NOTES

to unravel this model is more than I have time for here but let me give a short mapping over of this model.

The problem with this model is

1. Feeling vr. reason. it's based on the premise that there there is a distinction between feeling and reason. at the least you can't really unravel where feeling and reason are. In the empathy circle when you listen, you listen to the whole person. to their ideas, to the feelings of their ideas, to their feelings, to the tone of who they are.

2. Boring - 

3.  Individualistic Bias - it does not really include the mutual relationship but focuses on the empathizer and not on the relationship between people.

4. No consensus on this definition - 

5. 
   

Cognitive Empathy

1. Understanding - 

   1. 1. Definition: 

      2. Quote:

      3. In the Empathy Circle:  in the empathy circle the Active Listener listens attentively to the speaker and reflect back their understand of what is being said.  In the process of listening. As I hear them, I'm building a understanding of who they are, what they are thinking and feeling, their motivation, dreams, needs and how they all fit together. I create a map of them.

2. Imagining - 

   1. 1. Definition: 

      2. Quote:

      3. In the Empathy Circle:   

3. Perspective taking - 

   1. 1. Definition: 

      2. Quote:

      3. In the Empathy Circle:  this is imagining someone's perspective so is a form of imagining.  This fits with Imaginative empathy.

Affective Empathy

Researching the Cognitive Affective 

reason (cognition) and feeling (affect) are deeply intertwined and not neatly separable in how we experience and express empathy. 

1. Oversimplification and Neglect of Interactivity: 

Artificial Dichotomy: Critics argue that strictly separating cognitive and affective empathy oversimplifies a deeply interconnected and complex process. In many real-world social interactions, these two aspects are believed to work in tandem and are not easily disentangled. 

Dynamic vs. Static Measures: Much research has relied on static measures, while empathy is often a dynamic process that unfolds during social interactions. 

Integral Models: 

These critiques argue that the reason-emotion binary is often a false and hierarchical one, historically used to devalue emotion (often associated with certain groups) and overvalue a detached, "pure" reason that may not accurately reflect human experience. 

Perspective-Taking is Affectively Laden: The act of "putting oneself in another's shoes" (a core component of cognitive empathy) is rarely a purely intellectual exercise. Imagining another's experience often involves simulating not just their thoughts but also their likely feelings, thus blurring the lines. 

Real-world empathy is often a fluid process where we rapidly shift between understanding and feeling, with each component informing the other. An overly rigid separation can make it difficult to explain this dynamic. 

can you make the case that reason is actually a feeling. 

Okay, this is a fascinating challenge that requires us to be a bit philosophical and perhaps stretch the common understanding of both "reason" and "feeling." Conventionally, they are seen as distinct: reason as the faculty of logic, analysis, and inference; feeling as subjective emotional or sensory experience.

However, we can build a provocative case that reason, in its experiential aspect, could be considered a type of feeling – specifically, an epistemic or cognitive feeling.

Here's how such a case might be made:

1. The Subjective Experience of "Making Sense":

   • When you are reasoning effectively, and things "click into place," there is a distinct subjective experience. It's not just a cold, detached calculation. There's a qualitative "feel" to it – a feeling of clarity, coherence, understanding, or things "lining up." This "Aha!" moment, or even the more subtle feeling of following a logical thread, is a specific kind of mental state that has a unique phenomenal character. If a "feeling" is broadly defined as any subjective state of consciousness with a particular quality, then this experience of "making sense" could qualify.
     
     

2. The Feeling of "Rightness" or Logical Necessity:

   • When you grasp a strong logical argument or a mathematical proof, there can be an almost palpable feeling of its "rightness" or even its "beauty" (as mathematicians often describe it). This isn't an emotion like joy, but it's a powerful internal sense of congruence and irrefutability. The internal experience of "this must be so" based on logical steps has a unique, almost aesthetic, felt quality.
     
     

3. The Uncomfortable Feeling of Illogic or Dissonance:

   • Conversely, when faced with a contradiction, a flawed argument, or a piece of information that doesn't fit, we often experience a distinct feeling of discomfort, unease, or cognitive dissonance. This "something is wrong here" feeling is an affective signal. The process of reasoning, then, can be seen as an attempt to move away from this unpleasant feeling of incoherence towards the more pleasant, stable feeling of coherence. If the absence of reason (or flawed reason) produces a negative feeling, then the successful application of reason results in a corresponding positive (or at least neutral and stable) "feeling of sense."
     
     

4. Reason as a Guiding "Sense" or "Intuition":

   • Often, our reasoning processes are guided by what might be called "intellectual intuitions" or "epistemic feelings." We might "feel" that a certain line of inquiry is promising, or "sense" a flaw in an argument before we can articulate it precisely. These are not full-blown emotions, but they are felt states that guide and shape the reasoning process. Antonio Damasio's work on somatic markers suggests that "gut feelings" (which are tied to emotional processing) are crucial for effective real-world reasoning and decision-making. This implies that the "cold" calculations of reason are often informed by, and perhaps inseparable from, these more subtle felt states.
     
     

5. The Motivation to Reason Feels Like a Drive:

   • The drive to understand, to find consistency, and to solve problems feels like an internal pressure or motivation, similar to other basic drives. The satisfaction (a feeling) that comes from resolving a complex intellectual problem is a powerful reward. This suggests that reasoning isn't just a mechanical process but one that is initiated and sustained by felt needs and culminates in felt satisfaction.
     
     

6. Expanding the Definition of "Feeling":

   • If we restrict "feeling" only to primary emotions (anger, sadness, joy, fear, etc.), then reason is clearly not a feeling. But if we broaden "feeling" to include all manner of subjective, qualitative experiences that inform our awareness and guide our interaction with the world, then the distinct phenomenal character of "understanding," "coherence," "logical flow," and "insight" could be categorized as a specific kind of cognitive or epistemic feeling. These are feelings about the state of our knowledge and understanding.

Important Caveats:

• This argument reinterprets "feeling" in a broader way than is typical.

• It doesn't mean reason is irrational or purely emotional in the way we usually use those terms. The "feeling of reason" would be a feeling attuned to logic, evidence, and coherence, unlike, say, a feeling of anger which might arise from a perceived slight.

• It's a way of highlighting the experiential, subjective, and often guiding nature of what we call reason, rather than seeing it as an entirely abstract, disembodied computational process.

So, while it's unconventional, the case can be made that the conscious experience of reasoning – the felt sense of clarity, coherence, and logical progression – is a distinct qualitative state that could be legitimately described as a "feeling." It's the feeling of your cognitive apparatus successfully navigating the world of ideas and information.