Compassion is considered to be a virtue for people, even one of the things that make us human and separate from other animals. It is the treatment of others with kindness, generosity, or mercy. Generally, compassion is considered to be a good thing, but sometimes there is some overlap with pity, which is negative to the people on the receiving end. One feature of compassion to my mind is the lack of obligation behind it. We act in a compassionate manner simply because we feel like it; nobody is pressuring us to behave this way, and if there is some kind of pressure or imposition, the actions taken are not truly compassionate. In this way, compassion is similar to altruism. We show compassion not to receive any personal benefits, but out of a sense of care for other human beings.
The Source told us her family encouraged compassion from its members, telling the children especially not to ignore the weak, but to help and protect them. It was also the feeling that prevented siblings from fighting with each other. For herself personally, compassion is something instinctive, not learned, although it does involve the conscious choice not to cause harm. Interestingly, she also believed that being more powerful leads people to be more compassionate, although she might have meant that the more powerful have more resources with which to be generous or enable compassion through others.
Our Doctor was tickled by the term "Herculean", which the True Philosopher had used in his short essay. He agreed, however, that the task was not one which could be done with quickly; compassion is linked to each person's interpretation of life, but life is a mystery, and beyond that, each person at each instant is different. Taking from the Leader, he linked the feeling of compassion to an injustice done, and said that compassionate aid to people in distress is based on those situations being possible to have prevented. He reminded us that terms appear when they are needed, for example, "corruption" did not exist in Spain until only a couple of years ago, implying that what we consider the negative state of corruption was indistinguishable from normalcy. Compassion became a necessary concept because of the amount of suffering to be alleviated, as well as the possibility of doing so. Later he turned down his regular path of criticism of the modern world, insisting that pain has become a product in our society because it sells. Then, we can be sold other products to relieve or prevent that same pain. Compassion is inherent to humans, but our society is full of distractions and half-truths about ourselves.
The True Philosopher, echoing his thoughts in his writing, said that compassion is a subjective thing, immeasurable in any tangible way, but real because we know we feel it. Compassionate acts, on the other hand, can be measured. There is some suspicion of those acts, however; behind most actions that are claimed to be done out of compassion, we can find ulterior motives and hidden agendas.
The Teacher said he, like me, had been wondering about synonyms for the term, but also about how the feeling of compassion fits into our nature. Following the Philosopher's comments, he said that even when there are no conscious attempts to personally benefit from a compassionate act, there is a bit of selfishness behind it. We have been trained to feel good by doing good, mostly from the recognition of our good actions. If the act itself made us feel good, it would not be so hard to do good anonymously. In most cases, we at least have our names attached to donations or activities so everybody knows, or can find out, that we have participated in compassion or charity. Towards the end, he mentioned that the difficulty many people have in behaving compassionately is the image we have constructed for ourselves, or members of our group. Some groups are not supposed to be compassionate, and other groups are not supposed to deserve compassion. Until we overcome that sort of group mentality, it will remain a chore for many people to recognize and demonstrate the compassion they theoretically have inside them.
On this topic, the Leader's thoughts differ from mine. While his writing focused mainly on pain and suffering, he expanded his thoughts in the meeting, including the responsibility those who cause the pain have to be compassionate and the role guilt plays in stimulating action. I tried to argue that people responding to a situation of their making are making amends rather than being compassionate, but the Leader's view is that amends are more connected with legal proceedings than part of day-to-day life of people making mistakes and trying to correct them. He did concur that there is a component of lack of obligation on the part of the individual, but also emphasized that we must act on compassion rather than savor the feeling within us. Harkening back to the subjectivity and impossibility of measuring feelings, an internal feeling of compassion simply does not count; it has to come out in some kind of action and be recognized. However, he kept insisting that in order to call an act compassionate, the actor has to have some kind of role in causing the need for compassion; for example, a doctor can choose the most compassionate course of treatment for a suffering patient. He insisted that we can always do something for others, and that is the real question: what can I do? It is a question that refers to grand acts and big problems, not the everyday issues that anyone can face.
A Newer Participant was more focused on empathy, believing it necessary for compassion to flourish, and also a natural feeling in the human being. For her, the problem is that society encourages people to focus on themselves rather than each other. There is a natural empathy that encourages us to create connections between us, it is not a difficult thing to achieve. The cruelty we might observe in children is normally a sign of problems, something that needs attention and care from adults.
A Prodigal Participant told us it is hard to know for sure whether compassion is innate or taught. Religion and culture produce reactions in all of us, beginning in childhood. Another participant repeated the ideas of ulterior motives and personal gain, saying that many religious people gave to the poor only with the idea of receiving later for their trouble. She defined empathy as a cerebral thing, while compassion is in the heart.
In the end, we were left with the doubt about where compassion comes from, even if we might agree about where it goes to.
No comments:
Post a Comment