This article is about the controversial idea that a serious law of attraction student must basically avoid engaging in empathy and sympathy, in order to be able to pave the way for positive momentum.
KEYWORDS: emotional selfishness, emotions, empathy, feelings, law of attraction, philosophy, positivity, psychology, sympathy.
Here in today’s blog post I will try to make a case for the idea that we must abandon the idea of practicing empathy or sympathy for others.
This may of course sound radical, but in the long run this may serve everyone (i.e., not just ourselves). In other words, all parties may thus experience a gradual development toward a more positive emotional state of being.
Humans are hunters of positive emotions. And this is not just a “weird” New Age observation, but something that we easily and frequently can notice in our own lives, every step of the way.
When we are hungry, we want food so that we can get a nice taste in our mouth, and also to achieve a sense of being fulfilled. When we are thirsty, we want water to feel good. Etc.
But according to the basic theory of law of attraction and its principles, in order to get those manifestations that will give us those positive emotions, we need to work on our positivity.
If our level of positivity is high enough, we will seldom experience any lack in terms of our ability to satisfy our basic needs: satisfaction, happiness, health, and success.
So these are dependent on our own positivity. Only if we can maximize our positivity can we really achieve a “robust” lifestyle, with success in all areas of our lives.
Why Not Empathy or Sympathy?
Now let’s turn to empathy and sympathy.
There are, naturally, many different definitions of what the words “empathy” and “sympathy” mean, and I cannot, of course, refer to them all in this blog post.
But the general idea is that “empathy” involves the ability to understand the “issue” or “problem” of the other person, as if one were in the other person’s shoes, and that one, as a result of that understanding, then can engage one’s feelings to feel something similar.
Although “empathy” isn’t a synonym to “sympathy”, “sympathy” nevertheless might be understood, in some sense, simply as a “weaker” variant. Here, the listener gets involved to some degree, and may feel some limited “concern” or may realize the “importance” of the (negative) emotions felt by the other person.
In any case (regardless of the exact definition of the words “empathy” and “sympathy”), the feature I am interested in is simply the practice of accepting to listen to other people’s problems and concerns.
And my view is then that we simply should stop listening to other people’s problems and concerns. For it increases our negative momentum. But that’s not all.
For it’s not only the problems and concerns (i.e. our complete “intellectual” engagement) that are hindering the law of attraction student on his path to a more satisfying emotional level. It’s also the engagement of his own feelings.
So the most problematic aspect of this is the “evoking” or “calling forth” of one’s negative emotions (unhappiness, sadness, sorrow, etc.). It is that which is the most “destructive”.
For when we do that, we increase our own negative emotional momentum even more. Thus, we make it harder for ourselves to gain positive momentum, so we’re actually working against our own positive development.
The “danger” of adopting a consistent “no-empathy” personal policy is, of course, that other people will not like it.
They will most probably object to your refusal to listen to their emotional episode, and say that “you don’t care about other people”, and, essentially say, or imply, that you are very selfish.
The important point at this stage is that you yourself keep your policy “straight”. By that I simply mean that you do not “give in” or “change your mind”, but simply continue to explain your point of view.
This may be extra troublesome in certain cases, especially if you are dealing with old friends and family that previously may have exposed you to their sob stories. But at some point in time it has to be done, anyway.
Response, Part 1
So what is our response to the “you are so selfish” argument?
The first thing we want to explain is that all humans are selfish. This is an “easy” point, because that’s really the situation in a nutshell.
We are all, as humans, individual packages of consciousness and flesh, and we are designed to be selfish.
For if we are not selfish, we would not be able to survive, at all. We get hungry, we get thirsty, and we must get everything we need to survive, no matter what other people think.
But many times, in modern Western society, this “survival game” is played on a more subtle level, so that we do not really see how “barbarian” (and selfish) humans really are. But in societies that are less organized and less affluent, the situation is different.
So our first conclusion is that the “you are so selfish” argument is a bad one, because it applies to everyone, even to the person who said it.
Response, Part 2
But that is not all. We may here make a new argument to “flip” the situation a little bit. For at this point we may add the following important point.
We will here introduce the idea that it is actually the other person who is more selfish. Why is that?
Because that other person demands that we behave in a certain way, so that the other person may feel good.
The idea is thus that the other person demands that we should be empathetic or sympathetic, so that he or she may feel appreciated, or feel “liked” or “loved”, etc.
So it is that demanding that then really proves his or her selfishness.
And then we compare with our own situation, where we ourselves do not demand any empathy or sympathy. So we ourselves are less selfish than those who are demanding it.
Positivity Is the Key
In real life, of course, such an exchange may not proceed very smoothly. Maybe it even will be interrupted halfway in. But I think nevertheless there is something to appreciate about these arguments, even if they end up not being articulated at all.
In any event, we need more positivity in our lives. And if we can get away with it, I think it is a great idea to help our friends to not talk about their problems, and instead, like talking to small children, try to change subject as soon as possible into something that is more or less guaranteed to be a positive discussion.
For only if we have a lot of positivity and happiness do we have anything real to offer other people.
So the best strategy for me, and for others, is to create more positivity in me, so that I, and they, will have more to offer. And that prohibits any engagement in empathy and sympathy, for both me and them.
And the good thing is this. When we start by creating more positivity, the law of attraction will make sure that we will meet more and more people that also are positive themselves.
This means that there will gradually be less and less “chance” for us to meet people who demand empathy or sympathy.
For if I am, say, a “medium positive” P2 individual myself, then I will seldom bump into people who are “medium negative” N2 individuals (for negative persons are typically the ones who act as “victims”, requiring empathy and sympathy in others).
So let’s build our positivity muscles and become more happy, more satisfied, and more successful!