Building Bridges of Life

Once upon a time two brothers, who lived on adjoining farms, fell into conflict. It was the first serious rift in 40 years of farming side by side, sharing machinery, and trading labor and goods as needed without a conflict. Then the long collaboration fell apart. It began with a small misunderstanding and it grew into a major difference, and finally it exploded into an exchange of bitter words followed by weeks of silence.

One morning there was a knock on John’s door. He opened it to find a man with a carpenter’s tool box. “I’m looking for a few days’ work” he said. “Perhaps you would have a few small jobs here and there I could help with? Could I help you?” “Yes,” said the older brother. “I do have a job for you.”

“Look across the creek at that farm. That’s my neighbor; in fact, it’s my younger brother. Last week there was a meadow between us and he took his bulldozer to the river levee and now there is a creek between us. Well, he may have done this to spite me, but I’ll do him one better.”

“See that pile of lumber by the barn? I want you to build me a fence –an 8-foot fence — so I won’t need to see his place or his face anymore.” The carpenter said, “I think I understand the situation. Show me the nails and the post-hole digger and I’ll be able to do a job that pleases you.”

The older brother had to go to town, so he helped the carpenter get the materials ready and then he was off for the day. The carpenter worked hard all that day measuring, sawing, nailing. About sunset when the farmer returned, the carpenter had just finished his job.

The farmer’s eyes opened wide, his jaw dropped. There was no fence there at all. It was a bridge — a bridge stretching from one side of the creek to the other! A fine piece of work, handrails and all — and the neighbor, his younger brother, was coming toward them, his hand outstretched.

“You are quite a fellow to build this bridge after all I’ve said and done.” The two brothers stood at each end of the bridge, and then they met in the middle, taking each other’s hand.

They turned to see the carpenter hoist his toolbox onto his shoulder. “No, wait! Stay a few days. I’ve a lot of other projects for you,” said the older brother. “I’d love to stay on,” the carpenter said, but I have many more bridges to build.

Empathy Gap - Building Bridges Of Life

 

The Empathy Gap is, with the author's words, a "story of the American freedom", as seen from the point of view of psychology of behavior and decision-making.

A hot-cold empathy gap is a cognitive bias in which a person underestimates the influences of visceral drives, and instead attributes behavior primarily to other, non visceral factors.

The term hot-cold empathy gap was coined by Carnegie Mellon University psychologist, George Loewenstein.  Hot-cold empathy gaps are one of Loewenstein's major contributions to behavioral economics. The crux of this idea is that human understanding is "state dependent". For example, when one is angry, it is difficult to understand what it is like for one to be happy, and vice versa; when one is blindly in love for someone, it is difficult to understand what it is like for one not to be, such as to imagine the possibility of oneself not anymore blindly in love in the future.

                               

The implications of this were explored in the realm of sexual decision-making, where young men in an unaroused "cold state" fail to predict that when they are in an aroused "hot state" they will be more likely to make risky sexual decisions, such as not using a condom Can you keep your word, or let your emotions get in the way?

The empathy gap is the state we come to when we’ve just had a cold or hot state. A hot state consists of emotions such as courage, lust and sexual behaviors. A cold state is considered to be when the person is calmer and can think with a clear mind. A lot of us know what it is to be in a cold state and in a hot state.  For example a hot state can be when we’ve had too many drinks and just by someone pushing us a little we get aggravated. You might say anyone would get a bothered if anyone pushes them but the difference is now you’re in a hot state; you no longer think it might have been in accident. The point is you have too much liquor in your system and the only thing you want to do is get into a fight. Being in a hot state you don’t think of the consequences for example a fight or things that might affect you in the future that maybe that fight just got you arrested. In hot states the only thing you think of the right now. But if you take the same situation and subtract the liquor the outcome is to be much different. Yes, the same guy pushed you in the same place the only difference is your mind is calm and is cleared. Knowing yourself it was an accident you won’t throw the first hit nor might a fight even break out. You know in your mind it isn’t worth getting into a fight for a simple shoulder rub. The empathy gap for me was more of the “what would we do”? If were in a cold state and someone asked me a question that takes place in a hot state. This is what Lowenstein is saying in he’s theory, can we do what we say we would do. If you give us a situation and have someone make a guess about the out come would there answer be correct.  To me the answer is no, I know if I myself was to be asked a question in a cold state that deals in a hot state that moment I might think about my outcomes but truth in reality is that what I said wont be entirely true. People have certain things that can get them mad and don’t take time to place themselves in a cold state. The truth is that majority of the human population is going to say what they think sounds good and not the honest truth. Anyone can use the empathy gap method the only question is, which of those people can actually stand by there word.?