When I started to think on this topic, my curiosity made me google the exact meaning of compassion. The first result said, compassion literally means to “suffer together”.
My novice mind has always thought that compassion is a synonym of empathy. But the article by Emma Seppälä Ph.D. cleared my doubts. She wrote, Empathy, as defined by researchers, is the visceral or emotional experience of another person’s feelings. It is, in a sense, an automatic mirroring of another’s emotion, like tearing up at a friend’s sadness. Altruism is an action that benefits someone else. It may or may not be accompanied by empathy or compassion, for example in the case of making a donation for tax purposes. Although these terms are related to compassion, they are not identical. Compassion often does, of course, involve an empathic response and altruistic behavior. However, compassion is defined as the emotional response when perceiving suffering and involves an authentic desire to help.
I do realize the benefits of being a compassionate being but I am always conflicted, weather to be compassionate or to look if it’s in my favor or not. Compassion is defiantly a natural trait but as we grow up our this natural trait gets mixed with another natural trait, i.e. survival instincts . As Keltner explained that the term “survival of the fittest,” often attributed to Charles Darwin, was actually coined by Herbert Spencer and Social Darwinists who wished to justify class and race superiority. But, lesser known fact is that Darwin’s work is best described with the phrase “survival of the kindest.” Indeed in The Descent of Man and Selection In Relation to Sex, Darwin argued for “the greater strength of the social or maternal instincts than that of any other instinct or motive.” In another passage, he comments that “communities, which included the greatest number of the most sympathetic members, would flourish best, and rear the greatest number of offspring.” Compassion may indeed be a naturally evolved and adaptive trait. Without it, the survival and flourishing of our species would have been unlikely.
Coming to a conclusion is very confusing and difficult to me because as much as being morally correct is important, no one would want anything negative in his/her life. One can say that having a balance might be an holistic option but what defines the accurate balance? It’s very ambiguous. Everyone has their own quantities and their own version of ‘perfect balance’.
I want to know what is your perfect balance?
Vidisha 