The world needs more compassion. However, most of us limit ourselves to feeling sorry, that passive feeling through which we limit ourselves to experiencing sadness for those who suffer from deprivation, for those who leave their country, for those who live on the last step of our society. However, the compassionate is the only one who assumes an active feeling, the only one who does everything possible to mitigate other people's suffering.
Something that is curious in our day to day is the great discomfort that the word "compassion" arouses. Nobody likes, for example, to be sympathetic, because somehow it shows a certain disadvantage, a dimension that does not place us at the same level of opportunity as the rest. Now, transcendence changes if we refer to this term within a Buddhist framework.
"Pity costs nothing, but it's not worth anything either. We need more compassion. "
-Josh Billings-
In the latter case, compassion is an exceptional tool that allows us several achievements. The first is to see the world from a more human, affectionate and sensitive vision. Furthermore, the authentic commitment of wanting to alleviate that pain, of doing everything possible to repair that disadvantage, is added.
On the other hand, we also have that dimension that is so necessary that it is undoubtedly self-pity. We also should be proactive with our own needs and needs.
In short, it is not enough to experience pity. With seeing who suffers and just putting ourselves in their shoes a few moments to receive their sorrows, and then moving away to put forgetfulness at a distance. We need action, will and commitment, with others, but also with our own person, with that internal reality that we sometimes neglect and do not attend to.
More commitment, more compassion
Often, we leave aside the great psychological implication that certain terms have. Thus, the word "pity" hides in the recesses of its three syllables dimensions as curious as striking. In this way, there are those who venture to say for example that when we experience this emotion we apply the most basic empathy: we are able to connect with the suffering of others, we know what hurts, how they suffer and what the impact of their personal situation is.
However, feeling sorry for someone is not just empathizing. We also apply a feeling of superiority. There is an evident constancy of something that separates us from the other: it can be the status, the culture, the economy and even the physical distance proper to our species when we experience pity for an animal.
On the other hand, we have compassion, that word that by itself already gives us a clue about how it acts. This word comes from the Latin, 'cum passio', and could be translated as 'suffering together' or 'dealing with emotions together'. As we see, here the distances are dissolved to establish a closeness of equal to equal where to participate in the pain of the other but with a very clear purpose: to commit ourselves with him to improve his situation. In this way, we can conclude with the fact that compassion responds to the confluence of three basic components:
- The emotional: we connect with the suffering of others actively by experimenting with it a motivation, an express desire to generate well-being.
- The cognitive: to perceive the pain of others we evaluate, and then conclude with the need to develop an action plan.
- The behavioral: the decision to deploy a series of actions to resolve the complicated situation of the other party.
Empathy is not the same as compassion. Most of us empathize with the emotions of others, however, that connection does not always lead to mobilization. Compassion also implies presenting a mobilizing feeling, an action that starts from the emotions but seeks a defined objective: to improve the situation of the other.
Compassion, an instinct that we must recover
The world needs more compassion, more people who do not just contemplate the pain of others, but put means (within their means) to generate a positive change. Now, as we have indicated at the beginning, this word still has a somewhat complex and uncomfortable implication in our vocabulary. We do not like them to feel sorry for us. Most of the time, we are even reluctant to receive help from others.
However, as several scientists explain in a study at the University of Berkeley (California), we should be able to recover that "primary instinct". Compassion would be that natural and automatic response that has allowed us to survive as a species.
It has even been shown that two- and three-year-old children exhibit compassionate behaviors towards other children without needing to receive any kind of reward in return. It is a reaction, a type of response that unfortunately tends to disappear over time in many cases due to our social conditioning.
As a curiosity and finally, it is worth noting a piece of information that Dr. Dachner Keltner, from the aforementioned study at the University of Berkeley, contributed. The famous phrase "only the fittest survive" attributed to Charles Darwin would not actually be the famous author of the Origin of Species. That idea, that phrase, was coined by Herbert Spencer and social Darwinists, who wanted to justify the superiority of class and race.
Charles Darwin emphasized something very different. In fact, as he himself explained in his writings, the societies that applied the most compassion were those that would have the best chance of evolving. In his own words:
"social or maternal instincts such as compassion are better than any other. Communities that include a greater number of compassionate members will prosper more, because this trait favors the survival and flourishing of our species. "
REFERENCE:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-the-name-love/201008/do-not-pity-me
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dacher_Keltner
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin
https://chopra.com/articles/the-difference-between-compassion-and-pity
You got a 33.79% upvote from @ocdb courtesy of @joelgonz1982!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit