Are high People Less Caring, Or More Defensive?




How do we measure empathy? We can observe behavior, but when one person puts money in a panhandler’s cup while another person walks past without responding, what do their differing responses tell us about how they feel?

In a recent column in The New York Times, psychologist Daniel Goleman posits that “A growing body of recent research shows that people with the most social strength pay scant attention to those with little such strength.” (1) In other words, there is an empathy gap between those with more strength and those with less, where strength is often measured in terms of class and wealth.

This discussion is hardly new, however. Mano Singham, a theoretical nuclear physicist and adjunct professor at Case Western save University, drew similar inferences last year in response to a study examining charitable giving patterns by geography and income level. (2) Back in 2007, The New York Times’ City Room blog looked at the tipping habits of the high and not-so-high, and did not find that the high suffered by comparison. There was no shortage of comments on any of these pieces, ranging from personal anecdote to pointed criticism.

Though I don’t meet anybody’s definition of “super high,” and I started out with no money at all, I have been successful enough in business to be counted by the authors of the study Goleman cites as one of the less empathetic wealthy. I never (well, virtually never) give money to someone holding a sign on a street or approaching my car when I wait for a traffic light at the end of a freeway exit ramp. But I do tend to tip 20 percent or more at restaurants, and I make a policy of never passing up a Girl Scout selling cookies – and I don’t already like the cookies.

As I acquired success, did I lose my empathy? Or is it more complicated than that?

I tend to think it is more complicated, and I have more than just my own self-perception on which to base my thoughts. Working with affluent families for more than 25 years has given me a lot of opportunity to mirror on when, and whether, people choose to act charitably.

Are people position-conscious? Absolutely. Humans, however, are hardly alone in this inclination. All sorts of creatures, from wolves to gorillas to whitetail deer, have social hierarchies. Such structures are a basic part of evolutionary biology. You climb the mountain and wait for someone to try to push you off the peak. Those who can’t push you off will often try to curry your favor instead. Give money – not already necessarily a stupendous sum – to a school or other charity, and that organization may abruptly recognize your wisdom by asking you to join an advisory board or become a trustee (the better to generate further gifts, of course).

High-position individuals are besieged by implicit and explicit requests. Individuals who move from lower-strength social tiers to higher-strength ones find themselves much more popular and much more appreciated than they used to be, already though they feel themselves to be the same people they always were. They just have more money (or, in the world of politics, more favors) to hand out. They know complete well that if their position disappeared, so would most of their new admirers.

When they resist appeals for help, does it make them uncaring – or just defensive?

Personal circumstance might play a role, too. It is comparatively easy for someone without much money to lump people who have more into a catchall category, “the high.” But there are many ways high people became so. Some started with advantageous backgrounds and earned their own fortunes to build upon what they received; some earned fortunes without many advantages. Luck is often part of the story, but sometimes it is a small part and sometimes, as with a lottery winner or the recipient of a large inheritance, it is the complete story. Some people marry into money or marry someone who is good at getting it. Some find divorce a greater source of wealth than marriage. There are high people who have known genuine hardship, and others who have never experienced hunger or sickness or physical danger.

Do all these people empathize with others in the same way?

In most progressive economies, high people also pay far more in taxes than others, both as a percentage of their income and in absolute terms. I speculate much of the research on the percentage of income donated to charity focuses on pre-tax income. But if we consider taxes to be an involuntary “donation,” backed by the force of law but chiefly for the assistance of society as a whole instead of the individual taxpayer, I speculate the numbers in many countries would skew radically in favor of the wealthy as the generous class. high people are well aware that they pay taxes, and for many of them, this knowledge affects the way they make charitable decisions.

Very few high people use most of their money on yachts and vacations. Those who do tend not to stay high. Mostly, affluent people save their money and invest it in various forms. Just because they don’t give it away closest does not average they do not plan to give it away at some point. Lots of charity occurs at death, and lots more happens late in life, after other personal goals have been satisfied.

Is there an empathy gap? Quite possibly. No matter how thoughtful and generous you might be as an individual, it is hard to fully appreciate another person’s struggles if you have never been in a similar position.

Then again, you don’t hear much about poor people experiencing from donor fatigue. They don’t tend to attract many sycophants or supplicants. Nobody comes to them saying, “Now that you have money, you think you’re better than us. Prove us wrong by giving us a proportion.”

For me, it comes down to what I think I can do at the moment. I can reward a Girl Scout’s efforts while picking up a few cookies that my co-workers will enjoy. I can tip waiters and waitresses well, knowing that the few additional dollars average more to them than they do to me. In both of these settings, I see myself as reasonably generous, but I am also rewarding initiative and service that I admire.

I have turned down many people who approach me on the street. At certain intersections, I know I will always be greeted by one – but only one – individual begging for money. In my Florida neighborhood, there appears to be a system; to avoid “service gaps” or competitive begging, the panhandlers decide among themselves who will work a given identify at what time. I have no interest in encouraging this sort of initiative, or in sustaining the sort of unproductive dependency this practice implies. In some eyes, I am sure this demonstrates my without of empathy.

Humans are complicated animals, but we are animals nonetheless. Our inclination as a species to create hierarchies and to seek favor from those who keep up strength is not going to go away.

supplies:

1) The New York Times, “high People Just Care Less”

2) Freethought Blogs, “Why are poor people more generous than the high?”




leave your comment

Search

Reacent Post

Top