Is Empathy Actually Helpful?? ~ Kumashiro, "Troubling Education," Chapter 2
While reading through this chapter, there were a few moments where I felt tired and even a bit annoyed, because it was redundant of other texts I’ve encountered - I had seen this before, heard it before. Then I realized that this actually something to be grateful for! It makes me incredibly happy that I have read and discussed anti-oppressive pedagogy so much, have thought about it at such lengths, that I can feel this kind of ease within its tenants. There were, however, moments during the reading that made me pause and think more about ideas I had glossed over in the past.
One of these moments was when Kumashiro discussed on the limitations and potential downsides to empathy-focused teaching.
He writes, “The assumption that information and knowledge lead to empathy does not account for times when feelings do not reflect intention, and for that matter, when neither feelings nor intention gets played out in behavior” (43). I have spent some time in the past thinking about the limitations of emotional responses - the idea that feeling moved by a narrative does not necessitate a shift in mindset or the formation of action plans. Even after thinking through those limitations, I still feel that a greater capacity for empathy is vital for there to be any chance of future forward movement.
This is where Kumashiro’s argument begins to challenge me, however. He followed up that statement on limitations with a potential negative side-effect that I had not considered. He writes, “And even if empathy were to be achieved, it could be argued that it might simply reinforce the binary of “us” and “them”; for, as argued in chapter 1, the expectation that information about the Other leads to empathy is often based on the assumption that learning about “them” helps students see that “they” are like “us,” and therefore does not disrupt ways that students see themselves” (43). I have always thought about empathy as a thing that causes us to become closer and more connected to people who are different from us. To place ourselves on the same “side” as those who face challenges and achieve victories that we would never encounter due to differences in our life circumstances, biology, etc. What I hadn’t considered, is that by working to understand and feel connected to other people, we are actually highlighting the “otherness” of those people.
Kumashiro does go on to validate the importance of empathy, or encountering narratives that are unfamiliar, etc. because empathy does have social value. However, empathy possessing some social value does not mean that it possesses political value or that it holds great value in the fight for social justice. I will have to do a great deal more thinking about this issue before I feel settled, because I still feel very conflicted. For example, one of Kumashiro’s critiques was that empathy does not necessarily “disrupt ways that students see themselves." I am not sure if students’ senses of self need to be disrupted - they need to be deepened, expanded, and encouraged to grow, but do they need to be disrupted? I’m not so sure.
I’m interested in continuing this conversation with the other folks in the cohort, as well as continuing to contemplate it independently. How does empathy aid or hinder the progression of anti-oppressive education?
One of these moments was when Kumashiro discussed on the limitations and potential downsides to empathy-focused teaching.
He writes, “The assumption that information and knowledge lead to empathy does not account for times when feelings do not reflect intention, and for that matter, when neither feelings nor intention gets played out in behavior” (43). I have spent some time in the past thinking about the limitations of emotional responses - the idea that feeling moved by a narrative does not necessitate a shift in mindset or the formation of action plans. Even after thinking through those limitations, I still feel that a greater capacity for empathy is vital for there to be any chance of future forward movement.
This is where Kumashiro’s argument begins to challenge me, however. He followed up that statement on limitations with a potential negative side-effect that I had not considered. He writes, “And even if empathy were to be achieved, it could be argued that it might simply reinforce the binary of “us” and “them”; for, as argued in chapter 1, the expectation that information about the Other leads to empathy is often based on the assumption that learning about “them” helps students see that “they” are like “us,” and therefore does not disrupt ways that students see themselves” (43). I have always thought about empathy as a thing that causes us to become closer and more connected to people who are different from us. To place ourselves on the same “side” as those who face challenges and achieve victories that we would never encounter due to differences in our life circumstances, biology, etc. What I hadn’t considered, is that by working to understand and feel connected to other people, we are actually highlighting the “otherness” of those people.
Kumashiro does go on to validate the importance of empathy, or encountering narratives that are unfamiliar, etc. because empathy does have social value. However, empathy possessing some social value does not mean that it possesses political value or that it holds great value in the fight for social justice. I will have to do a great deal more thinking about this issue before I feel settled, because I still feel very conflicted. For example, one of Kumashiro’s critiques was that empathy does not necessarily “disrupt ways that students see themselves." I am not sure if students’ senses of self need to be disrupted - they need to be deepened, expanded, and encouraged to grow, but do they need to be disrupted? I’m not so sure.
I’m interested in continuing this conversation with the other folks in the cohort, as well as continuing to contemplate it independently. How does empathy aid or hinder the progression of anti-oppressive education?
I like that you chose to write about this section of our reading, because I also have very conflicting feelings about what Kumashiro was trying to say about empathy. At least at the moment, I believe we should encourage students to develop empathy. I understand what he was trying to say about this leading to othering, but I think students could both develop empathy and avoid othering if we are intentional about how we teach them. I think it is important that we have our students reflect on their own lives and make connections between how they walk through the world and how the people in question do. If students are able to make connections between they two, it is my belief that they will see the people in question as human beings and not just poor, unfortunate others.
ReplyDeleteYou ask really powerful questions, Leyla. And I'm glad you were able to access some of the nuance of his arguments; several others have commented that this reading is the "same old, same old," but I think he has some unique ideas to offer us. I agree that we should spend more time on this question of empathy.
ReplyDelete