July 13, 2022 • 24 mins
Stefan Pfattheicher is Associate Professor in the Department of Psychology and Behavioural Science at Aarhus University. Pfattheicher’s work is primarily in social psychology, focusing on prosocial behavior, empathy, and more recently vaccine-hesitancy. His work as appeared in many international journals, among which Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Health Psychology, and Psychological Science.
You can learn more about his research (and read some of his excellent articles) here: Stefan Pfattheicher - Research - Aarhus University (au.dk)
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Laura (00:11):
welcome to the Conflict Tipping Podcast for media.com.
The podcast explores social conflictand what we can do about it.
I'm your host, Laura May, and todayI have with me Stephan Fatia, a
behavioral scientist based in Denmark.
Welcome Stephan.
Stefan Pfattheicher (00:26):
Yeah, thanks for having me.
I'm very happy to be here.
Laura (00:30):
I am likewise.
Very happy to have you here.
So Stephan studies pro-social andanti-social behavior and personality.
Including how boredom motivates aggressionand sadism and the pro and antisocial
consequences of empathy and compassion.
And I came across his work whenI was doing my own research and.
Kept coming across this messageof compassion and sort of
(00:53):
sadism or evangelism, whichI couldn't really understand.
And so I went on this questto find answers and to see
who'd done work in this field.
And of course, I came across dfa.
The problem being that I wantedto cite him and didn't know
how to say his last name.
And so I reached out to him andhe was kind enough to actually do
a recording and Dropbox it to me.
And we've had a fantastic dialogue ever.
(01:14):
So I'm very happy to havehim with here, with me today.
So let's jump into it cuzI have lots of questions.
Starting with between sadism andthe dark light of compassion, your
research seems to be a cynics dream.
What led you to work in this area?
Stefan Pfattheicher (01:32):
So I started actually from from the Good Side.
So I wanted to understand whypeople cooperate with each other.
And then I discovered that many people inmany situations do not cooperate, right?
When it comes to group work orwhen it comes to Politics like
we, there are so many conflicts.
(01:53):
And then I looked into solutions,how to solve conflicts and.
Then I found out that, okay, likethe classic reward and punishment
works, so rewarding the goodguys and punishing the bad guys.
So I was very interested in thispunishment because it really helps
us to foster corporation betweenpeople if you think you're gonna be
(02:16):
punished or disapproved by the group.
You start cooperating withothers, and this is like a
well established the finding.
So the punishment really helps, orthe threat of punishment, right?
And then I just thought, okay,what are the motives of those
who punish others in the group?
And I thought, ah, this is like upholdingcorporation and learning others and
(02:39):
teaching others how to behave better.
And then I just felt.
Ah, this is probably not the casebecause a lot of punishment is driven by
revenge and wanting to harm other people.
So it's again, like thedark side that I discovered.
But I was also reallyfascinated about that.
And from that I started to investigatewho is punishing others, and I
(03:00):
also discovered that the bad guyis punched, for instance, also.
Those people will like personalitytrade that reflects sadism.
So like really wanting to harmothers for fun or for pleasure.
So they are also punishing.
So this was like my start from likethe good side to understand corporation
and to how to uphold corporation todiscover that many acts are done.
(03:25):
Yeah.
Like not the best and most noble motives.
Yeah.
Laura (03:31):
I really like this story that you started with.
Oh, everyone gets along.
Let's figure out why to, Oh, yeahlet's hit each other and punish each
other, and that'll make us get along.
You be could kids orthey'll come after you.
So what an interestingjourney that's been so far.
And so you've mentioned a couple ofterms here already, so you know about
compassion and empathy and what have you.
(03:53):
So before we get into the core ofresearch, could you quickly describe
for me how you use these terms?
Because I know they can besometimes a bit contested.
Stefan Pfattheicher (04:01):
Yeah so the concept of empathy is probably a disaster cause
everyone has a different understandingabout what empathy is, what compass is.
So I think I would describe.
Empathy as an umbrella term, capturingmany different tendencies like like the
cognitive part of empathy, trying tounderstand another person and reading
(04:26):
the other person's emotions and thoughtsin like more or less accurate ways.
So that this is like thecognitive understanding part.
And then the effective part, right?
So like the emotions, the emotionalresponse that results from
reading another person's emotionsand taking their perspectives.
So we have these two parts ofempathy, like the cognitive
(04:49):
part and the effective part.
Yeah.
And compassion is Yeah.
It's also used in so many differentways when holding a baby that is crying.
Yeah.
We have this this concern for thebaby, but also this warm glow maybe.
Yeah.
So some people wouldsay this is compassion.
I use compassion more in a way whenanother person is suffering and we
have these concerned feelings forthat other person who is suffering.
(05:13):
And.
Sometimes we have this workload, butoften it's also related to a bit more
distress and like also an emotion or astate that we want to avoid cause feeling
concerned for a suffering other person.
Ah.
It also affects us and we feel in anegative way of we share the negative
emotion, we share the negative state.
(05:36):
When I talk about compassion, Imight want this a bit negative
flavored concern and being movedfor another person that suffers.
Laura (05:47):
So if I understand correctly, then when you are talking about
compassion, you're really talking aboutemotions for others, whether it's the
warm glow or whether it's the worry.
Does it sound like there's anempathetic component in there as well
when you're talking about compassion?
If it feels bad within us as
Stefan Pfattheicher (06:03):
well?
Yeah.
Because you need this understandingof another person's state that
you, you need to understand thatanother person is suffering.
. So that's the first cognitive step.
And then we can develop reactionstowards or have emotional reactions
towards the, that suffering person.
And usually we feel movedand concerned except for some
(06:26):
people who don't, who like it.
. Laura: Okay.
It's like people not to be friends with.
Yeah.
Okay.
So thank you for clarifying that for me.
Because it's, I think it's reallyinteresting that in the mediation
and conflict resolution world, cuzmediate.com, we do talk a lot about
compassion and it's treated as this sortof patea for all kinds of conflicts.
(06:46):
If we just feel compassionate enough,all the problems will go away.
And so to what extent is that true?
Do
you.
I think it's true to a large extentespecially when we feel compassion
for the opponent, for the groupsthat we are in conflict with.
So then really compassion unfolds isbeautiful potential to reduce conflict.
(07:10):
So I'm very in favor of feelingcompassion for other people.
The problem comes in when we feelcompassion only for our own people
for our in group members, right?
And don't feel compassion for theout group, for the conflict partner.
So then compassion is biased and weonly direct our behavior towards in
(07:32):
group members and not towards out-groupmembers or the conflict partners.
Laura (07:38):
Okay.
No, I think that is a really good point.
And so does that sort ofimply a limit to compassion?
So if we have this boundless compassionfor the world at large, then that's
overall, overall better for the world.
And, but if it's a very sort ofsmall compassion, so only people
who look like me or act like meor vote like me then it can become
quite harmful as I'm understanding.
Stefan Pfattheicher (07:59):
Yeah.
Yeah, I agree.
And this is what Paul Bloomalso codes for, right?
That our effective re responses,like compassion are biased towards
our improve members, those who welike, who care for and compassion is
often an automatic reaction, right?
So we of course we can learn it, we cantry to be compassionate and motivate
ourselves, but it's often an impulsivereaction that we have or don't have.
(08:23):
So in, in that sense, it is biased.
And if you like, I can also talkabout some more like even harmful
consequences of compassion.
Laura (08:34):
Please.
I would love to hear about this.
Let's hear about the dark
Stefan Pfattheicher (08:37):
side.
Yeah.
That's why I'm here for, when we feelcompassion for our improve members Yeah.
And.
And our in group members, soa friend or like our partners
were harmed by an out group.
So like the harm is like theoutput members are responsible
for the harm of the group member.
And we feel compassion forour friend, for our partner.
(09:01):
Then we more likely wantto harm the output member.
Cause we care about our group member.
So it has this it so compassionand empathy for our group members.
It magnifies our angertowards the out group.
Yeah.
Who was responsible for the harmand this is what we would, we really
show also in, in a series of studies.
(09:24):
And yeah, so this is like when wethink about political conflicts
or like also wars when like thewar and Israel and Palestinian and
or like Ukraine, Russia, right?
The in group feels compassionfor the improvements.
And this compassion motivates or increasesour anger towards those who commit
(09:46):
or do bad things to our close others.
So in, in that way, compassion canhave like unwanted consequences.
Okay.
Laura (09:58):
So I guess the sort of a way of capturing it this is that, if I've got
my best friend and someone's nasty tomy best friend, I'm gonna get real mad
at that third party for being nasty.
Which is , perhaps an alittle bit less dramatic.
But that's the short of it as I understand
Stefan Pfattheicher (10:12):
it.
Exactly, Yeah.
Yeah.
Because we care and we aremoved by our friends' problems.
Yeah.
And suffering.
Laura (10:20):
And actually I have a question, which I'm not sure.
I think I feel like you're one of thebest people to try and answer this.
But I mean we, we have this ideathen that, there's tight compassion
people who are really close to worse.
That can be sometimes problematic,whereas a sort of wider compassion.
So we're feeling compassionatetowards the world at large.
Can be a bit healthieror a bit more positive.
But I'm wondering if there's anycosts for us when we try and be
(10:44):
so encompassing in our compassion.
Cause it sounds really tiring.
Stefan Pfattheicher (10:48):
Yeah.
Yeah.
It is.
And also our friends andfamily members also want that.
We feel compassion for them.
And not for
. Laura: We wanna
be your favorite.
It's the downside is, If we feelcompassion for all people, like in
universal compassion, then this mightalso reduce our in group bonding, right?
(11:13):
So like the in group identity, becausewe do not commit only to our in
group, but like also to the out group.
And so we might also be perceivedas not loyal, so that there might
be some downsides to that, althoughfrom like a universal perspective.
This is the way to go I think.
Laura (11:33):
Yep.
from the universalperspective, it sounds great.
No, I, I can definitely find,I find that really interesting
cause there's kinda implicationsfor self-esteem right, as well.
If I'm, I find there, with a partneror something and they feel the same way
towards me as far as compassion goesand caring goes that they're due towards
some random person they've never met.
I'm gonna be.
(11:54):
Why aren't I more important?
Like, why don't you care more?
So maybe it's a reflection on me, butI can definitely see that there would
be self esteem components to this.
Yeah.
It sounds like a very delicate balance.
Stefan Pfattheicher (12:04):
I totally agree.
So It's often about balance.
Laura (12:08):
Yeah, . Excellent.
Okay.
So then turning to another area ofyour research, you've done a fair
bit of work on the relationshipbetween board boredom and sadism.
So I understood you've done experimentswith online trolling in the military
amongst parents and even fantasies.
And question one, what kind offans are we talking about here?
(12:29):
And secondly, what do you mean by sadism?
Stefan Pfattheicher (12:32):
Yeah.
So we are talking about thesadistic fantasy of shooting
another person for fun.
So that is
Laura (12:40):
very sadistic.
Stefan Pfattheicher (12:40):
It is.
The good news is that not manypeople have those fantas, right?
. So it's really a low number.
Which is good.
But they, some people do happen.
And this also reflects likethe definition of sadism.
It's harming other people for fun.
And if I think about shooting anotherperson for fun, this really reflects
(13:01):
like the definition of sadism.
Yeah.
Laura (13:04):
In short, what is the relationship in general terms between bored and sadism?
Stefan Pfattheicher (13:10):
So bottom has, I think, a really positive image.
When you look in the literatureand there are books about
bored and creativity, right?
So that we need to be bored tohave these good thoughts and
to solve problems and so forth.
But the question is so I don't deny that.
But the question is, what doesboredom typically leads to?
(13:30):
And it is a negative emotionand it relates to people who are
bored very often are more anxiousand they are more depressed.
And we look, when we look at socialbehavior, like aggressive behavior, we.
There might be a relationshiplike reading the old classics
of Eric from this big analyst.
He proposed that bottom is a reallya negative state because it's,
(13:55):
it says us that, or like it tellsus that we need to change the
situation, We need to do something.
. And that is, might be morestimulating and aggression,
harming others is really stimula.
Yeah, so it, it gives us this
Laura (14:12):
Yeah.
This, because I guess is a kick, right?
Yeah.
It is.
Literally
Stefan Pfattheicher (14:15):
almost.
Yeah.
And when we look at at bullying atschools at hostility on the internet
, on other aggressive behavior, likewhen we are driving a car so some car
drivers are really aggressive, butevery time we, we can see that, that
people like it to, or some people likeit to be aggressive on the internet.
(14:37):
In schools, at the workplace, in a car.
And what we show is that when peopleare bored, they are more likely to harm
us for fun, to get rid of the boredom.
Yeah.
So it's really a downside of boredom
Laura (14:53):
As you're saying all this, I'm wondering if there's other ways in
which this boredom can be funneled, asopposed to, Oh I'll go hurt some people.
And especially in the context, wehear a lot about this idea of the
attention economy, so that, ourwaking hours just consumed by ads and
notifications and updates and doomscrolling, which is my personal vice.
So if our retention is soconsumed, how can we be bored?
(15:15):
Is that the same kind ofboredom you're talking?
Stefan Pfattheicher (15:18):
So it, it's a very good question.
Cause when we take our phoneand go to Instagram or.
Laura (15:25):
Read it in my case, , be the information.
Yeah.
Stefan Pfattheicher (15:28):
Then this might be a CNA that we have been bought.
For just a, like a moment.
So of course I think the episodes,so how long we are bored nowadays.
Are like much shorter compared to 40,50 years ago or like even 200 years ago.
But still we experience this emotion.
Now when we watch Netflix for four orfive hours, although the material is
(15:52):
quite stimulating, at some point we.
This is boring.
Yeah.
I don't find the stimulation orthe meaning in what I'm doing.
And these are like, by the waythe two sources of boredom that we
don't find stimulation in a taskor that we don't find meaning in,
in, in the things we are doing.
And both can like promote bottom.
(16:15):
Huh,
Laura (16:17):
Interesting.
As you're talking.
Netflix binging.
I'm thinking about this bookseries I'm reading at the
moment and I'm overly committed.
I'm at like book 13 and I haven'treally enjoyed any of them, but there's
four books left to go, which makes youthink I'm not very stimulated by this.
There's definitely no meaning.
So but it's clearly a response to boredom.
Is there some kind of weirdinterplay between motivation to
(16:40):
finish and get through boring?
Materials.
I'm not sure if I framed thatcorrectly, but please tell me why
I'm doing this to myself, Stephan.
What am
Stefan Pfattheicher (16:47):
I doing?
That's probably very specific to you.
would've stopped, but it's probablylike this escalation of commitment.
So you have committed so much.
You have invested so much,so that's, people don't stop.
And this is like in, in business, webusinesses we also observe that right
when the business has invested a lotof money in in in some things it's
(17:08):
really difficult to stop them, even ifit's like clear that you should stop.
So maybe you should.
Have reading the books.
Laura (17:14):
Maybe I should, but I'm so close
Stefan Pfattheicher (17:16):
to the end.
Yeah, I, You're so close.
Only four books
Laura (17:18):
left.
It's right.
So think he's still writing them, whichis problem, but this is just, I dunno,
I'm having this thought it feels like ina way, like I definitely, as I'm reading
them, I do get frustrated sometimes.
I'm not gonna go out and be sadistictowards people, but I'm just kinda
wondering if people are thinking ofonline trolls and maybe I'm, tying them
all with the same brush here, peopleplaying the same game for long periods
(17:39):
of time and or grinding or watchingthe same series long periods of time.
Is there some kinda.
Bored buildup that leads to outbursts or
Stefan Pfattheicher (17:47):
something.
Something like this.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And there are many factors that kickor that are responsible for whether
a person does or does not harm othersin the end, also on the internet.
So the first one is , anantisocial person personality,
or like a sadistic personality.
So people who in general,like to harm others.
They also do it in, on theinternet, they bully others.
(18:08):
So it's like a general tendency . Butthen the opportunity is also a big
factor so when people can do it,and it's very easy to do it on the.
, it's more difficult when you're a sadistin, in a school like and you like to bully
others and the teachers person, right?
So then it's, that's a bit more difficult.
So that tells us that we need monitoring,We need strong social norms against
(18:33):
bullying, against Online harassment.
So we, we need to reduce theopportunity for the bad guys to
engage in their evil behavior.
. And we need to provide people.
And especially the bad guys.
That's also our researchshows with alternatives.
(18:53):
So when at goals or also in privatelives and people have good alternatives
that they can engage in meaningfulbehavior that is maybe also stimulating.
So I.
Like to cook?
Yes.
And I'm not harassingothers on the internet.
Or like playing sports or board gamesor like having really good alternatives.
(19:14):
Is so important to reduce yeah.
Aggression and violenceand in, in all contexts.
Yeah.
So when people are bored anddon't know what to do, they
seek out stimulating behavior.
And we need to provide them as a societywith alternatives as well, I think.
Laura (19:32):
And so it sounds a little bit then like we should almost be avoiding boredom.
Is that fair to say?
Stefan Pfattheicher (19:39):
So to, to some degree I would.
Yes, definitely.
Like long episodes of porn, it's bad foryour emotional life because it feels bad.
And like I.
It motivates, especially thebad guys to do bad things.
Yeah.
That doesn't mean that we shouldavoid always, or having a short
(20:01):
bottom episode, this is not a problem,but , at least when I remember my
time at school, I was bored so often.
So maybe we should also think about,Helping our youngest to feel less bored.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Laura (20:16):
See, Now I'm wondering if the inspiration for the, your research
on boredom in schools, and thatis no aggression, was actually a
personal case study for you, Stephan.
Stefan Pfattheicher (20:25):
Remain silent here.
Laura (20:28):
Fantastic.
Okay then, so just getting backto this idea of social conflict.
Do you have an impressionof any relationship between.
Boredom and social conflict, oram I grasping at straws here?
And I guess, the reason I'm wonderingthis is we always talk about this idea
of, give people bread and circuses andthey won't be sadistic, in this case.
So does that actually work?
Stefan Pfattheicher (20:49):
So I think it, it works to some extent, yes.
. Because when we are bored we reallyseek out simulation excitement.
, and.
Or some people also seek out excitementand simulation in general and , they
might get this excitement fromengaging in, in social conflicts.
. I think this is part of the storiesof this the journal story of humans
(21:12):
that we need stimulation, we needto feel, experience things, right?
. And when you are in a positionof power, This is a possibility.
Laura (21:20):
No, absolutely.
It sounds like overall the relationshipwell, what your research shows and then
thinking about social conflict, that,ideally we wanna be stimulated in a
way that doesn't cause us to basically,Go against others that's fighting
them or picking on them more, or beinggenerally statistic and hopefully
not invading their country either.
(21:40):
And on the other hand of things,there's this balance to be played
as far as compassion goes about.
Who we're compassionate for and when.
I mean say there were asocial conflict right now.
Okay.
And so it's you against Australians.
Okay.
So just you personally taking onevery Australian in the world,
you might be up for something andwe've got kangaroos in outside.
(22:01):
But if we're there and all of Australiais bored and they're coming after you,
what would you do about this as far.
Australians boredom as far as theircompassion, Like actually what,
how can you deescalate this wholeconflict sort of step and V Australia?
Stefan Pfattheicher (22:17):
Yeah.
So I think we need structural solutions.
So like mediators, . Yeah.
Laura (22:23):
Yeah.
Stefan Pfattheicher (22:26):
Yeah.
I'm for sure because we have, so everyside of the conflict, of course, has
their own subjective and bias perspective.
I'm right, and you probably would also.
All Australians are, right?
Yeah.
, Laura: all of us.
There's millions more of us than you.
So we must Iraq.
Is that not how it works?
Yeah.
But so it's difficult to changepeople's bottoms levels because they
(22:49):
experiences in the private life, right?
. So we need to come uplike structural solutions.
Like your work and like havingmediators that come in and help
both sides to solve the problem.
And and here empathy and compassionmight then really help us again.
. Like this universalintergroup empathy, right?
(23:11):
Or like compassion, but we feelalso compassion for the out.
Laura (23:16):
Okay.
No, I love that youthrew mediators in there.
I always enjoy hearing that.
And so I guess just a, as a finalquestion, if you had to design a
society that was, a minimum sadisticand then pro-social towards others,
what would the society look like?
What would they be like?
Stefan Pfattheicher (23:35):
So I think we need.
Ethics.
So like the social normof universal compassion.
, you really feel compassion for.
All humans in this society.
. And then the second point, weneed meaningful things to do.
We need meaningful work.
(23:55):
We need meaningful relationships.
And if we have that, I think this isa society I would like to live in.
Laura (24:04):
It sounds pretty.
Perfect.
Thank you so much for joining me today.
I've really enjoyed our conversation.
And so for those who are interestedin learning more about your
work, where can they find you?
Stefan Pfattheicher (24:15):
So you can find me on the internet, of course.
Or also reach out to me.
So I'm always interested for a discussionvia email, via whatever the platform is.
Yeah.
. Laura: And if you're really lucky, he'll record how to pronounce his
name for you, that's the goal.
Yeah.
Perfect.
Thank you again so much,Stephan, and for everyone else.
Until next time, this isLaura May with the Conflict
(24:36):
Tipping Forecast for media.com.
welcome to the Conflict Tipping Podcast for media.com.
The podcast explores social conflictand what we can do about it.
I'm your host, Laura May, and todayI have with me Stephan Fatia, a
behavioral scientist based in Denmark.
Welcome Stephan.
Stefan Pfattheicher (00:26):
Yeah, thanks for having me.
I'm very happy to be here.
Laura (00:30):
I am likewise.
Very happy to have you here.
So Stephan studies pro-social andanti-social behavior and personality.
Including how boredom motivates aggressionand sadism and the pro and antisocial
consequences of empathy and compassion.
And I came across his work whenI was doing my own research and.
Kept coming across this messageof compassion and sort of
(00:53):
sadism or evangelism, whichI couldn't really understand.
And so I went on this questto find answers and to see
who'd done work in this field.
And of course, I came across dfa.
The problem being that I wantedto cite him and didn't know
how to say his last name.
And so I reached out to him andhe was kind enough to actually do
a recording and Dropbox it to me.
And we've had a fantastic dialogue ever.
(01:14):
So I'm very happy to havehim with here, with me today.
So let's jump into it cuzI have lots of questions.
Starting with between sadism andthe dark light of compassion, your
research seems to be a cynics dream.
What led you to work in this area?
Stefan Pfattheicher (01:32):
So I started actually from from the Good Side.
So I wanted to understand whypeople cooperate with each other.
And then I discovered that many people inmany situations do not cooperate, right?
When it comes to group work orwhen it comes to Politics like
we, there are so many conflicts.
(01:53):
And then I looked into solutions,how to solve conflicts and.
Then I found out that, okay, likethe classic reward and punishment
works, so rewarding the goodguys and punishing the bad guys.
So I was very interested in thispunishment because it really helps
us to foster corporation betweenpeople if you think you're gonna be
(02:16):
punished or disapproved by the group.
You start cooperating withothers, and this is like a
well established the finding.
So the punishment really helps, orthe threat of punishment, right?
And then I just thought, okay,what are the motives of those
who punish others in the group?
And I thought, ah, this is like upholdingcorporation and learning others and
(02:39):
teaching others how to behave better.
And then I just felt.
Ah, this is probably not the casebecause a lot of punishment is driven by
revenge and wanting to harm other people.
So it's again, like thedark side that I discovered.
But I was also reallyfascinated about that.
And from that I started to investigatewho is punishing others, and I
(03:00):
also discovered that the bad guyis punched, for instance, also.
Those people will like personalitytrade that reflects sadism.
So like really wanting to harmothers for fun or for pleasure.
So they are also punishing.
So this was like my start from likethe good side to understand corporation
and to how to uphold corporation todiscover that many acts are done.
(03:25):
Yeah.
Like not the best and most noble motives.
Yeah.
Laura (03:31):
I really like this story that you started with.
Oh, everyone gets along.
Let's figure out why to, Oh, yeahlet's hit each other and punish each
other, and that'll make us get along.
You be could kids orthey'll come after you.
So what an interestingjourney that's been so far.
And so you've mentioned a couple ofterms here already, so you know about
compassion and empathy and what have you.
(03:53):
So before we get into the core ofresearch, could you quickly describe
for me how you use these terms?
Because I know they can besometimes a bit contested.
Stefan Pfattheicher (04:01):
Yeah so the concept of empathy is probably a disaster cause
everyone has a different understandingabout what empathy is, what compass is.
So I think I would describe.
Empathy as an umbrella term, capturingmany different tendencies like like the
cognitive part of empathy, trying tounderstand another person and reading
(04:26):
the other person's emotions and thoughtsin like more or less accurate ways.
So that this is like thecognitive understanding part.
And then the effective part, right?
So like the emotions, the emotionalresponse that results from
reading another person's emotionsand taking their perspectives.
So we have these two parts ofempathy, like the cognitive
(04:49):
part and the effective part.
Yeah.
And compassion is Yeah.
It's also used in so many differentways when holding a baby that is crying.
Yeah.
We have this this concern for thebaby, but also this warm glow maybe.
Yeah.
So some people wouldsay this is compassion.
I use compassion more in a way whenanother person is suffering and we
have these concerned feelings forthat other person who is suffering.
(05:13):
And.
Sometimes we have this workload, butoften it's also related to a bit more
distress and like also an emotion or astate that we want to avoid cause feeling
concerned for a suffering other person.
Ah.
It also affects us and we feel in anegative way of we share the negative
emotion, we share the negative state.
(05:36):
When I talk about compassion, Imight want this a bit negative
flavored concern and being movedfor another person that suffers.
Laura (05:47):
So if I understand correctly, then when you are talking about
compassion, you're really talking aboutemotions for others, whether it's the
warm glow or whether it's the worry.
Does it sound like there's anempathetic component in there as well
when you're talking about compassion?
If it feels bad within us as
Stefan Pfattheicher (06:03):
well?
Yeah.
Because you need this understandingof another person's state that
you, you need to understand thatanother person is suffering.
. So that's the first cognitive step.
And then we can develop reactionstowards or have emotional reactions
towards the, that suffering person.
And usually we feel movedand concerned except for some
(06:26):
people who don't, who like it.
. Laura: Okay.
It's like people not to be friends with.
Yeah.
Okay.
So thank you for clarifying that for me.
Because it's, I think it's reallyinteresting that in the mediation
and conflict resolution world, cuzmediate.com, we do talk a lot about
compassion and it's treated as this sortof patea for all kinds of conflicts.
(06:46):
If we just feel compassionate enough,all the problems will go away.
And so to what extent is that true?
Do
you.
I think it's true to a large extentespecially when we feel compassion
for the opponent, for the groupsthat we are in conflict with.
So then really compassion unfolds isbeautiful potential to reduce conflict.
(07:10):
So I'm very in favor of feelingcompassion for other people.
The problem comes in when we feelcompassion only for our own people
for our in group members, right?
And don't feel compassion for theout group, for the conflict partner.
So then compassion is biased and weonly direct our behavior towards in
(07:32):
group members and not towards out-groupmembers or the conflict partners.
Laura (07:38):
Okay.
No, I think that is a really good point.
And so does that sort ofimply a limit to compassion?
So if we have this boundless compassionfor the world at large, then that's
overall, overall better for the world.
And, but if it's a very sort ofsmall compassion, so only people
who look like me or act like meor vote like me then it can become
quite harmful as I'm understanding.
Stefan Pfattheicher (07:59):
Yeah.
Yeah, I agree.
And this is what Paul Bloomalso codes for, right?
That our effective re responses,like compassion are biased towards
our improve members, those who welike, who care for and compassion is
often an automatic reaction, right?
So we of course we can learn it, we cantry to be compassionate and motivate
ourselves, but it's often an impulsivereaction that we have or don't have.
(08:23):
So in, in that sense, it is biased.
And if you like, I can also talkabout some more like even harmful
consequences of compassion.
Laura (08:34):
Please.
I would love to hear about this.
Let's hear about the dark
Stefan Pfattheicher (08:37):
side.
Yeah.
That's why I'm here for, when we feelcompassion for our improve members Yeah.
And.
And our in group members, soa friend or like our partners
were harmed by an out group.
So like the harm is like theoutput members are responsible
for the harm of the group member.
And we feel compassion forour friend, for our partner.
(09:01):
Then we more likely wantto harm the output member.
Cause we care about our group member.
So it has this it so compassionand empathy for our group members.
It magnifies our angertowards the out group.
Yeah.
Who was responsible for the harmand this is what we would, we really
show also in, in a series of studies.
(09:24):
And yeah, so this is like when wethink about political conflicts
or like also wars when like thewar and Israel and Palestinian and
or like Ukraine, Russia, right?
The in group feels compassionfor the improvements.
And this compassion motivates or increasesour anger towards those who commit
(09:46):
or do bad things to our close others.
So in, in that way, compassion canhave like unwanted consequences.
Okay.
Laura (09:58):
So I guess the sort of a way of capturing it this is that, if I've got
my best friend and someone's nasty tomy best friend, I'm gonna get real mad
at that third party for being nasty.
Which is , perhaps an alittle bit less dramatic.
But that's the short of it as I understand
Stefan Pfattheicher (10:12):
it.
Exactly, Yeah.
Yeah.
Because we care and we aremoved by our friends' problems.
Yeah.
And suffering.
Laura (10:20):
And actually I have a question, which I'm not sure.
I think I feel like you're one of thebest people to try and answer this.
But I mean we, we have this ideathen that, there's tight compassion
people who are really close to worse.
That can be sometimes problematic,whereas a sort of wider compassion.
So we're feeling compassionatetowards the world at large.
Can be a bit healthieror a bit more positive.
But I'm wondering if there's anycosts for us when we try and be
(10:44):
so encompassing in our compassion.
Cause it sounds really tiring.
Stefan Pfattheicher (10:48):
Yeah.
Yeah.
It is.
And also our friends andfamily members also want that.
We feel compassion for them.
And not for
. Laura: We wanna
be your favorite.
It's the downside is, If we feelcompassion for all people, like in
universal compassion, then this mightalso reduce our in group bonding, right?
(11:13):
So like the in group identity, becausewe do not commit only to our in
group, but like also to the out group.
And so we might also be perceivedas not loyal, so that there might
be some downsides to that, althoughfrom like a universal perspective.
This is the way to go I think.
Laura (11:33):
Yep.
from the universalperspective, it sounds great.
No, I, I can definitely find,I find that really interesting
cause there's kinda implicationsfor self-esteem right, as well.
If I'm, I find there, with a partneror something and they feel the same way
towards me as far as compassion goesand caring goes that they're due towards
some random person they've never met.
I'm gonna be.
(11:54):
Why aren't I more important?
Like, why don't you care more?
So maybe it's a reflection on me, butI can definitely see that there would
be self esteem components to this.
Yeah.
It sounds like a very delicate balance.
Stefan Pfattheicher (12:04):
I totally agree.
So It's often about balance.
Laura (12:08):
Yeah, . Excellent.
Okay.
So then turning to another area ofyour research, you've done a fair
bit of work on the relationshipbetween board boredom and sadism.
So I understood you've done experimentswith online trolling in the military
amongst parents and even fantasies.
And question one, what kind offans are we talking about here?
(12:29):
And secondly, what do you mean by sadism?
Stefan Pfattheicher (12:32):
Yeah.
So we are talking about thesadistic fantasy of shooting
another person for fun.
So that is
Laura (12:40):
very sadistic.
Stefan Pfattheicher (12:40):
It is.
The good news is that not manypeople have those fantas, right?
. So it's really a low number.
Which is good.
But they, some people do happen.
And this also reflects likethe definition of sadism.
It's harming other people for fun.
And if I think about shooting anotherperson for fun, this really reflects
(13:01):
like the definition of sadism.
Yeah.
Laura (13:04):
In short, what is the relationship in general terms between bored and sadism?
Stefan Pfattheicher (13:10):
So bottom has, I think, a really positive image.
When you look in the literatureand there are books about
bored and creativity, right?
So that we need to be bored tohave these good thoughts and
to solve problems and so forth.
But the question is so I don't deny that.
But the question is, what doesboredom typically leads to?
(13:30):
And it is a negative emotionand it relates to people who are
bored very often are more anxiousand they are more depressed.
And we look, when we look at socialbehavior, like aggressive behavior, we.
There might be a relationshiplike reading the old classics
of Eric from this big analyst.
He proposed that bottom is a reallya negative state because it's,
(13:55):
it says us that, or like it tellsus that we need to change the
situation, We need to do something.
. And that is, might be morestimulating and aggression,
harming others is really stimula.
Yeah, so it, it gives us this
Laura (14:12):
Yeah.
This, because I guess is a kick, right?
Yeah.
It is.
Literally
Stefan Pfattheicher (14:15):
almost.
Yeah.
And when we look at at bullying atschools at hostility on the internet
, on other aggressive behavior, likewhen we are driving a car so some car
drivers are really aggressive, butevery time we, we can see that, that
people like it to, or some people likeit to be aggressive on the internet.
(14:37):
In schools, at the workplace, in a car.
And what we show is that when peopleare bored, they are more likely to harm
us for fun, to get rid of the boredom.
Yeah.
So it's really a downside of boredom
Laura (14:53):
As you're saying all this, I'm wondering if there's other ways in
which this boredom can be funneled, asopposed to, Oh I'll go hurt some people.
And especially in the context, wehear a lot about this idea of the
attention economy, so that, ourwaking hours just consumed by ads and
notifications and updates and doomscrolling, which is my personal vice.
So if our retention is soconsumed, how can we be bored?
(15:15):
Is that the same kind ofboredom you're talking?
Stefan Pfattheicher (15:18):
So it, it's a very good question.
Cause when we take our phoneand go to Instagram or.
Laura (15:25):
Read it in my case, , be the information.
Yeah.
Stefan Pfattheicher (15:28):
Then this might be a CNA that we have been bought.
For just a, like a moment.
So of course I think the episodes,so how long we are bored nowadays.
Are like much shorter compared to 40,50 years ago or like even 200 years ago.
But still we experience this emotion.
Now when we watch Netflix for four orfive hours, although the material is
(15:52):
quite stimulating, at some point we.
This is boring.
Yeah.
I don't find the stimulation orthe meaning in what I'm doing.
And these are like, by the waythe two sources of boredom that we
don't find stimulation in a taskor that we don't find meaning in,
in, in the things we are doing.
And both can like promote bottom.
(16:15):
Huh,
Laura (16:17):
Interesting.
As you're talking.
Netflix binging.
I'm thinking about this bookseries I'm reading at the
moment and I'm overly committed.
I'm at like book 13 and I haven'treally enjoyed any of them, but there's
four books left to go, which makes youthink I'm not very stimulated by this.
There's definitely no meaning.
So but it's clearly a response to boredom.
Is there some kind of weirdinterplay between motivation to
(16:40):
finish and get through boring?
Materials.
I'm not sure if I framed thatcorrectly, but please tell me why
I'm doing this to myself, Stephan.
What am
Stefan Pfattheicher (16:47):
I doing?
That's probably very specific to you.
would've stopped, but it's probablylike this escalation of commitment.
So you have committed so much.
You have invested so much,so that's, people don't stop.
And this is like in, in business, webusinesses we also observe that right
when the business has invested a lotof money in in in some things it's
(17:08):
really difficult to stop them, even ifit's like clear that you should stop.
So maybe you should.
Have reading the books.
Laura (17:14):
Maybe I should, but I'm so close
Stefan Pfattheicher (17:16):
to the end.
Yeah, I, You're so close.
Only four books
Laura (17:18):
left.
It's right.
So think he's still writing them, whichis problem, but this is just, I dunno,
I'm having this thought it feels like ina way, like I definitely, as I'm reading
them, I do get frustrated sometimes.
I'm not gonna go out and be sadistictowards people, but I'm just kinda
wondering if people are thinking ofonline trolls and maybe I'm, tying them
all with the same brush here, peopleplaying the same game for long periods
(17:39):
of time and or grinding or watchingthe same series long periods of time.
Is there some kinda.
Bored buildup that leads to outbursts or
Stefan Pfattheicher (17:47):
something.
Something like this.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And there are many factors that kickor that are responsible for whether
a person does or does not harm othersin the end, also on the internet.
So the first one is , anantisocial person personality,
or like a sadistic personality.
So people who in general,like to harm others.
They also do it in, on theinternet, they bully others.
(18:08):
So it's like a general tendency . Butthen the opportunity is also a big
factor so when people can do it,and it's very easy to do it on the.
, it's more difficult when you're a sadistin, in a school like and you like to bully
others and the teachers person, right?
So then it's, that's a bit more difficult.
So that tells us that we need monitoring,We need strong social norms against
(18:33):
bullying, against Online harassment.
So we, we need to reduce theopportunity for the bad guys to
engage in their evil behavior.
. And we need to provide people.
And especially the bad guys.
That's also our researchshows with alternatives.
(18:53):
So when at goals or also in privatelives and people have good alternatives
that they can engage in meaningfulbehavior that is maybe also stimulating.
So I.
Like to cook?
Yes.
And I'm not harassingothers on the internet.
Or like playing sports or board gamesor like having really good alternatives.
(19:14):
Is so important to reduce yeah.
Aggression and violenceand in, in all contexts.
Yeah.
So when people are bored anddon't know what to do, they
seek out stimulating behavior.
And we need to provide them as a societywith alternatives as well, I think.
Laura (19:32):
And so it sounds a little bit then like we should almost be avoiding boredom.
Is that fair to say?
Stefan Pfattheicher (19:39):
So to, to some degree I would.
Yes, definitely.
Like long episodes of porn, it's bad foryour emotional life because it feels bad.
And like I.
It motivates, especially thebad guys to do bad things.
Yeah.
That doesn't mean that we shouldavoid always, or having a short
(20:01):
bottom episode, this is not a problem,but , at least when I remember my
time at school, I was bored so often.
So maybe we should also think about,Helping our youngest to feel less bored.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Laura (20:16):
See, Now I'm wondering if the inspiration for the, your research
on boredom in schools, and thatis no aggression, was actually a
personal case study for you, Stephan.
Stefan Pfattheicher (20:25):
Remain silent here.
Laura (20:28):
Fantastic.
Okay then, so just getting backto this idea of social conflict.
Do you have an impressionof any relationship between.
Boredom and social conflict, oram I grasping at straws here?
And I guess, the reason I'm wonderingthis is we always talk about this idea
of, give people bread and circuses andthey won't be sadistic, in this case.
So does that actually work?
Stefan Pfattheicher (20:49):
So I think it, it works to some extent, yes.
. Because when we are bored we reallyseek out simulation excitement.
, and.
Or some people also seek out excitementand simulation in general and , they
might get this excitement fromengaging in, in social conflicts.
. I think this is part of the storiesof this the journal story of humans
(21:12):
that we need stimulation, we needto feel, experience things, right?
. And when you are in a positionof power, This is a possibility.
Laura (21:20):
No, absolutely.
It sounds like overall the relationshipwell, what your research shows and then
thinking about social conflict, that,ideally we wanna be stimulated in a
way that doesn't cause us to basically,Go against others that's fighting
them or picking on them more, or beinggenerally statistic and hopefully
not invading their country either.
(21:40):
And on the other hand of things,there's this balance to be played
as far as compassion goes about.
Who we're compassionate for and when.
I mean say there were asocial conflict right now.
Okay.
And so it's you against Australians.
Okay.
So just you personally taking onevery Australian in the world,
you might be up for something andwe've got kangaroos in outside.
(22:01):
But if we're there and all of Australiais bored and they're coming after you,
what would you do about this as far.
Australians boredom as far as theircompassion, Like actually what,
how can you deescalate this wholeconflict sort of step and V Australia?
Stefan Pfattheicher (22:17):
Yeah.
So I think we need structural solutions.
So like mediators, . Yeah.
Laura (22:23):
Yeah.
Stefan Pfattheicher (22:26):
Yeah.
I'm for sure because we have, so everyside of the conflict, of course, has
their own subjective and bias perspective.
I'm right, and you probably would also.
All Australians are, right?
Yeah.
, Laura: all of us.
There's millions more of us than you.
So we must Iraq.
Is that not how it works?
Yeah.
But so it's difficult to changepeople's bottoms levels because they
(22:49):
experiences in the private life, right?
. So we need to come uplike structural solutions.
Like your work and like havingmediators that come in and help
both sides to solve the problem.
And and here empathy and compassionmight then really help us again.
. Like this universalintergroup empathy, right?
(23:11):
Or like compassion, but we feelalso compassion for the out.
Laura (23:16):
Okay.
No, I love that youthrew mediators in there.
I always enjoy hearing that.
And so I guess just a, as a finalquestion, if you had to design a
society that was, a minimum sadisticand then pro-social towards others,
what would the society look like?
What would they be like?
Stefan Pfattheicher (23:35):
So I think we need.
Ethics.
So like the social normof universal compassion.
, you really feel compassion for.
All humans in this society.
. And then the second point, weneed meaningful things to do.
We need meaningful work.
(23:55):
We need meaningful relationships.
And if we have that, I think this isa society I would like to live in.
Laura (24:04):
It sounds pretty.
Perfect.
Thank you so much for joining me today.
I've really enjoyed our conversation.
And so for those who are interestedin learning more about your
work, where can they find you?
Stefan Pfattheicher (24:15):
So you can find me on the internet, of course.
Or also reach out to me.
So I'm always interested for a discussionvia email, via whatever the platform is.
Yeah.
. Laura: And if you're really lucky, he'll record how to pronounce his
name for you, that's the goal.
Yeah.
Perfect.
Thank you again so much,Stephan, and for everyone else.
Until next time, this isLaura May with the Conflict
(24:36):
Tipping Forecast for media.com.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.