
在孩子们中有这样一种生活，想象一下拥有这种人生是怎样的，充满了成功，没有任何障碍，生活全是享受。
But that also means that the parents are co-experiencing that life, so they start taking over ... they basically want to use the child almost as a pawn.
但这也意味着父母也可以一起体验这样的人生，所以他们就开始来控制干预...基本上可以说他们把孩子当成了棋子。
In a sense, extreme helicopter parents are robbing their kids of a selfhood so that they can basically project their own self into these kids.
从某种层面说，极度溺爱的父母剥夺了孩子们的自我，以便于他们能够把自己投射到孩子身上。
You write that empathy can actually make us more polarized instead of bringing us together. How can that happen?
你还写道同理心会让我们更加孤立而不是更加团结。怎么回事呢？
People imagine that empathy can help resolve tensions in cases of conflict, but very often empathy is exactly that thing that leads to the extremes, that polarizes people even more.
人们以为同理心可以在发生冲突时缓和紧张，但同理心其实经常就是带来这种冲突的原因，会让人们更加孤立。
It can happen this way, be it a family feud or something that escalates to a civil war.
有可能会发生这种情况，无论是家庭争端，还是可能升级成内战的情形。
Humans are very quick to take sides.
人们会迅速开始站队。
And when you take one side, you take the perspective of that side.
当你站到某一队后，你就会采取这一队的立场。
You can see the painful parts of that perspective and empathize with them, and that empathy can fuel seeing the other side as darker and darker or more dubious.
你会看到这张视角下的苦难的部分，对其产生同理心，这种同理心会使得你把另一队看得更黑暗更可疑。
One example of this comes from Northern Ireland, which has a long history of conflict.
其中的一个例子就来自北爱尔兰，这里有很长的内乱历史。
In the early 2000s school administrators there tried to resolve the conflict between the Catholic and Protestant youth by bringing empathy into the curriculum.
在21世纪早年时，学校管理层曾试图在课程中加入同理心的概念来解决天主教和新教的年轻人之间的冲突。
They emphasized that students would learn both sides, and the atrocities committed by one side or the other were always put into context.
他们确保学生能够了解到两方，这两方的 各种恶行也放入了课文中。
Students learned this curriculum, but follow-up studies showed that this new generation was more polarized than the one before.
学生们学习了这样的课程，但后续调查表明这样的新一代比之前还要更加偏激了。
So what this group had internalized was there's always two sides and, in the end, they know their side.
所以这群学生们明白总是存在两种立场，最后，他们都知道自己的立场。
So they reorganized this information to empathize with people on their side and withdraw from the other side.
于是他们会重组信息，更加理解自己这种教的人，远离另外一种教的人。
So Northern Ireland had to abandon this project.
于是北爱尔兰不得不放弃了这个项目。
The other case is that of terrorists.
另一个案例则是恐怖分子。
I think a lot of terrorists may not lack empathy.
我想很多恐怖分子并非缺乏同理心。
Rather, they see some plight of a group they identify with — they see them suffering and see it as something horrible, and that becomes more extreme and activates them to become active terrorists.
相反，他们看到了自己民族的困境——他们看到了他们的苦难，知道其可怕，这会使得他们更加极端，变成更积极行动的恐怖分子。
Are there other downsides to empathy?
同理心还有别的什么坏处吗？
[Empathizers] may overextend themselves.
给出同理心的人可能会过度延伸自己。
If you are a medical doctor who sees a lot of suffering and pain every day, it can very quickly become too much.
加入你是一个医生每天看到很多的病痛，很快你可能就会崩溃。
Something like a third of medical doctors suffer from "empathy burnout" that is so severe that it affects their functioning as doctors and their personal life.
大概有三分之一的医生会患上“同理心过剩”，折痕严重以至于会影响他们行医以及他们的个人生活。
They become the victim of feeling empathy.
他们就成了同理心的受害者。
In the end though, doesn't empathy cause more good than harm?
不过最后，同理心还是利大于弊的吗？
In one sense, yes.
从一个层面说，说的。
Empathy is weakly correlated with altruistic behavior.
同理心跟利他性行为是弱相关的。
So there is a connection.
所以这之间存在一种联系。
I do think empathy can help people help each other, and that makes us human.
我们确实也认为同理心会帮助人们去帮助对方，而这使得人成其为人。
My core argument here is that in many cases of altruistic help or humanitarian aid, people actually don't really empathize as much with the person in need.
我在这里的主要观点是在很多利他性帮助和人道主义援助的情形中，人们实际上并没有都给需要帮助的人足够的同理心。
They identify more with the helper, the hero, the person who intervenes even if it's an imaginary helper.
他们会更多地认可援助者，英雄，那些采取行动的人们哪怕只是想象中的援助者。
It can be good when it leads to good action, but it can have downsides.
最后可能会带来好的行为这就是好的，不过也有不好的一面。
For example, if you want the victims to say 'thank you.'
比如，假如你想要受害者说“谢谢你”。
You may even want to keep the people you help in that position of inferior victim because it can sustain your feeling of being a hero.
你甚至可能会想让你帮助的人一直处于弱势受害者的位置因为这会延续你当英雄的感觉。
If you want recognition and if that doesn't come, it can turn into resentment.
假如你想得到认可，而又没能得到时，可能会带来怨恨。
That's an unfortunately common impulse.
这就是一直常见的不幸的想法。
On the political scale, I think it happened in Germany.
从政治上，我认为它曾经发生在德国。
In 2015 Germany opened its borders, very laudably, to refugees.
2015年德国曾很受赞赏地打开国境欢迎难民。
Initially there was a wave of huge enthusiasm, and then suddenly a huge drop in enthusiasm and a lot of resentment.
一开始他们充满热情，不过很快就下降了，还带来很多怨憎。
What are your big takeaways about empathy?
关于同理心你又什么建议呢？
I think we can learn to use empathy in a somewhat controlled way.
我认为我们可以学着以可控的方式来使用我们的同理心。
We can learn when to block it, when to not allow empathy to be manipulated and when to fully turn it on.
我们可以学会什么时候该抗拒它，什么时候不能让同理心被利用，什么时候又该让它完全展现出来。
Yes, we are born with empathy, but it needs constant practice [to know] when to use it and when not to use it.
是的，我们天生具有同理心，但我们需要持续的联系什么时候该用什么时候不该。
So the dark sides are so important to know because they teach us that in some cases you shouldn't empathize.
这些黑暗面也是很重要的，因为它教会我们有时候不应该展现同理心。
But when it's good, we should embrace empathy, because it can lead to such richer, fuller lives.
但当它有好处时，我们应该拥抱自己的 同理心，因为它会带来更丰富更完整的人生。
问题
文中没有提到一下哪一项同理心的不利面呢？
A.父母溺爱
B.医生崩溃
C.浪费时间
D.难民怨憎
留言回复正确选项，前十名朋友可以获得红包哦，赶快来试试吧！
感谢关注
跟amber一起看世界
联系客服
