logo

47 pages 1 hour read

Jamil Zaki

The War for Kindness: Building Empathy in a Fractured World

Jamil ZakiNonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 2019

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Themes

Obstacles to Empathy

Research suggests that empathy has decreased over the last several decades. Jamil Zaki suggests that the reason for this is there being numerous obstacles to empathy in the modern world.

One of these main obstacles is the mismatch between the evolutionary environment and modern context. Today, humans erratically exhibit care and kindness. An individual often displays empathy for a single other person, rather than the many. This focus on the individual is a leftover trait from evolution. Humans evolved in an environment dominated by small communities. People saw the suffering of their community members (close kin and neighbors) first-hand and would lend aid. Human ancestors also understood that their help would be reciprocated in times of need. While caring about one person at a time made sense in the evolutionary context, this is no longer true. People become easily overwhelmed by all the tragedies occurring around the world, choosing to forget or ignore the people impacted by them. This mismatch between the evolutionary environment and modern context makes strengthening empathy difficult.

Humans are also often prone to tribalism. Other people are categorized into insiders and outsiders, only many only empathize with those in their own group. In essence, people dehumanize those they consider outsiders. Zaki notes that “many people strip each other of humanity with a shocking lack of self-awareness” (56). For example, studies have found that when people watch a rival sports team lose, the part of their brain that controls happiness activates. In this situation, people fail to consider the emotions of fans of the rival sports team.

Political tribalism has also increased exponentially in the US, further impeding empathy between different political party members. Americans in 1960 were far less likely to be upset if their children married someone of the opposite political party than in 2010. People are often unwilling to hear other perspectives, as attested by a study where Democrats and Republicans both paid money to not hear the opposite side’s view. By stripping outsiders of their humanity, people no longer show them empathy.

The internet also acts as a significant barrier to empathy. The internet’s anonymity “strips away a key pillar of kindness” (148). With in-person interactions, people hold each other accountable; hence, why there is more empathy. This can be challenging to do on the internet, as the technology allows people to be cruel without repercussions.

Too much empathy can also be its own obstacle. For example, Zaki spends Chapter 5 describing the adverse effects of empathetic distress on healthcare workers, a situation which continues to worsen in the US. Even pre-pandemic, the “marathon of twenty-four hour shifts” (105) has resulted in caregivers facing greater burnout and having a difficult time hearing patient concerns. The US medical system is at a precipice: Failure to act has the potential to implode the whole system.

Humans are struggling to be more empathetic in the current environment. These obstacles will only continue to grow as the population grows. Thus, the inability to overcome barriers to building a kinder world will only grow more difficult.

Strategies for Building Empathy

While Zaki meticulously documents obstacles to empathy, he remains hopeful that humans will still be able to build a kinder world. The reason for this is that plenty of people are already doing so. These individuals are helping shift the balance from isolation and violence to empathy. For every obstacle that Zaki introduces, he provides a strategy to help overcome it.

There are proven strategies that help reduce hate. One such example is contact theory, which holds that bringing insiders and outsiders together will “awaken their common humanity” (61). However, contact alone is not always enough to increase empathy for outsiders. Contact programs need to focus on balance rather than equality. Neuroscientist Emile Bruneau once paired white US citizens and Mexican immigrants in a study; one individual wrote an essay on the hardships faced by their group, and the other responded with their own reflections. Both individuals would then discuss how they felt about the other ethnic group. Bruneau found that white Americans “felt better about Mexican immigrants” (67) when they were the responder. In contrast, Mexican immigrants “felt worse about white Americans after listening to the complaints of this richer, more powerful group. They felt better about whites after playing the role of the sender” (67-68). This study shows the importance of reversing current power structures in contact programs.

Greater empathy can also occur when people change how they view themselves. Characters in fictional stories often give readers the lens to do this (89). An especially powerful example is the Changing Lives Through Literature program, which offers its students a book club as an alternative probation sentence. Through fictional characters, these students gain “a sense of possibility” (89) of what their future could be. Students who participate in Changing Lives are less likely to reoffend than peers who do not.

Another example is the radio show Musekeweya (or New Dawn). The main couple on New Dawn, who were from rival ethnic groups, eventually marry. The wedding was filmed at a venue where Tutsis took refuge during the Rwandan genocide. The symbolism was incredibly powerful for real-life Rwandans. A place that once symbolized horror came to symbolize celebration. During the community justice (gacaca) trials, victims often talked about their horrific experiences using character names from New Dawn. The show gave victims “a language to talk about the violence…and people’s roles in that violence, without having to directly accuse” (86). The show helped the Hutu and Tutsi people reconsider each other, providing collective healing.

To combat burnout among healthcare workers, John Hopkin’s created the Resilience in Stressful Events (RISE) program, a “hospital-wide peer-to-peer empathy network” (109). Healthcare workers can call RISE counselors after a traumatic event and talk to them about it. The counselors listen without passing judgement, sometimes recommending additional resources. RISE is especially successful at helping combat burnout. Studies show that nurses who used the program were less likely to leave their job or take days off than peers who did not. The RISE program is starting to spread to other hospitals in the US and around the world.

Teachers can also create more empathetic classrooms by “creat[ing] ecosystems in which kindness is expected and rewarded” (143). To do this, teachers and those in power must take responsibility for the environment they create. If teachers bring racism into the classroom, they will create a hostile, unwelcoming environment. Training created by researcher Jason Okonofua helps teachers see this perspective, enabling them to better empathize with their students. When teachers have greater empathy for their students, the latter, in turn, will have more empathy for them. This allows for the construction of a kinder ecosystem.

All of these examples highlight a key element of Zaki’s argument: one cannot “throw the kitchen sink” (66) at empathy. There is no single solution that will allow humans to build a kinder world. Instead, strategies must be tailored to fit each situation. To do so effectively, researchers and scientists need to incorporate the perspectives of those in specific situations.

The “Fixity” of Human Nature

Zaki explores the intellectual tradition of researchers and scholars believing in the “fixity” of human nature. British scientist Francis Galton first proposed this idea over 130 years ago. Galton strongly believed that genes determined human behavior, which is known as genetic determinism. Zaki notes that Galton “ranked ethnic groups by intelligence, invented the term ‘eugenics,’ and dreamed of a ‘utopia’ in which people could be bred for intellect and moral worth” (11). These racist notions have since been disavowed.

Phrenology, a pseudoscience which involves measuring the bumps on skulls to determine mental and character abilities, is another example of fixism. People used this concept in the 19th and early-20th centuries to defend prevailing beliefs around the inferiority and superiority of certain races and gender identities.

The scientific field eventually debunked phrenology in the early 20th century, but psychologists still believed “our biology was fixed” (19). Researchers and scientists believed brain development, including the ability to replace neurons, stopped at adulthood. This belief remained dominant, even when research on songbirds and other animals proved it wrong. In these experiments, researchers documented the formation of new neurons in adult animals. Yet, many researchers remained skeptical that “adult humans could grow their brains” (20). Scientific research conducted during the Cold War finally disproved the fixity of the brain. Zaki underscores that the brain “changes, and these shifts are not random. MRI studies have now repeatedly shown that our experiences, choices, and habits mold our brains” (20).

Early empathy researchers followed the footsteps of other fixists, believing that empathy was a fixed trait. These researchers tried to create tests that would evaluate an individual’s level of empathy. Findings from different empathy tests contradicted each other and were often difficult to interpret. Since empathy was supposed to be intrinsic, researchers also assumed that “empathy was likewise automatic” (13). They believed empathetic people could not help but take on others’ emotions, and vice versa for non-empathetic individuals.

After numerous experiments, researchers now view empathy as a skill rather than a trait. Yet, many non-scientists still believe in the fixity of empathy. To Zaki, the inability to dispel this myth is one reason for empathy’s decline over the last few decades. He has hope, however, that global kindness can be restored by the ability to actively choose empathy.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
Unlock IconUnlock all 47 pages of this Study Guide

Plus, gain access to 8,800+ more expert-written Study Guides.

Including features:

+ Mobile App
+ Printable PDF
+ Literary AI Tools