Empathy

Level Four Adv. Diploma: F.H.Fisher. Word Count : 4593 ( Inc. Quotes ) Empathy An Exploration of the Historical and Philosophical Development: Analysed – How it Lives in Society/Self: Defined in the Counselling Relationship: The passive noun empathy is so often conflated with that of sympathy; however they are different words with different meanings, albeit with similarities- I feel the clear distinction must first be explained. The Oxford Dictionary defines the former as initially from the Greek - empatheia, rendering, physical affection, partiality; and later from the German - after this was adapted by Hermann Lotze and Robert Vischer into the German active noun Einfuhlung - at the end of the nineteenth century, (this being the route by which it entered the English language) – in feeling or feeling into, an understanding so intimate that the feelings, thoughts and motives of one person are readily comprehended by another. The inert English noun empathy – as Einfuhlung was translated by the psychologist E.B.Titchener in 1909 - becomes active with the form empathize … The power of projecting one’s personality into, and so fully understanding the object (sic) of contemplation. Thus inanimate objects could be empathized with, surely very different from any connotation of the word sympathy, hence a fundamental difference. The root of the word sympathy is the Greek sympatheia – from together and passion, to be affected by, to suffer; indeed the proper term I use when addressing the Greek mother of my son-in-law is “sympethera,” one of relationship; and in the philosophy of Epicurus (341-270 B.C.) sympathy was a corresponding affection or quality, affinity of body. Unlike affective empathy, (of this distinction I shall refer later) it is not a congruent emotion such as feeling another’s sadness as in say bereavement but rather showing sorrow or concern for the needs of another – different entirely in terms of fact and therapeutically. Shlien in Bohart et al. (1997 p. 67) states … Empathy is not sympathy or a degree of it, the latter a “feeling for,” and not therapeutic. Strangely the French have no word for empathy and the English took there’s from the Germans; the Swiss- French rather bizarrely developed the term, sympathetic penetration, as an equivalent; and the Italians have merely used simpatico as a general term for empathy. Although Aristotle in the 1st century told us humans have a natural social nature, behaving as animals do in similar social situations, it was Charles Darwin who gave the first modern day description of empathy, referring to it in terms of morality and social affection. He realised through his studies of evolution that those creatures that empathised with - and thus provided for - their offspring’s needs, would survive as a genetic line, thus showing natural selection for empathy, in action. Thus, rooted in Greek language, the word empathy developed etymologically and philosophically over almost two millennia, seemingly quietly at first but exploding at the turn of the twentieth century. After being seen in the 19th century only as a way, primarily, of gaining knowledge of others minds - selfishly - philosophy again became gently engaged with the idea of empathy/einfuhlung as a result of the writings of the romantic (German) thinkers such as Herder and Novalis, regarding our ability to feel into works of art and into nature: this as a corrective against the harsh, scientific approach to all around us; as Rollins (1958) states, the poet Keats was renown for his ability to empathically “enter into” his subject matter. However, only with the more technical, substantive sense of the word, introduced by Robert Vischer - and with his book “On the Optical Sense of Form: A Contribution to Aesthetics (1873) - did it become a subject deemed worthy of philosophical analysis again. Theodor Lipps - the German psychologist (1851-1914) - scrutinised empathy most thoroughly in his book (translated as) Empathy, Inner Limitation and Sense Feelings ((1903); arguing for its conceptual value as being indispensable to the philosophical and psychological analysis of human aesthetic experiences; thereafter developing into a central plank of the philosophy of the social/human sciences – a useful tool in human appreciation of objects around us and a basis of recognition of others as like- minded, sentient beings. Titchener, it is said, had this construction of empathy in mind when developing his translation of Einfuhlung. Thus an understanding of our perceptions of say beauty, in an object, was held to be exactly the same - as direct as - its perception of its being big or small, black or white. Lipps called these “resonance phenomena” in the body - triggering inner processes; this, a mirroring essentially- similar inner experiences felt with various physical bodily activities. He stated that perceptual focus on objects allows us to experience them – by projection of our experiences “into” them. Importantly explaining the essence of vitality or as he termed the life potentiality that lies in a perceived object – a work of art perhaps or young child. Here I sense the real power of empathy emerging – an innate disposition in living things for mimicry at the motor level - this noted by Adam Smith (1853) - almost unconsciously; feeling into animate or inanimate objects to get a “lived” sense of what they are about. However Lipps contention, basically, that another’s outward, specific behaviour could be understood by reference to one’s own mental state that manifests that same self – behaviour, fell short according to Scheler (1973). He held a phenomenological approach to empathy as more discerning, that is, we do not see only bodily movements, but facial expression, tone of voice, gestures and eye movements; he preferred the term “nachfuhlen” to feel with. Buber (2007 p.114) held it to be ... To glide with one’s own feelings into the dynamic structure of an object, a pillar, a crystal or the branch of a tree, or even of an animal or a man… To trace it from within … excluding ones own concreteness …he was later to become an influence on Roger’s concept of empathy. The historical and philosophical connotations of empathy are now being finally understood as a powerful life force within all living things - a psychological driver, and a necessity for survival and appreciation of our surroundings in the broadest sense; and most importantly, the way we experience another human being. In the fifth century B.C. the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu wrote …Look at the man through the man, no more appropriate phrase could have been written given our modern understanding of psychotherapy. ≈ So how then does empathy “live” in society, the reality of our lives and self' Lipps described it as… The primary epistemic means for understanding other minds, and this conception is accepted now - revived towards the end of the last century - as the primary mechanism used to explain and make sense of the outer world. We have empathy in our bones, states Hanson (2010), the new born are shown to cry at the recordings of other crying babies, yet not at those of their own; adult tear glands produce tears - sometimes unknowingly – at the crying of others. Nature granted us the tools to bring us together - we understand other’s actions by mapping observed action onto our own motor representations of the same actions ... This surely is the way we are able to communicate empathy and our understanding of others feelings Firth and Blackmore ( 2007). If we look at the animal world we see the flight animals such as the horse – empathy is probably its most valuable and active mental resource. Evolution has surely selected for this to keep it alive; a horse feels any tensions/fears as they present themselves in body language in the surrounding herd, or in an approaching human – the nervous rider spooks the horse. Such is their empathy they are used therapeutically throughout the world - primarily in the Epona Method - to teach the importance of self-awareness, authenticity and clear boundaries - the horse only allows close encounter, if loose, after understanding of intention - flexibility and co-operation in relationships. They always reflect back to us where our inner and outer self is in misalignment - inner conflicts; effectively using empathy to show incongruence… They readily respond to non-verbal cues of dominance, submission and co-operation used in human encouters, Kohanov (2008). Who has not felt empathy literally oozing out of a pet dog as it reads our body language and mimics; they are used as co-therapists for the non-communicative to great success, they were used after the Columbine shootings in the U.S., this following the work in the sixties by Levinson. He held that emotional connections made with animals translate into more empathic attitudes to other people. Monkeys have been shown - after being trained to pull a chain for food – to go hungry, if pulling the chain resulted in an electric shock being given as a consequence to another monkey. This work by Professor Baron-Cohen went on to demonstrate a bell curve of empathic response, what he termed “empathic erosion” he considered to be the cause of atrocities perpetrated by mankind. We have witnessed in our lives the constant use of demonization of other peoples or cultures, by politicians, to ready us for war against them – to erode our empathy. We are lead to believe they are sub-human, thus breaking our empathic link with them – the more palatable for us then the killing that follows. Modern medical technology allows us to take two millennia of philosophical and psychological theory and provide validation. The postulations of philosophy regarding the way we think and feel are debunked or validated. Neuroscience and imaging technology now prove the presence of spindle and mirror neurons in the frontal gyrus of the brain and resonance imaging shows excitation of specifically these areas as we try to comprehend another’s actions and intentions and re-excitation as we try to mimic them exactly. The same overlaying of excitation is seen on our recognition of another’s emotional state as perceived by there facial expression and our corresponding experience of that emotion, Rizzolatti et al. (2002). The premise is that face to face encounters being central to how we as humans sense our “mindedness” and the psychological state of others, these mirror neurons are central to the creation of intersubjective relations. The neuroscientist Gallese suggests they constitute the “shared manifold of inter-subjectivity,” Gallese (2001 p.44). Steuber (2006), after Lipps’ idea of empathy as inner imitation, states mirror neurons to be the mechanism of basic empathy; allowing us, he says … An understanding of another’s emotions by facial expression and allowing us to understand his bodily movements as goal-directed actions. {Regarding cultural differences, work by Molnar-Szakacs at U.C.L.A. shows a profound difference in mirror neuron activity when we interact with someone from a different culture even when using only gestures or body language; this understanding has profound implications for cross-cultural psychotherapy}. Importantly, by studying the “lit” areas of the brain during various image inputs, the response to animate as opposed to inanimate objects is profoundly different; coincidentally undermining Cartesian thought that we perceive others as merely physical objects. Whilst human brains carry the greatest numbers of these highly specialised cells they have been found in the brains of the great apes and cetaceans – the mammals of the ocean, this work done by Nimchinsky and Hof respectively. U.C.L.A. scientists suggest spindle and mirror neurons play a key role in the mental re-enactment of actions … When linguistic descriptions of these actions are conceptually processed, Aziz – Zadeh (2003). Here it should be stated however that this basic hardwired facility of empathy is hardly sufficient in psychotherapy, as medical science also shows concomitant activity in the medial frontal, temporoparietal, and cingulate- cortices, Kain and Penn (2003) i.e. despite our own empathy, without a theory we cannot truly understand the complex range of subtle subtexts at work in our client’s mind to be of therapeutic value to them. Plant life is not without empathy, through the work of Backster, in the U.S. using the electro-conductivity of plants, it was proved they perceive “intention” empathically/telepathically; his mere intention to burn a leaf of the dracaena plant in his laboratory induced an electrical impulse in the plant, but when merely approaching the plant with a lit match - without intent – no impulse was induced. These experiments were confirmed in Russia by Prof. Gunar at the Department of Plant Psychology in Tamiryazev. Pravda - in describing his work - wrote, … “Plants talk…. yes they scream….accepting their pain submissively,” Tomkins (1972). Backster proved plants … Develop an affinity for their carers and exhibit responses based on the emotional state of the caretaker. He went on to measure true empathic response in plants to the suffering of others; in an automated experiment shrimps were tipped into boiling brine in the presence of a plant connected to a polygraph machine, an immediate electrical response followed the moment of immersion of the shrimps. Interestingly, from a therapeutic standpoint of empathy, he pointed out that a period of “charging” or relationship building with plants is essential for an empathic response to develop with “caretakers.” He then went even further; he proved, at a cellular level in our bodies, empathy is hard wired and telepathically communicated; cells, he showed by experiment, can communicate emotions too and mimic one another (shown pathologically in disease and healing) - and this, incomprehensively, even at huge distances. Pearsall (1980) and Backster (2002).[i] O’Leary (1989) wrote of this …This one experiment proved to me …. communication in [empathic] consciousness that defies the known laws of physics. It is important to note here that now quantum physics allows that distance between objects, even vast distances, does not preclude a connection between those objects; the Schrodinger wave theory in fact proves that electrons entangle and a single electron can simultaneously pass through two pin holes in a metal plate, tunnel through impenetrable barriers and travel any distance. This in quantum physics develops the idea of an apparent “sea” of consciousness, a unified consciousness each of us is a part of, … Individual minds may combine into networks of entangled minds ……. more complex mind circuits. Radin (2006 p.261). This theory by Professor Radin, in his research at the Institute of Noetic Sciences California, is somewhat speculative because like many elements in this field it is difficult to test at the moment. This empathic effect is striking also in the heart; at Stanford University and the Institute of Heart Math, experiments measuring the electromagnetic field of the heart and using electrocardiogram detection, [ii] have found it possible to measure empathy in the heart. Whenever two subjects felt they had had an empathic exchange, over the course of the experiment, they pressed a button, at the end of the experiment it was found on those occasions their heartbeats had synchronised. Further, after each exchange the heart rhythm frequency bandwidth widened; it was also found that a wider bandwidth predicted more meaningful relationships with people in the future. This heartbeat synchrony is referred to as resonance; Tiller (1997), states that the system then experiences enhanced informational processing capacity. It was further found that two people at conversational distance apart were affected empathically by the overlap of magnetic fields from one another’s heart; in fact the projection and power of the heart’s magnetic field is greater than that of the brain. How often has mankind related to the heart in this way - broken hearted, affairs of the heart, touched my heart etc. an innate sense that the heart feels – in fact the philosopher Max Scherer held the heart to have this capacity. In the 19th century, the philosopher Antoine de St. Exupery wrote … “It is with the heart that one sees rightly, what is essential is invisible to the eye.” Perhaps he knew then what science proves now. Another somewhat disturbing aspect of the heart’s power is its memory, and capacity to project that into the minds of those receiving transplants. As neurons in the brain lay down memory - seen destructively in the onset of some types of epilepsy, where synchronised firings continue to recur after psychological trauma – due to the plasticity of the brain - causing seizures, although the brain is otherwise healthy - so does the heart.[iii] The work of Lacey and Lacey regarding empathic heart response and its role as an endocrine gland – a driver of feeling and emotion – also prompted Waldropin (1977) to state that their research may tell us about what makes each of us a whole person and may suggest techniques that can restore a distressed person to health. Correspondingly it has been shown that bacteria can mutate to adapt to environment – to utilise lactose for instance, in experiments – they have no nervous system yet they show a degree of consciousness … sensing and perceiving the environment. Samanta - Laughton (2002 p.55), - it follows that the heart is at least as clever. The gut also has empathic resonance, via the enteric nervous system based in the solar plexus; this like the heart seems to link into the medulla or brain stem – also known as the reptilian brain; this feeds on into the thalamus and amygdala – the higher control centres. Further to this, the work of the neuro-scientist Damasio, in Carroll (2011 p. 32), shows us that transference and counter-transference in therapy is an embodied process – a felt sense, visceral. Somatic awareness and techniques developed in psychotherapy to manipulate bodily feelings actually help resolve anxiety and incongruence, showing the body’s affective relationship with the mind … natural gestural/postural body language combined with words in psychotherapy may have an implicit advantage over solely talking or non-verbal/body based interventions, Berrol (1992) in Payne and Stott (2010.p.296). Before the higher conscious brain registers danger the “gut” has already recognised/perceived intention; signals - that can be detected by E.C.G. - feed into the autonomic nervous system first, creating the “fight or flight” syndrome or more interestingly the appeasement option. This outpost of the adaptive unconscious - not a part of the normal unconscious - works with its counterpart in the brain; this area is the one driving spontaneity - the superfast empathic response to new ideas, threats and the occasional requirement for fast life saving decision … The mind operates most efficiently by relegating a good deal of high level thinking to the adaptive unconscious, Wilson (2002 p.262). Here again mirror neurons are reacting to body postures, facial expressions and perceptions of relational conditions.[iv] The muscles of the face are a major simultaneous expression of the thoughts of the mind at all times; whilst all aspects of speech and body posture are indicators the face never lies. Empathic exchange is almost impossible without sight of the face - the most powerful interface of the empathic construct in primates. There are over ten thousand possible facial expressions available to man; about three thousand of these mean something in terms of explaining the mental state or intention of another. Whenever we experience an emotion it is automatically expressed by the muscles of the face. Ekman and Friesen (1978), in Gladwell (1995 p.78). Even when we cannot consciously see these many are seen “unconsciously” and others can be detected by the electrical discharges of the muscles. even suppressing expression cannot prevent detectable “leakage;” even more interesting is the two way aspect of this - emotion can begin in the face and affect mental state …Expression alone is sufficient to affect the autonomic nervous system. Ekman and Friesen (1978) in Gladwell (1995 p83). Touch is controversial in most therapeutic models, yet research shows that that when people touch, in empathic exchanges, the heartbeat of the “ toucher” - as recorded by E.C.G - is registered in the brainwaves of the “touched” – as recorded by E.E.G. , in other words the alpha rhythms synchronized. This coherence is apparent in close proximity but much stronger on physical contact … The electromagnetic field of the heart is being conducted and amplified by living tissue, McCratey et al (1997) in Swanson (1995 p 93). Finally in considering the role of the eye in empathy, the most striking is the ability of some people with borderline personality disorders to accurately, almost telepathically, read intention and mental state of another by focussing only on the eye area – called a mental state discrimination by Fertuck (2009); whilst another subset misread others mind states. Research also shows that a failing in some neonates to attend to the eye areas of care- takers results in accumulative errors in empathic development; leading to less eye contact with others in later life and lack of affection. By the age of three children are perspective taking regarding the minds of others, establishing mood and intention. Empathy is moderated in the body, predominantly, by the area of the right brain known as the insulary cortex (although this structure is present in both hemispheres) - explaining generally more enhanced empathy in females who are more right - brained than males; from whence it connects to the visceral organs, heart and skin – mediating there sensations of touch and temperature. It is not an intellectual process - when it would involve large areas of the left brain – but is the essential capacity we have to relate safely and accurately to others; its use actually altering brain function and mental activity to guide us in the development of interpersonal relationships and psychological and physiological well being. It is a form of intelligence, an enabler and not always benign; it is a one-sided tool of torturers, sadists, generals and hunters, the sportsman and indeed anyone seeking advantage over another; but it could also be described as being, and being indispensable to the human condition.[v] ≈ Where does empathy stand now and how is it defined in the counselling process' Rogers held it to be the most important factor in creating a therapeutic relationship, initially defining it as … The ability to accurately perceive the other’s frame of reference, with the emotional components which pertain there to, Rogers (1995 p.140) he went on to say … “As if one were that person but not losing the “as if” aspect:”[vi] whereas Shlien holds that it occupies a lower stage of moral development than sympathy - his use of the interpretation of sympathy as “feeling for” – seen as a commitment where empathy is not; and that the latter without the former may be harmful. I feel he misses the point - what does harm is its improper or ill - informed use, say, correctly interpreting what is going on in the mind of a client but offering it back in a way that invalidates extensively the sense they are making of their own lives in that moment - albeit incorrectly, but then that goes for all “tools” used in psychotherapy - I feel empathy is quickly perceived by a client as a huge commitment to them. Sympathy can be inappropriate and overpowering – disempowering, whereas empathy empowers the client; in fact Rogers (2002 p. 34) refers to a need to empathise with each of the client’s feelings and communications as they seem to him; surely following this dictum can hardly be harmful. He later called it a “process” not as a state (fixed); and then went on to re-define it in a way I feel to be the most appropriate still in Person-centred counselling… Entering the private perceptual world of the other and being completely at home in it; (my underlining) being sensitive moment by moment to the changing felt meanings which flow in this other person, Rogers (1992 p.142 ). He goes on to warn against uncovering totally unconscious feelings, and constantly checking your accuracy - with the client - of your understanding of their feelings and laying aside one’s own prejudices, views and values. Although this discipline holds that the technique of reflection was an equal requirement, it is difficult to know how intuitive one’s client is at perceiving one’s understandings, nevertheless, without one’s vocalisation of them. Perhaps his mistaken belief that you completely understand him is better left intact, without your disappointing input. This theory of empathic reflections was at the centre of the criticism of the Truax – Carkuff theory of empathy scaling; Snyder (1992) in Bohart and Greenberg (1999 p.4) states … Many therapists conceive of empathy as little more than a kindly and supportive posture. The present arguments - most P.C.C. therapists now see empathy as an indispensable aspect of therapy - centre on whether it is an attitude or behaviour; is it a way, literally, of “feeling” what the client feels (emotion based) -affective - or a process for mind reading – cognitive' Some therapists suggest certain ways of being best reflect empathy whilst others say attitude is all that is required and empathy follows. A debate continues as to the importance of unconscious system involvement and degrees of inferred or interpreted meanings; and also the relative use of the present-centred and future - oriented empathic responses - what Bohart (1993) calls a trajectory towards the future, which he suggests is present in the moment for the client, maintaining this response to be empowering to the client. Feshbach (1987) in Bohart et al., (1999), describes empathy as a three part tool, the cognitive quality of “reading” affective cues, the higher cognition involved in adopting the role or perspective of clients and that of feeling the emotions of clients. Attunement between people is recognised as a form of empathic highway by psychotherapists, an indispensable tool for moderating empathic responses - in a sense a feedback mechanism. Caution is recommended in relation to feelings, those too closely shadowing and those affecting the client leading to possible non-therapeutic rescue/sympathy responses – a lack of differentiation, Orlinsky et al., (1994) in Bohart et al., (1999). Empathic reflections must encompass not only verbal disclosure but all accompanying feelings. Bozarth (1984) in Sanders et al. (2009 p.112) suggests also that Rogers refined his view of aspects of these processes by stating in a 1957 paper … It is not enough for communication to take place (as it must be received to be effective) but the therapist must intend such communication, since it is often by some casual remark, or involuntary facial expression that this communication is actually achieved. Surely he realised at that time that the complete body is the tool of communication - both voluntary and involuntary movements and speech - as borne out by later scientific research. Spooner (2011 p.17) states … both partners must be focussed in the moment, grounded in themselves, and open and receptive to the other. This analogy with empathy in counselling refers in fact to her knowledge of the Argentine Tango – a completely improvised dance. The client is the arbiter, regarding successful empathic exchange and the therapist’s delivery better when “idiosyncratic” according to Bozarth (unique to that person in that relationship); this is then perceived more accurately by the client although - interestingly - often missed by the observer. I feel this understanding of empathy to be the very crux of therapeutic success, we each interact with others in singularly, special ways, dependent on the depth of relationship with that person; and further we each communicate with others in our own unique way. It seems the debate regarding human distress could favour the greater importance of human connectedness rather than separateness - perhaps socio-centric, eastern cultured ways of being as opposed to an ego-centric, western cultured way of being; and in this regard, perhaps empathy is the greatest resource humanity possesses. True beings are lived in the present…Only when two say to one another with all that they are, “It is Thou,” is the dwelling of the Present Being between them. Buber (2002 p.35).[vii] ≈≈ ----------------------- [i] Cellular donations held in vitrio, in nutrients, showed electrical activity corresponding to the emotional state of donor, at that time, even at thousands of miles distant, this may b⁥硥汰楡敮⁤潳敭桷瑡戠⁹畱湡畴桴潥祲愠⁳䔍湩瑳楥鉮⁳牰瑯柩⃩潂浨‬敦瑬焠慵瑮浵琠敨牯⁹畳杧獥整⁤₅桴⁥硥e explained somewhat by quantum theory as Einstein’s protégé Bohm, felt quantum theory suggested … the existence of a deeper reality than that presented by our senses. Radin (2006 p.254). The physicist d’Espagnat in Radin (2006 p.251)) states -The doctrine that the world is made up of objects whose existence is independent of human consciousness turns out to be in conflict with quantum mechanics and with facts established by experiment. [ii] Work by Drs. J. Ardell, and J.A.Armour shows the heart to have a complex, functional, intrinsic nervous system – a brain in its own right. This includes neurons, neurotransmitters, proteins and support cells comparable to the brain. Forty thousand neurons – sensory neurites, send information straight to the medulla in the brain stem and can regulate the body; even cascading up to influence perception, decision making and cognitive processing. This system within the heart operates independently of the brain also – allowing heart transplants to work; the heart’s intrinsic nervous system enables it to function without connection to the brain or central nervous system - the nerve pathways in transplanted hearts rarely re-connect to the brain of donors. [iii] Pearsall (1998) a psycho-neuro- immunologist relates the story of a young heart transplant patient; plagued by persistent violent nightmares of her being murdered by a man, she was referred to a psychiatrist – the girl described her murderer in minute detail. This included time and place of murder, weapon, and clothing; the psychiatrist contacted the police and after investigation they arrested and charged the killer of her hitherto unknown heart donor. Another transplant patient – in his fifties – reverted to a love of loud rock and roll music rather than his taste in classical; his donor, he then learnt, was a teenager. John and Beatrice Lacey, psycho - physiological researchers - showed the heart can control our behaviour, sending messages to the brain that the brain understood and reacted to. This was able to affect the way we perceive and react to the world; either shutting down or cranking up brain arousal. The heart in 1983 was reclassified as an endocrine gland after work by Dr. Armour; amazingly excreting oxytocin – the bonding or love hormone; this is also functional in cognition, tolerance, adaptation, complex sexual and maternal behaviours, as well as the learning of empathic social cues and enduring bonds. [iv] Incoming image and aural stimulation was shown to induce significant changes to the normal slow three cycles a minute electrophysiology of the gut - as measured on an electro – gastrogram . This is reasoned to be a seat of empathic response to subliminal cues and unconscious inferences in its own right. Hams (2000). Von Neumann holds that …. One person’s mind/brain state can cause the probabilistic brain state of another person or another object – or other human organs, like the gut, to preferentially collapse into selected states; a sense of empathic involvement transcending known states of reality. The “wisdom of the body” is presented in Therapy Today (2011 p.10) pointing out the complete inter-relatedness of the body/mind as a holistic entity with complex signalling from each and to each of the nervous systems; Sympathetic autonomic, cardiac, enteric, para- sympathetic etc.. pointing out the heart and gut’s ability to influence mood independently of the brain. [v] The Quantum Zero - or watched pot effect – shows by experiment how observation of quantum systems affects their state; that is it forces them to remain in a wave-like, indeterminate state, rather than collapsing into a particular determined state. The relevance to empathy is revealing: if the brain is repeatedly self -observed - as in reflection caused by affective empathy - then the structure within the neurons - the microtubule, has effect. How: the size of this (one billionth of a metre) allows for only single atomic particles to pass, namely calcium ions; the electrical signalling in the brain opens these channels for ion passage and accumulation and if enough accumulate at the synapse it fires. This demonstrates potentiality in the brain changing into specific firings, directed by self observation in the brain - hence affecting thought processes, because where and whether the calcium ions land on the given neurotransmitter – directing thought this or that way is indeterminate until the “watching mind” determines the process. Essentially the mind could be thought of as a continuous distribution of parallel virtual states. Stapp (2006). [vi] Here he admits to being influenced by Gendlin’s (1962) concept of “experiencing” – the felt meaning experienced by the client in that moment. These are checked by the client against the therapists interpretation and corrected where necessary. [vii] The Hassidic Jewish scholar Martin Buber was an early influence on Rogers, he referred to his book Man to Man suggesting Shlien read it, (this in the period during which he – Rogers - was compiling his book Client Centred Therapy) especially his passage on inclusiveness. Buber, Shlien states, was way ahead of them regarding empathy in relationship building and not in need of a “clinical” view of the term - unlike psychologists of his day. Bibliograpthy Bohart, A.C. & Greenberg.L. (eds.) (1999) Empathy Reconsidered. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association. Buber, M. (1993) Between Man and Man. New York: Routledge. Buber, M. (2010) I and Thou. 2nd ed. London: Continuum. Gladwell, M. (2005) Blink. London. Penguin Gladwell, M. (2000) Tipping Point. London: Penguin Merry, T. (2002) Learning and Being in Person Centred Counselling. 2nd ed. Ross-on-Wye: PCCS Books. Radin, D. (2006) Entangled Minds. New York: Simon and Schuster. Rogers, C. (2003) Client-Centred Therapy. London: Constable. Samanta-Laughton, M. (2006) Punk Science. Hants.: John Hunt. Sanders, P. Frankland, A. Wilkins, P. (2009) Next Steps in Counselling Practice. 2nd ed. Ross-on-Wye: PCCS Books. Steuber, K. (2006) Rediscovering Empathy: Agency, Folk Psychology, and the Human Sciences. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Swanson, C. (2005) Synchronised Universe. Tucson: Poseidia. Tzu Lao, (1963) Tao Te Ching. London: Penguin. Bray, J. (2011) The Wisdom of the Body, Therapy Today; 22 (1). p.10. Spooner, C. (2011) Exploring Intimacy, Therapy Today; 22 (2). p.17. Payne, H. & Stott, D. (2010) Change in the Moving Bodymind, Counselling and Psychotherapy Research; 10 (4). p.295. Baron-Cohen, S. (2009) The Science Of Empathy. Available from: http://www.dailygood.org/viewphp'qld=4561 accessed 8/7/2011 Molnar-Szakacs, I. (2007) The Role of Mirror Neurons in Human Empathy. Available from: hhtp://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007 accessed 13/7/2011 Childre,D. (2001) The Intelligent Heart. Available from: http://www.heartmath.org accessed 11/4/2011 Stanford Ency. of Philosophy (2008) Empathy. Available from: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/empathy/ Accessed 4/7/2011