What do you think of this? Do you find it as frightening as I do?
Maybe I'm being to harsh and negative about these studies. Are my comments and opinions being too hard on Sandra Brown, M.A. the author of the article? What do you think?

Genetic and Neuro-Physiological Basis for Hyper-Empathy

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...yper-empathy-0

I read this "too much empathy" article by Sandra Brown in Psychology today. Here's a significant snip from the article:

"these genes influence the production of various brain chemicals that can influence just 'how much' empathy you have. These brain chemicals include those that influence orgasm, and it's effect on how bonded you feel, while also influencing some aspects of mental health ...

"Other brain chemicals influence how much innate and learned fear you have. However, females don't seem to assess threats well, and the chemicals then increase her social interactions while at the same time she is not assessing fear and threats well."

Okay....consider: victimology is fate. Victimology is fore-ordained by brain chemicals. Well, as it turns out, psychopathology and sociopathology, as well as borderline and some other conditions, are heavily influenced or pre-ordained by genetics and brain chemicals, too, according to the "research" Sandra Brown cites. Could this research, done by her own clinic, be serving to reinforce her personal beliefs, since she herself experienced severe trauma when she was a child?

further down in the article, Sandra Brown writes: "The Institute [The Institute for Relational Harm Reduction and Public Pathology Education.* has long said to survivors that personality disorders are not merely willful behavior, but brain deficits that control how much empathy, compassion, conscience, guilt, insight, and change a person is capable. Autism and personality disorders share a common thread as 'empathy spectrum disorders' now being studied extensively within the field of neuroscience."

These are frightening IDEAS, at least that's how they make me feel, and I don't see anywhere in the article about what is actually being done in the research she implies, and how this research is being done by this Institute that Sandra Brown runs. She does have a Research tab in her website, but the research she has done sounds pretty general, i.e. she does not outline exactly how the studies were done.

She says human will apparently has no role to play in whether one is a victim or a psychopath, borderline, etc etc.

"Neuroscience, with all its awesome information, has the dynamic power to blow us all out of the <strong>murky waters of assuming that our behavior is merely a reflection of our will.</strong> As neuroscience graces our minds with new understanding of how our brains work, it brings with it incredible freedom to understand our own traits, and the pathological traits of others."

Personally, I believe and KNOW that my will, my intentions and my efforts are not governed and controlled by my chemical makeup.


*Sandra L. Brown, M.A., is CEO of The Institute for Relational Harm Reduction and Public Pathology Education.

[jacky8807]

All in all I agree. The day we humans stop taking ANY responsibility for ourselves the world will become a dark place

Pffft. She gave the game away early on in the article:

"When we began writing about women who love psychopaths, anti-socials, sociopaths and narcissists, we already 'assumed' that maybe you did have too much empathy (as well as other elevated temperament traits). We just didn't know how much, or why. When we began the actual testing for the research of the book 'Women Who Love Psychopaths', we learned just 'how much' empathy you had."

She "assumed" (does she not understand the use of quotation marks, or does she figure her assumptions aren't assumptions, but fact?) the conclusion for a book she was writing, THEN did "research" for it (quotation marks very much intentional). And lo and behold it showed exactly what she wanted it to(!) And you're right, flowerbells, she doesn't give much detail about these (conveniently self-serving) studies. People who use good methodology tell you exactly what parameters their study has, because they don't expect your blind faith. Research should be clear of prejudice, well set-up and PRECEDE conclusions, let alone book writing.

Leaving all that aside, are we still really taking exclusive sides on nature vs. nurture?! It's BOTH. Neither has exclusive universal domain on behavior.