Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To see papers related to the one you are viewing…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

When there are articles or videos related to the one you are viewing, you will see a related papers icon next to the title, like this: RelatedPapers32Final3For example:

2015-11-06_09h28_31

Click on it and you will see a bibliographic list of papers that are related (including the current one).  Related papers may be papers which are commentaries, responses to commentaries, erratum, and videos discussing the paper.  Since they are not part of the original source material, they are added by PEP editorial staff, and may not be marked as such in every possible case.

 

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Feiner, K. Kiersky, S. (1994). Empathy Is Perception and Interpretation (And Who Ever Said It Wasn't?): Reply to Ghent and Stern. Psychoanal. Dial., 4(3):487-497.

(1994). Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 4(3):487-497

Empathy Is Perception and Interpretation (And Who Ever Said It Wasn't?): Reply to Ghent and Stern Related Papers

Kenneth Feiner, PSYD and Sandra Kiersky, Ph.D.

We would like to express appreciation to both discussants for their extremely thoughtful and challenging comments. Ghent's discussion contributes greatly to a sense of dialogue by extending our ideas and adding to them in his discussion of the conditions that make empathy possible. Space limitations, however, require us to respond primarily to Stern's discussion, which alerts us to aspects of our paper that are, apparently, insufficiently clear. We hope to clarify some central points, including how our position differs from Stern's as well as some areas of agreement that he may not fully appreciate. Throughout his discussion, Stern collapses the two stages of our model, which leads him to make a series of assumptions about our point of view that we do not endorse. With this in mind, it is worth restating our view.

Unlike Stern, who views empathy solely as an attitude toward observation, we see it as a mode of observation and understanding of another's experience from within his or her vantage point. For explanatory purposes, we divide the process into two stages. The first involves cross-modal perceptual processing, which gives a measure of direct access to aspects of another's inner state and usually includes some affective resonance. The second involves the attribution of meaning to the accessed state. Empathic understanding, in this model, is a helical process including both perceptual and interpretive activity. The qualities of experience that are accessed contribute, in important ways, to the generation of meaning, or what Stern calls interpretation. In this sense, we agree with Stern that empathy is the result of interpretation but maintain that some interpretations are more accurate than others.

—————————————

© 1994 The Analytic Press

- 487 -

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2018, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.