The War for Kindness: Building Empathy in a Fractured World

Zaki opens Chapter 1 by describing how geology rebuffed fixism. Until about 100 years ago, researchers and scientists believed that Earth’s continents did not move—that land bridges once connected the continents and enabled organisms to move between them. However, by using fossil and rock evidence as well as maps of the seafloor, German climatologist Alfred Wegener rejected this theory in favor of continental drift (the theory that continents move). Continental drift initially faced immense skepticism from the scientific community. Traditional fixists defended their belief against “a small camp of geological ‘mobilists’” (18), though mobilists eventually won this scientific argument decades later.

Like geology, it took centuries for psychology to reject “psychological fixism” (19), the theory that human nature is intrinsic and unchangeable. Zaki uses the term “psychological mobility” to describe how “we’re not static or frozen; our brains and minds shift throughout our lives” (21). Experience and genes play a role in shaping human nature, including empathy.

Zaki cites research on children, adults, and twins in particular to support this idea. For example, research shows that children who are adopted by age two in Romania exhibit a higher level of empathy than those who stayed in the foster care system—which is notorious for its poor treatment of children. Here, nurture shaped the children’s empathy.

Zaki examines how suffering can decrease or increase empathy. He notes that “when people cause it, their empathy erodes; when people endure it, their empathy grows” (24). People who perform “necessary evils” (25), such as oncologists delivering bad news to their cancer patients or managers laying off workers, often develop health and sleep issues. Disengagement (removing emotion from a situation) is a coping mechanism for people in these situations or who routinely hurt others. In essence, these individuals shut off their empathy.

On the other hand, people can become more empathetic because of suffering. These individuals are more likely to help others facing similar tragedies. This type of kindness is known as “altruism born of suffering” (26). After experiencing trauma, people often change careers to counseling to help others; positive empathetic effects from trauma endure for years.

To conclude, Zaki examines whether or not people can intentionally change their level of empathy. Research on mindsets by American psychologist Carol Dweck demonstrates that “simply believing it is possible to change one’s empathy helps to make it so” (27). The Roddenberry hypothesis remains another barrier to creating a kinder world. Disavowing this fixist perspective will open “new empathetic possibilities” (32) to more people.

Zaki begins Chapter 2 by describing how two photojournalists who document some of the worst human tragedies empathize with their subjects. One photojournalist suppresses his emotions and the other uses his emotions to forge strong connections. According to the Roddenberry hypothesis, these two photojournalists cannot control their reactions since “empathy is a reflex that washes over us when people encounter someone else’s emotions” (34). Zaki notes that neither photojournalist agrees with this idea. Rather, they are both being intentionally empathetic to their subjects.

To explain these different approaches to empathy, Zaki suggests a “tug-of-war” (36) is occurring in the brain: “We are pulled toward certain actions by approach motives, and pulled away from them by avoidance motives” (35). What is most important about this push-pull factor is that one chooses how one feels. Research supports that humans can “turn their emotions up or down” (38), which is known as “psychological tuning” (38). Moreover, humans can create certain feelings to fit various situations. For example, people might choose angry music while working out to amp themselves up and peaceful music while writing or cooking.

Avoiding empathy often hurts the person doing so, isolating them even more from others. To help people make better empathy decisions, researchers have developed “nudges” (42). For example, a researcher conducted a study where they asked participants to imagine how an individual with HIV might feel. This study occurred at the height of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, in which victims faced severe ostracization. Critically, the study found that those who imagined the given scenario became more compassionate toward those with HIV/AIDS. Another type of nudge is giving people money to change their feelings on a given subject.

Zaki notes that people need more than one nudge to ensure positive changes to their empathy are long-term. Chapter 1 demonstrated how nurture and suffering can sustain this type of change. In Chapter 2, Zaki turns to whether or not researchers can design an experiment to have the same impact. Studies on loving-kindness (metta) meditation—which involves mentally sending goodwill to others while silently repeating mantras—and writing supportive letters show that people can change their brain anatomy and capability for empathy. Thus, humans can strengthen their empathy.