Some kind of “empathy score.” Not sure what the formula would be, but it would reflect how readily they feel empathy for another person, and how many other people they can care about.
A narcissist would have a 0 – they can only care about themself. Someone with very limited empathy would have a small number – say, they can only care about their immediate family, and they need to really get to know someone before they care about that person. People who naturally care about others, even if they don’t know the other person, would have high numbers.
This number would sometimes just flat out tell you that certain people should be avoided, or certain conversations are pointless with that person. Or if you do need to try to convince them of something, the number may show you how to frame the conversation. E.g., show how it’s in their own interest if they have a low number.
I can’t tell if that would end up depressing the crap out of me or making me feel better about the world. My pessimistic brain tells me there are far more un-empathic people in the world than I’d like to acknowledge.
Oh, I didn’t see any other rules specified in the question :) So, isn’t the fact that I can see everyone’s stat above their head already a privacy violation to begin with? Also, am I the only one who gets to see a chosen stat or can other people also choose a stat that only they can see?
It doesn’t specify, but if everyone could see it the implications would be more pressing than the question itself. If only one person, or just a select few people, in the world can see it it’s not a widespread privacy violation. Just like only a select few people are (supposed) to have access to private information in the real world for it to not be a privacy violation.
Presumably with questions like others can see different stats if they chose one. And even if only you saw it you could be super unethical and MAKE it a widespread privacy violation by showing social security, credit card, etc. info and stealing whatever you could as much as you could.
Yeah, but those select few are given access for a specific need, like to be able to give you health care or pay your salary, etc. If even just a few randos could see whatever stat they want about all of us for no reason than their own wishes, I’d definitely consider that a violation of our privacy, even if they kept the info to themselves and even more so if it was something they could exploit. But all this is getting away from the spirit of the question.
No, not really. There are a LOT of very unempathic people who are super easy to scam (MAGA), and being empathetic doesn’t mean you fall for scams easily. You’d want something like a gullibility score for that.
Oh awesome. I’d love something like that, and do think we need to kind of train every person to understand and analyze others empathy better. Because this is a major problem when selecting, voting or promoting people into position of power. Every time there is a competition for a promotion, the ones that care the least about anything but more power or money or influence will be statistically more likely to advance. The more self serving the better. So at the top end you have function sociopaths who are very adept at lying about themselves or even to themselves.
Detecting purely self-serving or greedy people would be awesome and should be taught and trained for in school as basic political education. You know like math or PT is taught and trained. And candidates for political power should be put through some kind of “psychological gauntlet” to make it at least more likely they show they care or believe in something besides gaining more power.
It might also be possible to create a kind of AI models to evaluate and analyze people seeking power. Like some sort of lie detector test observing every reaction and every word and tonal shift in a conversation with the machine. Something like the interrogation in Blade Runner or “The Expanse” Season 1. Of course a bit of a ludicrous idea.
Might be better to just pick someone at random, quite likely to get better world leaders like that.
But this remains a fundamental problem of any hierarchical system, no matter if capitalism or socialism. We are now in an age where humanity can easily destroy itself, and we have collectively chosen, or proven unable, to save ourselves from the existential danger of climate change. And despite our “advances in ethics” in general, we’re still ruled by total shits. And no matter what system we choose the problem will persist. Lack of empathy is a very strong indicator for that.
Sorry for the long rant lol
FYI, I believe you use narcissist wrong, because generally they “weaponize empathy” to manipulate people. They absolutely need to maintain a false glamorous mirror image of their own ego (or they die) and will use all sorts of rationalizations or delusions to keep that up. From a young age they need to pretend and for that they need to read people very well. And as long as they see you as one of the awesome people they’ll charm you, but if they see you as one of the shit people they’ll flip and treat you like dirt. And no amount of time will change that lol.
A narcissist has a lot of empathy… for themself. A racist has a lot of empathy for people of their own race, but zero empathy for people of certain races.
I’d add in a modifier for people on the spectrum. Like, the number is low, but that’s due to an underdeveloped social ability, not because they are sociopaths.
Some kind of “empathy score.” Not sure what the formula would be, but it would reflect how readily they feel empathy for another person, and how many other people they can care about.
A narcissist would have a 0 – they can only care about themself. Someone with very limited empathy would have a small number – say, they can only care about their immediate family, and they need to really get to know someone before they care about that person. People who naturally care about others, even if they don’t know the other person, would have high numbers.
This number would sometimes just flat out tell you that certain people should be avoided, or certain conversations are pointless with that person. Or if you do need to try to convince them of something, the number may show you how to frame the conversation. E.g., show how it’s in their own interest if they have a low number.
I can’t tell if that would end up depressing the crap out of me or making me feel better about the world. My pessimistic brain tells me there are far more un-empathic people in the world than I’d like to acknowledge.
The only problem with this stat showing is that the fascists would know who to throw into the concentration camps.
I thought that only you can see this stat, not everyone else. It’s an issue of privacy violation otherwise.
Oh, I didn’t see any other rules specified in the question :) So, isn’t the fact that I can see everyone’s stat above their head already a privacy violation to begin with? Also, am I the only one who gets to see a chosen stat or can other people also choose a stat that only they can see?
It doesn’t specify, but if everyone could see it the implications would be more pressing than the question itself. If only one person, or just a select few people, in the world can see it it’s not a widespread privacy violation. Just like only a select few people are (supposed) to have access to private information in the real world for it to not be a privacy violation.
Presumably with questions like others can see different stats if they chose one. And even if only you saw it you could be super unethical and MAKE it a widespread privacy violation by showing social security, credit card, etc. info and stealing whatever you could as much as you could.
Yeah, but those select few are given access for a specific need, like to be able to give you health care or pay your salary, etc. If even just a few randos could see whatever stat they want about all of us for no reason than their own wishes, I’d definitely consider that a violation of our privacy, even if they kept the info to themselves and even more so if it was something they could exploit. But all this is getting away from the spirit of the question.
This! You would be able to see who’s trusting and caring? Perfect for scaming people all day, every day! I love it!
No, not really. There are a LOT of very unempathic people who are super easy to scam (MAGA), and being empathetic doesn’t mean you fall for scams easily. You’d want something like a gullibility score for that.
Oh awesome. I’d love something like that, and do think we need to kind of train every person to understand and analyze others empathy better. Because this is a major problem when selecting, voting or promoting people into position of power. Every time there is a competition for a promotion, the ones that care the least about anything but more power or money or influence will be statistically more likely to advance. The more self serving the better. So at the top end you have function sociopaths who are very adept at lying about themselves or even to themselves.
Detecting purely self-serving or greedy people would be awesome and should be taught and trained for in school as basic political education. You know like math or PT is taught and trained. And candidates for political power should be put through some kind of “psychological gauntlet” to make it at least more likely they show they care or believe in something besides gaining more power.
It might also be possible to create a kind of AI models to evaluate and analyze people seeking power. Like some sort of lie detector test observing every reaction and every word and tonal shift in a conversation with the machine. Something like the interrogation in Blade Runner or “The Expanse” Season 1. Of course a bit of a ludicrous idea.
Might be better to just pick someone at random, quite likely to get better world leaders like that.
But this remains a fundamental problem of any hierarchical system, no matter if capitalism or socialism. We are now in an age where humanity can easily destroy itself, and we have collectively chosen, or proven unable, to save ourselves from the existential danger of climate change. And despite our “advances in ethics” in general, we’re still ruled by total shits. And no matter what system we choose the problem will persist. Lack of empathy is a very strong indicator for that.
Sorry for the long rant lol
FYI, I believe you use narcissist wrong, because generally they “weaponize empathy” to manipulate people. They absolutely need to maintain a false glamorous mirror image of their own ego (or they die) and will use all sorts of rationalizations or delusions to keep that up. From a young age they need to pretend and for that they need to read people very well. And as long as they see you as one of the awesome people they’ll charm you, but if they see you as one of the shit people they’ll flip and treat you like dirt. And no amount of time will change that lol.
A narcissist has a lot of empathy… for themself. A racist has a lot of empathy for people of their own race, but zero empathy for people of certain races.
I’d add in a modifier for people on the spectrum. Like, the number is low, but that’s due to an underdeveloped social ability, not because they are sociopaths.