Full Chapter The Development of Empathy Phenomenology Structure and Human Nature 1St Edition Zhuravlova PDF

The Development of Empathy
Phenomenology Structure and Human

Nature 1st Edition Zhuravlova
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-development-of-empathy-phenomenology-structu
re-and-human-nature-1st-edition-zhuravlova/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
Story Structure and Development 1st Edition Craig

Caldwell
https://textbookfull.com/product/story-structure-and-
development-1st-edition-craig-caldwell/
The Logical Structure of Human Behavior First Edition

Michael Starks
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-logical-structure-of-human-
behavior-first-edition-michael-starks/
The Nature of Human Intelligence Robert J. Sternberg
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-nature-of-human-
intelligence-robert-j-sternberg/
The Concise Laws of Human Nature Robert Greene
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-concise-laws-of-human-
nature-robert-greene/
Human Nature and the Causes of War John David Orme
https://textbookfull.com/product/human-nature-and-the-causes-of-
war-john-david-orme/
Phenomenology of illness 1st Edition Carel
https://textbookfull.com/product/phenomenology-of-illness-1st-
edition-carel/
Justifying Ethics Human Rights And Human Nature Jan

Górecki
https://textbookfull.com/product/justifying-ethics-human-rights-
and-human-nature-jan-gorecki/
Human Nature David Berlinski
https://textbookfull.com/product/human-nature-david-berlinski/
Thirteen Theories of Human Nature Leslie Stevenson
https://textbookfull.com/product/thirteen-theories-of-human-
nature-leslie-stevenson/
‘This is an in-depth, comprehensive and highly applicable book on the elusive
phenomenon of empathy, in which the authors present their original, holis-
tic general psychological concept of the development of human empathy and
its attributes. The critical points of development of the empathic personality
throughout human life are thoroughly investigated and analysed. There is no
doubt in my mind that this book will be of significant interest to both research-
ers and students, as well as to practicing psychologists, teachers, and parents – in
other words, to all those who work in this field.’
– Dr. Ephraim Suhir, IEEE, ASME, SPIE, IMAPS, Life Fellow,
Portland State University, USA
‘The Development of Empathy focuses primarily on the positive aspects of

empathy. The authors perceive empathy as an individual’s valuable personal
resource, rooted in early social experiences accumulated in relationships with
loved ones, and that changes in its strength and scope are interrelated with
experiences gained in subsequent periods of life. The book is a rich source of
knowledge about empathy that will be useful for scientists, students, practition-
ers and parents interested in educating children as people capable of empathy
towards others.’
– Hanna Liberska, Head of the Department of Social Psychology,
Kazimierz Wielki University, Bydgoszcz, Poland
The Development of Empathy
This thought-provoking volume offers psychological perspectives on the

formation of empathy and how this determines both antisocial and prosocial
behaviors in individuals. It offers a theoretically grounded and empirically
proven integrated approach, helping readers gain a holistic understanding of
human nature and the need for empathic interaction between people.
Larysa Zhuravlova and Oleksiy Chebykin study the evolution of empathy,
peculiarities from birth to old age, and its role in the moral and spiritual
development of a person. Key sections explore theoretical and methodological
principles of empathy research, the genesis and development of human empathy,
the phylogenetic preconditions for empathy, the psychological features of the
ontogenesis of empathy, the key factors in personality development, and the
experimental study of empathy.
Considering a vision of a society based on empathic relationships, which
could deter discrimination, help resolve environmental issues, harmonize
interpersonal relationships, and resolve conflict, this new text is for advanced
students of developmental and educational psychology. It will have broad
appeal across academic and applied disciplines in social and developmental
psychology, education, the helping professions, and human development.
Larysa Zhuravlova is Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Academician of

the National Academy of Higher Education of Ukraine, and Head of the
Psychology Department at the Polissia National University.
Oleksiy Chebykin is Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Academician of the

National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine, founder of the Southern
Scientific Center in Odessa, President of the University of South Ukraine, and
Head of the Department of Theory and Methods of Practical Psychology.
The Development
of Empathy
Phenomenology, Structure and
Human Nature
Larysa Zhuravlova and

Oleksiy Chebykin
First published 2021
by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2021 Larysa Zhuravlova and Oleksiy Chebykin
The right of Larysa Zhuravlova and Oleksiy Chebykin to be identified as
authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with sections
77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Zhuravlova, Larysa, 1958- author. | Chebykin, A. I︠A, author.
Title: The development of empathy: phenomenology, structure and human
nature / Larysa Zhuravlova and Oleksiy Chebykin.
Description: Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge, 2021. |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2020057859 (print) | LCCN 2020057860 (ebook) |
ISBN 9780367702731 (paperback) | ISBN 9780367702724 (hardback) |
ISBN 9781003145370 (ebook)
Subjects: LCSH: Empathy.
Classification: LCC BF575.E55 Z48 2021 (print) |
LCC BF575.E55 (ebook) | DDC 152.4/1–dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020057859
LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020057860
ISBN: 978-0-367-70272-4 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-0-367-70273-1 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-1-003-14537-0 (ebk)
DOI: 10.4324/9781003145370
Typeset in Bembo
by Deanta Global Publishing Services, Chennai, India
To my family and my teachers
Larysa Zhuravlova
To my beloved grandchildren Alex and Masha
Oleksiy Chebykin
Contents
Introduction 1
1 Theoretical and methodological principles of

empathy research 4
1.1. Historical overview, current status, and future
of empathy research 4
1.2. Methodological basis of studying human empathy 13
1.3. Experience as a meaningful basis of the empathic processes 22
1.4. Conclusions 27
Note 28
References 28
2 Conceptualizing the genesis and development of

human empathy 36
2.1. Conceptual basis of the empathy phenomenon 36
2.2. Structural-dynamic model of elementary and personalized-
meaning empathy 45
2.3. Features of transfinite empathy 60
2.4. Empathy from the standpoint of the psychology of attitudes
and activities 65
2.5. Conclusions 74
Notes 77
References 77
3 Phylogenetic preconditions for the development of

human empathy 80
3.1. Evolutionary development of natural empathy 81
3.2. Microgenesis mechanisms of natural empathy 90
3.3. Ontogenetic development of natural empathy 93
3.4. Conclusions 101
x Contents
Notes 102
References 102
4 Psychological features of the ontogenesis of

human empathy 105
4.1. Development of empathy in infants 106
4.2. Dynamics of the development of personalized-meaning
empathy in early childhood and preschool age 115
4.3. Features of empathic attitudes of children at primary school
age 122
4.4. The dynamics of empathy in teenagers and adolescents 132
4.5. Empathy in adulthood 140
4.6. Comparative analysis of the ontogenetic development
of empathy 146
References 162
5 Determining factors of personality development in the

experimental study of empathy 167
5.1. Study of individual and typological correlates of empathy 167
5.2. Empathy and self-awareness 176
5.3. Correlation between the development of empathy and value-
based needs 196
5.4. Family as an important culturogenic factor in the actualization
and development of empathy 203
References 214
6 Actualization and the development of empathy 216

6.1. Early school age as a sensitive period for the development of
effective forms of empathy 216
6.2. Development of empathy in junior schoolchildren 220
References 233
Conclusions 235
Appendix A: Empathy test for younger schoolchildren 241
Appendix B: Empathy test for teenagers and adolescents 248
Appendix C: Empathy test for adults 255
Index 262
Introduction
Entering the 21st century, humanity fell into the bosom of symbolic con-
tradictions: between man and nature, between technocratic opportunities
and the ecology of the environment, a new quality of life, and a thirst for
submission and mastery. Globalization, international terrorism, local wars,
interethnic and interconfessional confrontations, the ecological crisis, and the
dynamic frenzy of the world have all marked the start of the new millennium.
Today, the problem of human morality requires broad humanistic under-
standing because it is, as never before, closely linked to the problem of the
future of humanity.
The authors of this book respond to these challenges focusing on the study
of problems of modern psychology, which studies the highest manifestations
of human psychic processes. We are convinced that focusing on human spir-
ituality, psychological maturity, authentic existential responsibility, moral-
ity, and empathy will help in solving the critical contradictions of our time.
Consideration of empathy as a complement to human nature will lead to solv-
ing the problems of environmental issues, help to grasp and experience life in
its fullness, achieve wisdom, resolve internal and external conflicts, and harmo-
nize interpersonal and interethnic relations.
The spiritual revival of civilization is impossible without the humanization
of all spheres of social life and the actual, not declarative, attitude to man as an
end in itself, as a being that embodies the infinite potentials of the human race.
In our challenging times, when society is rethinking universal concepts and
values, when a person appears as a unique individual, not a means or a thing, as
a subject, not an object, the dichotomies of good/evil, spirituality/pragmatism,
and I/the Other (she/he) gain special relevance.
At first glance, the problem of the good/evil dichotomy is purely ethical.
Indeed, for centuries, philosophers and ethicists have sought to solve it at the
scientific level (Aristotle, R. Descartes, B. Spinoza, M. Montaigne, F. Hegel,
I. Kant, L. Feuerbach, F. Nietzsche, K. Marx, M. Berdyaev, V. Solovyov,
P. Kropotkin, V. Efroimson, Y. Sogomonov, and others). However, because
the human individual is the bearer of good and evil, of moral and spiritual
development, ethics could not do without the psychological aspects of these
phenomena.
2 Introduction
In psychological studies, the problem of good and evil, existential spiritual-
ism, altruism, and selfishness are represented, mainly, in the study of moral
consciousness (R. Pavelkov, M. Savchin, M. Hoffman, L. Kohlberg), person-
ality as a subject of free moral action (I. Bech, L. Bozhovich, M. Boryshevsky,
I. Subotsky, etc.), personality as a subject of his own world (T. Titarenko),
studies of emotional maturity of the individual (O. Chebykin), processes of
self-determination, search for ego-identity (E. Erikson, I. Kohn), self-actu-
alization (A. Maslow), self-realization (K. Rogers), transcendental subject (B.
Bratus, L. Vorobyov, V. Petrovsky, V. Slobodchikov, E. Isaev, L. Rubinstein,
E. Fromm), etc.
In the recent past, these studies have often been considered abstract, philo-
sophical, and even para-idealistic or parapsychological. Empathy, transcend-
ence, faith, soul, spirituality, and the universe became the first links in this
chain. Over the last decade, psychologists are increasingly choosing empathy as
the subject of study (V. Boiko, T. Vasilyshyn, I. Kogan, V. Krotenko, K. Los,
O. Oryshchenko, T. Fedotyuk, I. Yusupov, M.N. Davis, N. Eisenberg, M.
Hoffman, E. Troitskaya).
Thus, the problem of empathy, its place in the system of values, and the
structure of moral consciousness and personality in general, began to enthuse
not only expert philosophers of ethics, but psychologists as well. There are
numerous studies in which empathy is seen as a condition for the develop-
ment of moral consciousness (L. Bozhovich, T. Konnikova, D. Bech) and
the mechanism of prosocial behavior (T. Gavrilova, A. Solomatina, etc.) and
human self-transcendence (V. Petrovsky, K. Rogers), that is a determinant of
its assertiveness (L. Zhuravlova). Insight into another person’s state of mind,
understanding of their inner world, empathy, and compassion are prerequisites
for the formation of a tolerant, humanistic, and active personality. However, in
spite of its rather long history (the problem of empathy has been studied in the
last century within the framework of the philosophical disciplines), research
in this area remains fragmented and contradictory and does not have a single
integrated theory.
In our view, considering empathy from a psychological perspective as a
systemic hierarchical formation that determines both asocial and prosocial
behaviors will help to find the solution for the array of social and personality
problems. Research of empathic processes in evolutionary (the functioning and
interrelation of instincts of the struggle for existence and mutual assistance and
communication in the animal world), ontogenetic (peculiarities and patterns
of empathic development at different age stages, its conditions and factors),
personal (place of empathy), sociocultural (family role, teacher empathy in the
child’s empathic development, empathy and success in professional activity),
and existentially spiritual (transfinite empathy) plans allow the opportunity to
consider the personality, the self, identity, life, and professional self-determina-
tion based on the presence of certain forms of empathy (sympathy, compassion,
sharing the joy of another, altruism, indifference, sadism, etc.). The state of
development of human empathy is determined, first of all, by its orientation on
Introduction 3
another person and intention to build empathic relationship with that person, a
high level of which implies sensitivity to the inner world of another person, the
formation of altruistic qualities of the individual, and his readiness for appro-
priate behavior. Consideration of the object of empathy as a function of the
subject’s empathy and the empathogenic situation makes it possible to optimize
the educational process and to develop new methods of education, through
which it would be possible to constructively implement the subject–subject
interaction of a teacher and a student.
Knowledge of the mechanisms of developing empathy, its individual-psy-
chological correlation, and its gender characteristics allow society to control
the moral development of an individual, to help harmonize life and profes-
sional self-determination, interpersonal relationships, and to humanize social
relations in general.
The importance and lack of elaboration on these aspects of empathy is the
general focus of our work on the study of the process of empathic development
of the individual as a special way of mastering his own life and the totality of his
inner and outer worlds, in the latter of which the dominant position is more
humanistic.
The authors do not claim to resolve all empathy issues. Some of these issues
do not have clear answers. As with all eternal matters, they are relevant at all
times. However, there are times when these issues come up with particular
urgency. In our opinion, such a period has come. We hope that the proposed
theory of empathy will help solve some of the problems of modern humanity.
1 Theoretical and methodological
principles of empathy research
The study of empathy is one of the hottest topics in psychological science. The dis-
cord in the definition of its essence, mechanisms, functions, and the role of empathy
in the moral development of the personality, prosocial behavior, altruism, etc., only
proves the scientific community’s confusion on that elusive phenomenon. The
accumulated material requires certain systematization, generalization, and editing.
A retrospective view on the problem of empathy and analysis of its modern
study made it possible to state the absence of a complete, consistent theory of
empathy. Most modern researchers use it for applied purposes (Batson, 2011;
Kayris, 2002; Kovalenko, 2005; Hoffman, 2000; Shpak, 2016; Slote, 2010).
However, without a relatively clear theory of empathy, it is truly complicated
to develop theories of personality and interpersonal relationships, to understand the
essence of a human as a social being, a self-determining subject, and transcendental
individuality. The conceptualization of empathy should help solve the main task
of psychology, which is, according to modern psychologists (Taylor et al., 2004),
not so much describing the subjective reality of man’s inner world, but researching
and understanding the relationship between his world and the outer world of the
individual’s existence, which together form a person’s integral life world.
In the next section, we will attempt to describe a complete concept of
empathy. Empathy is seen as a specific reflection of objective reality, one form
of which is the inner world of another person. A comprehensive combina-
tion of the principles of explanatory (natural) and descriptive (humanitarian)
psychology should determine its nature, genesis, and its role in the human
comprehension of its generic essence.
1.1. Historical overview, current status, and future of
empathy research
In psychology, T.P. Gavrilova (1975) made one of the first fairly thorough
historical reviews of empathy.
Researchers are faced with the task to create a theory of empathy, to pen-
etrate into its nature, to analyze the function of empathy in human life, to
study the genesis of empathy and the conditions of its formation.
(Gavrilova, 1975, p. 156)
DOI: 10.4324/9781003145370-1
Principles of empathy research 5
In recent years, empathy studies have been supplemented by review utiliz-
ing a person-centered approach (Gippenreiter et al., 1993), in the context of
sociopsychology (Davis, 2019; Zhuravlova and Hrechuha, 2018; Zhuravlova
and Shpak, 2015; Vygovskaya, 1996) and as a phenomenon of psychologi-
cal help (Ilyin, 2013; Karyagina and Ivanova, 2013). However, more than
40 years after the publication of T.P. Gavrilova’s work, the problem of mak-
ing holistic models of a complex mental phenomenon, including empathy,
remains relevant. This is despite all attempts to create a holistic concept of the
phenomenology of empathy (Davis, 2019; Hoffman, 2000; Yusupov, 1997).
We will supplement the mentioned reviews, systematize different approaches
to solving the problem of empathy, and outline some prospects for its further
research.
The word “empathy” comes from the Greek “pathos”, which means a deep,
strong, sensitive feeling (perception) close to suffering. The prefix “em” means
directed (aimed) inward. The concept of empathy is mentioned by stoic phi-
losophers. By “empathy”, stoic philosophy understands the objective spiritual
unity of all things, through which people have sympathy for each other.
However, serious research on empathy was not started until the 19th cen-
tury with the rise of the philosophical disciplines of ethics and aesthetics. Ethics
called this concept sympathy, compassion (Smith, 1995; Spencer, 1998; Stern,
1922; Wilson, 1975), aesthetes called it empathy (einfühlung) (Lipps, 1907).
Many ethicists of the 19th century believed that sympathy is an innate human
property. A. Smith defined sympathy as the ability to empathize with others,
“a feeling excited in us by the suffering of another person” (Smith, 1995, p.
18). The philosopher calls the mechanism of sympathy imagination, although,
in fact, empathy equals the mechanism of projection, as A. Smith believes that
“our feelings cannot present us anything except what is within us” (Smith,
1995, p. 16).
According to A. Schopenhauer (1992), people’s sympathy for each other is
based on their sense of common nature and origin. He considered identifica-
tion as a mechanism of empathy: in the process of compassion, a person, over-
coming his selfishness, identifies himself with others, makes their experiences
his own, and seeks to stop the suffering of others, which brings him satisfaction
and happiness.
G. Spencer (1998) tried to consider the development of sympathy from
evolutionary and cultural-historical points of view. He showed its role in the
struggle for existence in nature and society and argued that as social forms
become more complex, the content of sympathy also becomes more complex.
He defines instinctive (emotional contagion) and intellectual (compassionate)
sympathy.
The founder of philosophical anthropology, German philosopher Max
Scheler, in his work, The Content and Forms of Sympathy, deepened and
extended the differentiation of sympathy, which he regarded as a specific emo-
tional form of human cognition (Scheler, 1926). The scientist developed a clas-
sification of forms of sympathy from the lowest (succession, empathy) to the
6 Principles of empathy research
highest (compassion and sympathy) up to the cosmic sensation. He believed
that the ability to empathize and sympathize is of great importance for the
individual’s spiritual development because the act of sympathy represents the
potential capabilities of the human being from the lowest level (vegetative)
to the highest (spiritual). Sympathy is the basis of love. The phenomenologist
identified three main stages in the development of love focused on certain val-
ues: love for goodness, love for the highest achievements of culture, and love
for the sacred, which may require complete self-denial (holy love).
Eventually, the concept of empathy began to be used as a tool, a method of
cognition, to comprehend artwork. It was believed that empathy is indispensa-
ble in describing the aesthetic experience. It helps, in particular, to separate aes-
thetic experience from the mere study of visual and associative factors, through
which it becomes possible to describe and, in a certain sense, to understand the
work of art.
In 1906, German art scholar Wilhelm Worringer wrote a dissertation that
later was published as a separate book under the title Abstraction and Empathy
(Abstraktion und Einfühlung). In addition to the aesthetic and psychological sub-
stantiation of the development path of contemporary art, he also considered the
relationship between the two most important psychological concepts, abstrac-
tion, and empathy. Two varieties of creative evolution (classical naturalism
and abstractionism), which Worringer stated opposed each other, are directly
reflected in the human psyche in the form of two antagonistic impulses: empa-
thy and abstraction. The scientist called empathy the projection of the feeling
of life onto the space of the picture (Worringer, 1979).
Summing up the philosophical studies of empathy, we may distinguish three
aspects. It is considered as:
•• a method of cognition of an object or subject (“living life”, consciousness);

•• an attitude (sympathy) to the Other;
•• a property, an ability of a person.
The ideas of sympathy and empathy were introduced into the plane of psycho-
logical analysis by T. Lipps (1907). The German philosopher and psycholo-
gist has given a theoretical basis of the concept of “einfühlung”, translated by
Edward Titchener into English as “empathy”. T. Lipps began with the study of
aesthetic empathy, but in his latest works he also tried to explain the nature and
mechanisms of empathic interaction between people. He considered empathy
as a specific type of cognition of the essence of an object or subject. He often
acted as an extreme subjectivist: “The people I know are only embodied mul-
tiplication of my own ‘self’” (Lipps, 1907, p. 178). Thus, the subject is aware of
itself and its experiences through the content of an object or subject, project-
ing its “self” into it. So empathy, according to T. Lipps, operates through the
mechanism of projection.
In modern psychology, empathy and its equivalents empathic experi-
ence, compassion, and sympathy are studied by various psychological schools
associated with studying interpersonal interaction, psychotherapy, communi-
cation, personality development, and its interaction in various activities.
Behaviorists and non-behaviorists see empathy as the result of social learn-
ing. The subject can empathize only if there are reactions in his experience to
a similar stimulus reaction. Within the behavioral approach framework of the
instinctive origin of sympathy (McDougall, 1916) and the conditioned reflex
nature of empathic reactions (Allport, 1924) emerged.
Representatives of the dispositional theory of personality consider the
empathy of the subject as a factor of its complicity and behavior to help other
people.
In gestalt therapy, the identification between training group participants is
actualized to strengthen their empathy. Gestalt psychologists use empathy for
patients to better understand their experiences.
In psychoanalytic theories, compassion toward the patient is studied as a nec-
essary tool of confrontation with another person’s mental life. Freud’s (2009)
Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious (1905) contains the earliest definition
of empathy: we take into account the patient’s mental state, place ourselves in
this state, and try to understand it by comparing it with our own. Z. Freud’s
follower, H. Kohut (2000), in his psychology of the self (self-psychology), was
one of the first to describe empathy as a process and method of psychotherapy
and psychology.
Empathy is most deeply and comprehensively studied within the framework
of humanistic psychology. It is used as an integral element of psychotherapeu-
tic and pedagogical interaction and as a condition for constructive personality
changes and personal growth and spiritual development.
In humanistic psychology, empathic listening is used to understand the state
of mind, the “phenomenological field” (Rogers, 1987) of another person.
Empathic listening is based on a person’s ability to understand the interlocutor
in experiencing compassion for him. Initially, empathy was proposed by 19th-
century German philosopher and psychologist, founder of descriptive (cogni-
tive, humanitarian) psychology, W. Dilthey (1996), as a basic method to study
the spirit in the sciences and then to understand the spiritual life of man. Later,
K. Rogers described, justified, and used empathic listening in his psychothera-
peutic practice to communicate with and understand his client (Rogers, 1994).
Summarizing the views on empathy in various psychological theories, we
may state that empathy is considered an important factor in the individual’s
moral development (Hoffman, 2000; Krotenko, 2001; Smirnova, 1994; Vallon,
1967). It is also considered an effective tool for revealing and assimilating the
inner nature of moral relations and ethical norms (Bech, 2006; Oleksyk, 1994;
Slote, 2007; Valantinas, 1988). Empathy assists in developing humane relation-
ships and an altruistic style of behavior (Batson, 2011; Slote, 2010; Solomatina,
1992; Zhuravlova and Luchkiv, 2016;). Empathic compassion plays the
role of a mediator in the act of assistance (Batson, 2011; Taylor et al., 2004;
Zhuravlyova and Senkevych, 2015). Empathy is seen as one of the tools for
limiting a person’s aggression (Freud, 1992; 2004). It is an effective method of
learning and understanding the inner world of the Other (Slobodchikov and
Isaev, 1995). And, finally, empathy is a necessary condition for the develop-
ment of personality (Vygovskaya, 1994; Fromm, 1990; Kohut, 2003; Rogers,
1994), its emotional maturity (Chebykin, 1992; 1996; 1999), and interpersonal
mutual understanding (Filatov, 1991; Ilyin, 2013; Kogan, 2005).
In recent decades, with the development of psychological anthropology and
humanitarian psychology, the subjective approach to the study of personality
and the growing popularity of the humanistic paradigm, the number of empa-
thy studies has increased significantly. It is valued by specialists of socionomic
professions in general (Sannikova, 1995), psychotherapists (Karyagina and
Ivanova, 2013; Rogers, 1994) and, in particular, physicians (Vasilkova, 1999;
Pavlyuk, 2007; Garden, 2009; Khademalhosseini et al., 2014; Neumann et al.,
2009), teachers (Karpova and Kopteva, 2019; Kovalenko, 2005; Malitskaya,
1995; Rzaeva, 2010; Vasylyshyna, 1994), academics (Polunina, 2002), practical
psychologists (Yatsenko, 1996), and others.
It is regarded as an important factor of socialization (Avdeeva and
Meshcheryakova, 1991; Ryabovol, 2007), sociopsychological adaptation, and
social adaptability (Sannikova et al., 2003) in the context of biological condi-
tions of development (Liberska, 2020). Its neurophysiological mechanisms are
actively studied (Batson, 2009; Preston and de Waal, 2002; Ruby and Decety,
2004; Oberman et al., 2007).
A non-standard view of empathy was proposed by the Russian researcher
V.V. Boiko (1996). According to Boiko, it serves as a manipulative mecha-
nism to influence a partner in the needed direction. Through empathy and
compassion, the subject of empathy “breaks” the protective energy “screen”
of the communication partner and thus discovers, understands, and anticipates
his individual characteristics, which he uses for personal purposes. V.V. Boiko
sees empathy as “a form of rational-emotional-intuitive reflection of another
person, which allows [him] to overcome his psychological protection and to
understand the causes and consequences of self-manifestations – properties,
states, reactions – in order to predict and adequately influence his behavior”
(Boiko, 1996, p. 117). At the same time, the scientist believes that if there is a
sincere interest in another person, deep empathy may exist.
Interpreting the essence of empathy, six main tendencies can be distin-
guished. The empathy may be considered as:
•• an emotional process of experiencing the affective state of another being

in response to his emotional behavior (Coke et al., 1978; Frank, 1992;
McDougall, 1916; Mehrabian and Epstein, 1972; Pashukova, 1985; Stern,
1922; Stotland, 1978);
•• a cognitive process, i.e., understanding, comprehending the inner life
of another person, the ability to accept the role, perspective, position
of another human being (Bronfenbrenner et al., 1958; Dymond, 1950;
Sopikov, 1975; Troitskaya, 2016);
•• a complex affective-cognitive process (Gavrilova, 1975; Kayris, 2002;
Kosheleva, 1983; Solomatina, 1992; Strelkova, 1987; Shibutani, 1999;
Shepel, 1987; Hoffman, 1978);
•• rational and emotional, intuitive form of reflection (Bozhovich and
Konnikova, 1975);
•• interactions of affective (emotional), cognitive, and conative (motoric,
effective, behavioral, communicative) components (Boiko, 1996;
Gippenreiter et al., 1993; Ribo, 1897; Sopikov, 1977);
•• a holistic formation of cognitive, emotional, and motoric compo-
nents, or as a unidirectional emotional, cognitive process (Boiko, 1996;
Sardzhveladze, 1989; Strelkova, 1987).
Different views exist regarding the forms and types of empathy. The following
forms of empathy are distinguished:
•• empathy and compassion (Allport, 1924; Asch, 1952; Gavrilova, 1977;
Krotenko, 2001; Stotland, 1978; Strelkova, 1987; Valantinas, 1988;
Vallon, 1967);
-- active and passive (McDougall, 1916);
-- reflective and personal (Gavrilova, 1977);
-- congruent (Gippenreiter et al., 1993).
There are four types of empathy (Obozov, 1990; Petrovsky and Platonov,
1976; Reich, 2007; Sopikov, 1977):
•• emotive;
•• cognitive (predictive);
•• behavioral (active, volitional);
•• social.
A number of psychological studies are dedicated to building a hierarchical

structure of empathy. Thus, French psychologist T. Ribo (1884), a supporter
of functional psychology, was one of the first who studied the phenomenon
of sympathy. Describing sympathy, he identified three levels, which are mani-
fested in the form of synergy (lower level), synesthesia (middle level), and intel-
lectual sympathy (higher level).
The synergistic stage is responsible for the coordination of motoric reac-
tions. Synergy is the unconscious automated imitation of the motoric reactions
of other persons. At the level of synesthesia, the identity of people’s feelings
and experiences determine their similarity in actions. At the intellectual level,
the coherence of feelings and actions arises from the unity of ideas and tem-
perament with the object of sympathy.
Modern researchers J. Decety and J. Cowell (2014) distinguish three sepa-
rate components in the structure of empathy: motivational (desire to care for
the well-being of another person), emotional (ability to share the emotions of
another person), and cognitive (understanding of other people’s states, ability
to take the place of another person).
Empathy, as a complex, multilevel, integral property of personality, is
also studied by Ukrainian psychologists O.P. Sannikova (2003) and O.A.
Oryshchenko (2004). According to O.P. Sannikova’s continuum-hierarchical
model of personality (Sannikova, 1995), researchers distinguish three levels in
its structure:
•• a formally dynamic level includes dynamic (features of occurrence and

course of empathic reactions) and qualitative (modal) properties of
empathy;
•• a content-personal level includes those aspects of empathy that relate to
the choice of space for empathic experiences and the moral-ethical con-
tent of its object;
•• A socio-imperative level reflects social and individual ideas about the exist-
ing sociocultural “norms” of empathic manifestations.
There is no single view on the genesis of empathy and its mechanisms. Analysis
of the relevant literature showed several approaches to explaining the nature
of empathy:
•• sympathy (empathy) is viewed as a psychophysiological property of ani-

mals and humans, one of the primary emotions, on which social feelings
develop (Darwin, 1873; Simonov et al., 1976; Stern, 1922; Wilson, 1975);
•• the theory of the instinctive origin of sympathy (Kropotkin, 1991;
McDougall, 1916; Murphy, 1937; Spencer, 1998; Valantinas, 1988; Waal,
2010);
•• empathy is based upon an intuitive response to any manifestation of feel-
ings from other human beings (Shibutani, 1999);
•• empathy is a conditioned reflex phenomenon, the result of social learn-
ing and moral education (Allport, 1924; Bandura and Walter, 1963;
Meshcheryakova, 1982; Strelkova, 1987);
•• kinesthetic theory of empathy (Dymond, 1950; Hoffman, 1978).
Considering the problem of empathy’s nature and its development, one can-
not ignore this phenomenon’s mechanisms. This problem is even more com-
plicated than the definition of the very concept of empathy since a variety of
interpretations of the meaning of the same mechanisms have been added to the
numerous interpretations of this phenomenon.
Some researchers considered the mechanism of empathy an emotional
contagion or succession (McDougall, 1916; Press and Piaget, 1975; Sullivan,
1953; Vallon, 1967). Other psychologists shared G. Allport’s criticism of W.
McDaugall’s ideas about emotional contagion as the primary mechanism of
sympathy (Asch, 1952). They assumed that the social situation requires more
complex forms of response from a person than succession or contagion since a
person is faced with the task of understanding the experience of other people.
So G. Allport (cited by Asch, 1952), not denying the presence of the mecha-
nism of contagion, introduced a conditioned reflex amendment that allows
one to raise the question of a child’s social learning of sympathy by achieving
similarities between the experience of the subject and the object.
A number of psychologists consider identification as the main mechanism
of empathy (Avdeeva, 1975; Fromm, 1990; Parygin, 1971; Stolin, 1983).
In psychoanalysis, empathy is also connected with the idea of identification:
“From identification, the path leads us through imitation to empathy, i.e., to
the understanding [of] the mechanism due to which it is generally possible for
us to come into contact with the spiritual life of another person” (Freud, 2004,
p. 54).
Considering that the identification in the process of empathy acts as a unity
of projection and introjection, N.I. Sardzhveladze (1978) describes them, along
with emotional contagion, as mechanisms of the empathic process.
According to T.P. Gavrilova (1975), mechanisms of empathy are emotional
contagions at the lower levels (in young children) and partial or complete
identification at the higher levels with the consideration of a certain formed
“self” of a person. In her later works, the emergence of empathy is explained
by the mechanism of emotional decentration (Gavrilova, 1980). G.M. Breslav
also considers emotional decentration as the initial moment of empathy and
compassion (Breslav, 1990).
M.L. Hoffman (1978) summarizes data accumulated in developmental psy-
chology on forming the ability to empathize and concludes that emotional
arousal in an empathogenic situation may rest on different processes: the reac-
tion of classical conditioning, compassion through motoric imitation, and the
idea of how a person should feel in the situation of someone in need.
Thus, in the studies of empathy, there is no unity in relation to its
mechanisms.
To date, a significant number of studies have been carried out to identify
the conditions and factors that affect the origin and features of the empathic
process. First, this is a group of factors associated with:
•• the development of cognitive processes (Allport, 1924; Bronfenbrenner,

1958; Gavrilova, 1977; Kolomiiets, 2014; Strelkova, 1987);
•• past experience, primarily emotional (Allport, 1924; Gavrilova, 1977;
Reich, 2007) and communicative (the breadth of the communication
circle with peers) (Bodalev and Kashtanova, 1975; Kolomiiets et al.,
2018);
•• personality traits of the subject. The main personal factors that affect human
empathy are emotional sensitivity, interest in other people, flexibility,
high behavioral adaptability (Cottrel and Dymond, 1949), extraversion
(Guiton, 1959), anxiety (Stotland, 1978), personality stability, acceptance
of roles, self-identification of the individual (Hoffman, 2000), the domi-
nant motivation (collectivistic or egocentric), the stability of motives, and
the degree of subjective significance in the value system of other people
and one’s own self (Bodalev, 1995; Kolomiyets, 2014), etc.
These personal factors that affect a person’s empathy were added by Russian
psychologist I.M. Yusupov (1993). Unlike K. Jung, he argues that introverts
are more prone to empathy than extroverts. Egocentrism, anxiety, aggression,
depression, neuroticism, and appropriate personal sets (for example, avoidance
of unnecessary contact, unacceptability to show curiosity toward another per-
son, calm treatment of other people’s experiences and problems) all hinder
the formation and manifestation of empathy. A.P. Vasilkova (1999) character-
izes highly empathetic individuals as soft, friendly, sociable, emotional, highly
intelligent, and low empathetic are characterized as emotionally stunted and
unfriendly.
The next group of factors that affect the subject’s empathy is the features of
an emotional or empathogenic situation (intensity of the stimulus that causes
empathy: pain, tears, etc.) (Murphy, 1937; Strelkova, 1987). Among the fac-
tors that determine the features of the empathy represented by the subject are
relevant characteristics of the object of empathy, such as its personality features,
psychological and social distance to the subject, frequency of communication,
and degree of similarity (Alekseeva, 1984; Murphy, 1937).
Social factors are also an important issue. L. Murphy (1937) studied the
influence social groups with children have on the development of a baby’s
empathy. I.M. Yusupov (1993), having studied some demographic factors,
showed that, in his opinion, only socialization of adolescents in the city makes
the development of empathy possible, while their socialization in country areas
inhibits empathy greatly.
From this brief overview, a varied picture of opinions, hypotheses, and
approaches to solving the problem of empathy emerges. Obviously, such a
variety is due to multiple reasons. The main constraint here is the lack of a sin-
gle, sufficiently convincing theory. One cannot but agree with A.A. Bodalev
and T.R. Kashtanova that
the introduction of such a theory would allow [us] to integrate all the facts
obtained and, at the same time would make it possible to more purpose-
fully and productively search for new characteristics of empathy and pat-
terns of its development and formation, and therefore more effectively use
the knowledge of this phenomenon for applied purposes.
(Bodalev and Kashtanova, 1975, p. 12)
The making of a theory of any psychological phenomenon, including empa-

thy, presupposes a fundamental systemic study of its various aspects. In our
opinion, the study of empathy requires a special methodology that differs from
those that scientists have relied on in their studies until recently. We believe
that the study of the nature of empathy and the construction of its concept will
be most effective if evolutionary, sociocultural, and psychological (personal)
approaches are integrated on the basis of the principles of systemic research,
supplemented by the relevant provisions of the humanitarian methodology.
1.2. Methodological basis of studying human empathy

The retrospective analysis of empathy research conducted in the previous sec-
tion highlights a wide range of problems: main forms, types, stages of develop-
ment, mechanisms, relationship with individual psychological characteristics of
personality, conditions, features, factors of its manifestation and development,
etc. However, the results of all these works are ambiguous and contradictory
and do not rely on a single, fairly convincing theory. In this regard, the primary
task of studying the development of human empathy, in order to develop its
holistic concept, is to determine its methodological principles.
Conceptualization of the phenomenon is possible on the basis of under-
standing mental phenomena as a systemic property of highly organized living
matter (living systems) to self-organize and self-manage its development and
self-consciousness as a result of the subjective reflection of the objective world
(Kostyuk, 1989; Rubinstein, 1973). In the process of empathy, the inner world
of another individual is reflected, first of all, his experiences, which are not only
subjective but also are one of the forms of objective reality (Prigogine, 1991;
Slobodchikov, 1994; Yakov, 1990). Such a dichotomy of the inner world
determines the specificity of its reflection on different mental levels.
The reflection of another living being’s world of experiences is a key
point in empathic processes. However, one should not reduce empathy to
the processes of social perception, as this phenomenon is studied by G.M.
Andreeva and O.O. Bodalev and their followers (Andreeva, 2000; Bodalev
and Kashtanova, 1975). Researchers who study empathy in this aspect reduce
it to cognitive processes by which the social object is perceived, evaluated, and
explored by external signs (anatomical features, speech intonations, gender dif-
ferences, expressive features, etc.).
When using other approaches in research such as active, personal, condi-
tioned reflex, etc., empathy is reduced to separate processes, abilities, psycho-
logical states, emotions, and feelings such as reflection, penetration, cognition,
prediction, experiencing the inner world of another person, compassion, and
complicity. These processes take place on the basis of appropriate mechanisms:
emotional contagion, identification, projection, decentration, reflection, etc.
In this case, the subject of empathy is more or less alienated from its object.
Even according to K. Rogers, the empath-subject, living the world of another,
should keep the conventionality “as if” and not prevent the empath-object
from realizing his experiences.
Here we observe the traditional understanding of the internal psychological
connection of subject and object, i.e., the object acts as an external factor in
relation to the subject. Based upon the construction of the image of objective
reality and the mechanism of projection, “subjective reality” is experienced
(Geller, 1994). Indeed, such a perception of another person allows one to some
extent to understand his emotional state, to predict his behavior, but it is only
a fragment of the empathic process.
Considering empathy in the context of social perception does not account
for empathic phenomena at the level of the perceptual psyche in higher verte-
brates such as birds, dogs, dolphins, apes, and some other mammals. From the
standpoint of social perception, it is also impossible to explain the process of
the “meeting of two consciousnesses” and the possibility of treating the other
as “You” (Buber, 2012).
Thus, the plotting of the theory of empathy is impossible in the narrow
framework of interpersonal communication and interaction of people, as is
accepted in many psychological schools.
The reflection of another living being’s experiences can have varying degrees
of accuracy and complexity: from the direct sensory reflection of the mental
state of a living being to the comprehension of all the diversity and depth of the
inner world of another person through the comprehension of his experiences.
Here arises the question about the possibility of knowing the inner world
of another person only through empathic penetration. The answer is negative
if we consider that mental processes proceed independently of each other and
positive if the psyche is considered a systemic formation. Using L.S. Vygotsky’s
concept, in a case where empathy acts as a higher mental function mediated by
the high personal maturity of the subject whose semantic sphere is at the spirit-
ual level of development, we can observe complete interpenetration and fusion
of the inner worlds of two people, communication between “I” and “You”.
The consideration of empathy in the system of mental reflection repre-
sents it as a complex, multidimensional, hierarchically structured systemic for-
mation, which is an integrative feature of the human being. In this regard,
the study of the phenomenological, dynamic, and functional characteristics of
empathy involves a systematic analysis of empathic phenomena. The signs of a
systemic approach are the presence of a holistic structure of elements, relation-
ships between constituent elements, the hierarchical organization of elements,
system-forming factors, units of scientific analysis, input and output, structural
and functional characteristics, and a level of system development, etc. (Lomov,
1984).
However, this is not enough. Such an analysis does not reveal the nature of
empathy, does not answer the question of why the subject seeks to share the
emotional life of another person. The synthesis of evolutionary genetic, psy-
chological, sociocultural, and humanitarian approaches applied to the study of
empathy should help to answer this question.
Such a synthesis is based upon a general pattern of mental and personal
development, i.e., on the diversity and interconnectedness of directions, areas
of development (body, psyche, personality, subjectivity, spirituality, etc.), as
well as on a combination of human biosocial and spiritual nature (Frankl,
1990; Savchin and Vasilenko, 2017; Slobodchikov, 1994). In this approach,
empathy is seen as a phenomenon of a bio-psycho-socio-spiritual nature. The
combination of a systemic principle with genetic and sociocultural approaches
determines the interpretation of its main methodological requirements. Thus,
the development of the psyche is seen as a system of its quantitative, qualita-
tive, and structural changes; criteria, conditions, factors, and driving forces of
development are considered to have a systemic nature (diversity), while genetic
and social processes are systemic (different integrity).
Taking into account the general laws of the evolution of the psyche allows
us to conduct a fairly reliable study on the prehistory of anthropogenesis. M.L.
Krementsov expressed the gist of the evolutionary approach as:
the essence of the case is not just to describe, state any similarities or dif-
ferences in human and animal behavior, but to explain the reasons for its
existence, to consider the processes that ensure or determine its existence.
This is the essence of the evolutionary approach. We too often use the
word “preconditions” thoughtlessly (for example, biological preconditions
of speech, etc.), forgetting that it is insufficient to indicate that something
similar exists in animals. It is important to understand how that “some-
thing” in the process of evolution has led to the emergence of specifically
human behavioral traits. It is also not enough to say that some trait distin-
guishes man from animal; it is necessary to show why and how this trait
became characteristic.
(Krementsov, 1989, p. 27)
The evolutionary approach within our subject of research requires the deter-
mination of conditions and the ability of the psyche at a certain stage of its
development to reflect the experiences of other living beings. To do this, phy-
logeny has to form an set for the emotional perception of another subject and,
as a consequence, for the perception of his emotional state. This is possible only
at the sensory stage of mental development.
We may assume that increasing complexity in the development of the psy-
che during the evolution process up to the sensory-perceptual level became
an external factor in the emergence of empathy in living beings. Thus, at
the sensory-perceptual stage, the psyche has acquired the ability to reflect the
subjective states of other individuals (Vilyunas, 1986). As a result, the state of
another being became a significant stimulus for living organisms.
The emergence of imprinting in vertebrates is probably a prerequisite for
the development of their empathic sensitivity. For the first time in phylogeny,
stimuli-orienting instinctive behavior, the purpose of which is the attachment to
the subject, is engraved postnatally (during the individual’s life). And although
it is not the state of the subject that is imprinted, but only certain external key
stimuli, the evolutionary development of the reaction to the inherited imprint-
ing of the image of the subject of attachment could serve as a prerequisite for
the psyche of one individual to reflect the mental state of another. According
to V.K. Vilyunas, the process of imprinting is to display new properties of the
object (Vilyunas, 1990). It is clear that such properties may be the emotional
states of the subject of attachment, not just his external traits.
Thus, animals develop emotional resonance and the ability to respond to
signals that reflect other individuals’ emotional states. Emotional resonance
makes the reflected experience motivationally significant for the subject.
Due to the processes described above, animals, especially herd animals,
formed a need for emotional contact, and the instinct for mutual assistance
along with physiological mechanisms of empathy emerged. The work of P.V.
Simonov et al. (1976), who believes that the central gray matter of the brain is
a physiological substrate of compassion, only confirms our reasoning.
The ability of a highly organized psyche to influence emotions can be con-
sidered as an internal factor in the genesis of empathy. Modern psychology has
accumulated a lot of empirical data that show the influence of an individual’s
emotional sensitivity to the perception of the emotional situation and his reac-
tion to it. Emotional sensitivity determines the psyche’s sensitivity to the per-
ception of another’s emotional state. At the heart of such sensitivity to another
individual, his focus, and concern are certain properties of the nervous system.
The features of the highly organized psyche just mentioned are prerequisites
for the emergence of empathy in phylogeny.
As for the genesis of empathy in Homo sapiens, its determination is much
more complicated. Along with emotional sensitivity, hominids have such a
general precondition for the emergence of human empathy, a sense of “ances-
tral” community with other fellow tribesmen. The internal determination of
behavior, mental processes, and mental development are supplemented by
external factors that mediate these processes. Myths, social norms, traditions,
and cults, depending on the axiological orientation, contribute to the emer-
gence, formation, and development of human empathy or inhibit these pro-
cesses. Thus, the system of biological determinants of the genesis of Homo
sapiens’ empathy was supplemented by sociocultural determinants.
Nowadays, an increasing number of scientists are moving away from simpli-
fication in the interpretation of biological and social determinants of the inter-
action of mental phenomena, personality development, and human behavior.
Concepts of successive change in biological and social issues and theories of
two factors (acting in parallel or interacting) are replaced by the development
of theoretical models of “systemic determination” and “change of determi-
nation” (Lomov, 1984). In different circumstances and at different stages of
mental development, the ratio and function of sociobiological determinants
changes. Thus, if one or another social event is a factor in certain human
actions in a particular situation, its biological features can act as a factor, a pre-
requisite, or link that mediates these actions. In other situations, the structure
of determination may be different.
It is important to realize that the social system is always complex and
dynamic. It consists of many subsystems, different forms, and types of social
relations. The biological system also includes different types of living organiza-
tion: organismic, population-species, biocoenotic, and biospheric (Vernadsky,
2001). It follows that mental development at different stages (steps) is associ-
ated with a change in the system of factors. That greatly hinders the analysis
of psyche development determination and the empathy of living beings, in
particular.
Investigating the system of empathy genesis determinants, it is necessary
to identify its external and internal factors, general and specific prerequisites,
and links that mediate the process of the emergence of empathic sensitivity.
In addition, the system of genesis determinants of this phenomenon in higher
animals and in Homo sapiens may differ.
The study of human evolutionary history by Charles Darwin, P.O.
Kropotkin, V.P. Ephroimson, and others gave us sound facts about the evolu-
tionary genetic basis of altruism in Homo sapiens. However, it is mainly homi-
nids, sensitive to a fellow tribesman’s emotional state, that may exercise mutual
assistance and altruism. Thus, evolutionary selection left not only the strong-
est but also the most empathetic. Here we may indicate the simplest level of
empathy development and natural empathy, based on direct sensory reflection
of another individual’s emotional state.
The biological evolution of man is inseparable from cultural evolution. A
primitive culture of hominids, which contributed to the regression of instinc-
tive behaviors, the development of its plasticity, and the complication of
associative connections in the brain emerged before the emergence of Homo
sapiens. Individuals develop sensitivity and emotionality, increasing the ability
to experience, and hence to empathize.
After the emergence of Homo sapiens, culture became dominant in empa-
thy development. Emotional life, mediated by a developed intellect and the
achievements of spiritual culture, complicates man’s inner world and experi-
ences. Empathy becomes more selective and may evolve to a higher level:
personal, mediated by cognition.
The ontogenetic development of higher forms of empathy (personalized-
meaning and transfinite) (Zhuravlyova, 2008) is determined by cultural-his-
torical and subcultural factors of human socialization and by the value and
significance given to empathic qualities by society, in general, and subcultures
to which man belongs, in particular. Depending on the social sanctioning or
denunciation of empathic behavior and the ideological, ethical, and political
systems prevailing in society, the personal and social value of empathy as a
human quality is determined.
The study of archaic communities has shown that even prehistoric man
faced existential contradictions: the dichotomies of life and death, good and
evil, truth and illusion, and self and non-self. In our study, the greatest interest
is in humanity’s attempts to solve the last dichotomy, self and non-self. The
desire for interpenetration, merging with another person, and the inability to
achieve this in the absolute is reflected in myths (the myth of Androgynes),
religion (the trinity), and the humanities (problems of I and You, I and It, dia-
logic consciousness in the humanities and psychology). We may assume that
highly developed empathy (transcendent, transfinite, spiritual) is able to help
merge the “two consciousnesses”, to comprehend deep experiences and the
natural essence (self, nature, soul) of each other.
Due to the fact that the essence of man is not only bio-socio-cultural, but
also spiritual, existential, and transcendental (Frankl, 1990; Fromm, 1990;
Slobodchikov, 1994), the genesis of such a phenomenon should be investi-
gated not only in evolutionary and sociocultural aspects but in the existential
and spiritual aspects as well.
Our understanding of transfinite empathy is close to E. Fromm’s view on
such types of “humanized experiences” as compassion and empathy:
Compassion or empathy assumes that I myself experience what was expe-

rienced by another person, and, therefore, in this experience he and I – we
are the one. All knowledge about other person is valid insofar as it is based
on my experience of what he is experiencing. If this is not the case and
the person remains an object, maybe I know a lot about him, but I do not
know him. … This attitude is not from “I” to “You”, it is characterized
by the phrase: “I am You”.
(Fromm, 1990, p. 279)
Such an attitude toward the other person is proclaimed in a number of philo-

sophical, psychological, and philological texts that constitute the methodology
of humanistic knowledge (Bakhtin, 1979; Buber, 1999; Chavchavadze, 1991;
Romanes, 1905; Frank, 1992).
In recent years, on the basis of this methodology and the principles of
descriptive (understanding) psychology by V. Dilthey (1996), a new branch
of psychological research has been born: humanitarian psychology (Bratus,
1990; Smirnova, 1994; Starovoitenko, 1996; Petrovsky, 1992; Vorobieva,
1995).
The systematic study of empathic phenomena from the standpoint of
humanitarian methodology will help solve numerous questions for empa-
thy researchers. First of all, it is necessary to solve the problem of the gen-
esis of empathy, its differences from other mental processes, and psychological
phenomena.
Within the humanitarian approach, the following provisions should be
noted in the study of the problem of empathy:
•• The existence of one isolated consciousness, i.e., a person without other

people, is impossible. People consciously or unconsciously feel their unity.
M.M. Bakhtin wrote about the lack of self-sufficiency of an isolated per-
sonality: “To be means to be for the other person and through him – for
oneself” (Bakhtin, 1979, p. 330). This idea is vividly expressed by S.L.
Rubinstein in his latest book Man and the World, where he has stressed
that I cannot be revealed as an object of immediate awareness through a
relationship to oneself, isolated from other people: “the initial condition of
my existence is the existence of individuals, subjects with consciousness –
the existence of the psyche, the consciousness of other people” (Romanes,
1905, p. 338).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
indeed, most unexpected. Before this matter had been settled
the German Minister was killed. Suddenly meeting this affair
caused us deep grief. We ought vigorously to seek the murderer
and punish him.' No more. The date July 18; the murder June
20!
"Yet even in this decree there was a complete 'volte-face.'

Missionaries who were by the decree of July 2 'to be at once
driven away to their own countries' were by the decree of July
18 'to be protected in every province,' 'to be protected
without the least carelessness.' The truculence and
belligerence of the decrees issued when our troops had been
driven back had disappeared; the tone now was one of
justification and conciliation. Only one interpretation was
possible—that the Chinese had been defeated. Confirmation came
the same day. A messenger sent out by the Japanese
successfully passed the enemy's lines and brought us the news
that we had so long awaited. … By the same messenger a letter
was received by the French Minister. … The same messenger also
brought to the Belgian Minister a despatch from his Consul at
Tien-tsin. … Days followed quietly now, though 'sniping' did
not cease. Several casualties occurred among the garrison. A
Russian was killed and an Austrian wounded; an Italian wounded
and also a Japanese. In the Fu it was still dangerous for the
Christian refugees to move about, and several were hit and two
killed. But the Yamên became more and more conciliatory, until
we could gauge the advance of the reliefs by the degree of
apology in their despatches. But all supplies were rigorously
cut off, and the sufferings of the Christians were acute. …
"On the 22nd Sir Robert Hart received a despatch from the
Tsung-li-Yamên. They naïvely remarked that it was now one
month since they had heard from him, and his silence gave them
concern for his welfare. Moreover, a report had just reached them
that his house had been burned, but they expressed the hope
that he and al his staff were well. Another despatch requested
his advice upon a Customs question that had arisen in
Shanghai. Sir Robert Hart wrote a dignified reply. For more
than a month, he said, he had been a refugee in the British
Legation with all his staff, having had to flee from his house
without warning; that all Customs records and papers, and
every paper and letter of value that he had accumulated during
a lifetime, had been destroyed; that not only his house, but
some 19 other buildings in the occupation of his staff had
been burned with all their contents; that the acting postal
secretary had been killed by a shell, and two other members of
his staff—Mr. Richardson and Mr. Macoun—had been wounded by
bullets. …
"Meanwhile, the armistice continued, if armistice it can be

called where true armistice there was none. Desultory firing
continued, and sniping was still the chief pastime at the
Chinese outposts. Friendly relations were, however, opened
with some Chinese soldiers in the Fu. A Japanese Volunteer
established a bureau of intelligence to which the enemy's
soldiers had access. One soldier was especially communicative,
and earned high reward for the valuable information that he
conveyed to us. For a week from July 26 to August 2 daily
bulletins based upon this information of the advance of the
relief column were posted on the bell tower of the British
Legation.
{127}
An unbroken series of victories was attending our relief
forces. … Letters were given to the soldier to take to the
General of the relief column, and a reward offered if an
answer should be brought next day, but no answer was ever
brought. Our informant had brought the armies along too
quickly. He was compelled to send them back. Accordingly on
the 31st he made the Chinese recapture Chang-chia-wan, killing
60 of the foreigners; advancing upon Matou he killed 70
foreigners more, and drove them back to An-ping. Next day he
drove the foreigners disastrously back to Tien-tsin with a
loss of 1,000. The day was equally disastrous to himself. Our
informant had killed the goose that lay the golden egg. For a
messenger arrived on that day with letters from Tien-tsin,
dated July 30, informing us that a large force was on the
point of leaving for our relief. … Meanwhile, while our
informant was marching our relief backwards and forwards to
Tien-tsin, Prince Ching and others were vainly urging the
Ministers to leave Peking, but whether they left Peking or not
they were to hand over the Christian refugees now under the
protection of the Legations to the mercies of the Government,
which had issued a decree commanding that they be exterminated
unless they recanted their errors. In other communications
Prince Ching 'and others' urged that the foreign Ministers
should telegraph to their Government 'en clair' lying reports
of the condition of affairs in Peking.
Two days after the cessation of hostilities Prince Ching 'and

others' sent a despatch to Sir Claude MacDonald to the effect
that it was impossible to protect the Ministers in Peking
because 'Boxers' were gathering from all points of the
compass, and that nothing would satisfy them (the 'Boxers')
but the destruction of the Legations, and that the Ministers
would be given safe conduct to Tien-tsin. Sir Claude, in
reply, asked why it was that protection could be given to the
Ministers on the way to Tien-tsin and yet could not be given
to them while in the Legations in Peking. Prince Ching 'and
others' replied: 'July 25, 1900. … As to the inquiry what
difference there is between giving protection in the city or
on the road, and why it is possible to give it in the latter,
there is only an apparent discrepancy. For the being in the
city is permanent, the being on the road is temporary. If all
the foreign Ministers are willing to temporarily retire we
should propose the route to Tung-chau and thence by boat down
stream to Tien-tsin, which could be reached in only two days.
No matter what difficulties there might be a numerous body of
troops would be sent, half by water to form a close escort,
half by road to keep all safe for a long way on both banks.
Since the time would be short we can guarantee that there
would be no mishap. It is otherwise with a permanent residence
in Peking, where it is impossible to foretell when a disaster
may occur.' … In the envelope which brought this letter were
two other communications of the same guileless nature. 'On
July 24,' said the first, 'we received a telegram from Mr.
Warren, British Consul-General in Shanghai, to the effect that
while China was protecting the Legations no telegram had been
received from the British Minister, and asking the Yamên to
transmit Sir C. M. MacDonald's telegram to Shanghai. As in
duty bound we communicate the above, and beg you to send a
telegram "en clair" to the Yamên for transmission.' Tender
consideration was shown for us in the second letter:—'For the
past month and more military affairs have been very pressing.
Your Excellency and other Ministers ought to telegraph home
that your families are well in order to soothe anxiety, but at
the present moment peace is not yet restored, and your
Legation telegrams must be wholly "en clair," stating that all
is well, without touching on military affairs. Under those
conditions the Yamên can transmit them. The writers beg that
your Excellency will communicate this to the other foreign
Ministers.'
"Evasive replies were given to these communications. … Our

position at this time compelled us to temporize. We knew from
the alteration in tone of the Chinese despatches that they had
suffered defeats and were growing alarmed, but we did not know
how much longer international jealousies or difficulties of
obtaining transport were to delay the departure of the troops
for Tien-tsin. … Though now nominally under the protection of
an armistice sniping still continued, especially in the Fu,
into any exposed portion of the besieged area. … The Chinese
worked on continuously at their fortifications. … Finding that
the Ministers declined to telegraph to their Governments 'en
clair' that all was well with the Legations, the
Tsung-li-Yamên wrote to Sir Robert Hart asking him to send
home a telegram in the sense they suggested. Sir Robert
replied diplomatically, 'If I were to wire the truth about the
Legations I should not be believed.'
"A malevolent attempt was next made by the Chinese to obtain
possession of the refugees who were in our safe keeping. On
July 27 they wrote to Sir Claude MacDonald saying that 'they
hear that there are lodged at the Legations a considerable
number of converts, and that, as 'the space is limited and
weather hot, they suggest that they must be causing the
Legations considerable inconvenience. And now that people's
minds are quieted, these converts can all be sent out and go
about their ordinary avocations. They need not have doubts or
fears. If you concur, an estimate should be made of the
numbers and a date fixed for letting them out. Then all will
be in harmony.' The reply of the diplomatic body was to the
effect that while they were considering the two last
letters—one offering safe conduct to Tien-tsin and the other
declaring that the converts might leave the Legations in
perfect security—heavy firing was heard in the direction of
the Pei-tang, which was evidently being attacked in force;
that yesterday and last night a barricade was built across the
North Bridge, from behind which shots are being continuously
fired into the British Legation. The French and Russian
Legations are also being fired upon. As all this seems
inconsistent with the above letters, an explanation is asked
for before further consideration is given to the offer.
Promptly the Yamên sent its explanation. The Pei-tang
refugees, it seemed, who were starving, had made a sortie to
obtain food. And they had fired upon the people. 'A decree,'
it went on to say, 'has now been requested to the effect that
if the converts do not come out to plunder they are to be
protected and not to be continually attacked, for they also
are the children of the State. This practice (of continually
firing upon the converts) will thus be gradually stopped.'
{128}
Such a callous reply was read with indignation, and there was
not the slightest intention on the part of any Minister to
leave Peking. Yet on the 4th of August a decree was issued
appointing Yung Lu to conduct the foreign Ministers safely to
Tien-tsin 'in order once more to show the tenderness of the
Throne for the men from afar.' …
"On August 10, Friday, a messenger succeeded in passing the

enemy's lines, and brought us letters from General Gaselee and
General Fukushima. A strong relief force was marching to
Peking, and would arrive here if nothing untoward happened on
the 13th or 14th. Our danger then was that the enemy would
make a final effort to rush the Legations before the arrival
of reinforcements. And the expected happened. …
"Yesterday [August 13] passed under a continuous fusillade

which increased during the night. Then at 3 on this morning we
were all awakened by the booming of guns in the east and by
the welcome sound of volley firing. Word flew round that 'the
foreign troops are at the city wall and are shelling the East
Gate.' At daylight most of us went on to the wall, and
witnessed the shelling of the Great East Gate. We knew that
the allies would advance in separate columns, and were on the
qui vive of excitement, knowing that at any moment now the
troops might arrive. Luncheon, the hard luncheon of horse
flesh, came on, and we had just finished when the cry rang
through the Legation, 'The British are coming,' and there was
a rush to the entrance and up Canal-street towards the Water
Gate. The stalwart form of the general and his staff were
entering by the Water Gate, followed by the 1st Regiment of
Sikhs and the 7th Rajputs. They passed down Canal-street, and
amid a scene of indescribable emotion marched to the British
Legation. The siege has been raised.
"Peking, August 15. On reading over my narrative of the siege

I find that in the hurry and confusion of concluding my report
I have omitted one or two things that I had wished to say. In
the first place, I find that I have not in any adequate way
expressed the obligation of all those confined in the British
Legation to the splendid services done by the Reverend F. D.
Gamewell, of the American Episcopal Mission [who was educated
as a civil engineer at Troy and Cornell], to whom was due the
designing and construction of all our defences, and who
carried out in the most admirable manner the ideas and
suggestions of our Minister, Sir Claude MacDonald. To the
Reverend Frank Norris, of the Society for the Propagation of
the Gospel, our thanks are also specially due. He
superintended, often under heavy fire, the construction of
defences in the Prince's Fu and in other exposed places,
working always with a courage and energy worthy of admiration.
He was struck in the neck once by a segment of a shell, but
escaped marvellously from serious injury. He speaks Chinese
well, and Chinese worked under him with a fearlessness that
few men can inspire. In the second place, I noticed that I
have not sufficiently recorded the valuable services rendered
by Mr. H. G. Squiers, the First Secretary of the American
Legation, who on the death of Captain Strouts became Chief of
the Staff to Sir Claude MacDonald. He had been for 15 years in
the United States cavalry, and his knowledge and skill and the
resolution with which he inspired his small body of men will
not readily be forgotten. …
"To-day the Pei-tang Cathedral was relieved. Bishops, priests,

and sisters had survived the siege and, thanks to the
wonderful foresight of Bishop Favier, the Christians had been
spared from starvation. Japanese coming down from the north of
the city relieved the cathedral; French, British, and Russians
from the south arrived as the siege was raised. Mines had been
employed with deadly effect. The guards had lost five French
killed and five Italians. Some 200 of the Christians had
perished."
London Times,
October 13 and 15, 1900.
CHINA: A. D. 1900 (June-December).

Upright conduct of the Chinese Viceroys in
the Yang-tsze provinces.
In his annual message of December 3, 1900, to Congress,
referring to the occurrences in China, the President of the
United States remarked with much justice: "It is a relief to
recall and a pleasure to record the loyal conduct of the
viceroys and local authorities of the southern and eastern
provinces. Their efforts were continuously directed to the
pacific control of the vast populations under their rule and
to the scrupulous observance of foreign treaty rights. At
critical moments they did not hesitate to memorialize the
Throne, urging the protection of the legations, the
restoration of communication, and the assertion of the
Imperial authority against the subversive elements. They
maintained excellent relations with the official
representatives of foreign powers. To their kindly disposition
is largely due the success of the consuls in removing many of
the missionaries from the interior to places of safety." The
viceroys especially referred to in this are Chang Chih-tung
and Liu Kun-yi, often referred to as "the Yang-tsze viceroys."
CHINA: A. D. 1900 (July).

Speech of German Emperor to troops departing to China,
commanding no quarter.
See (in this volume)

GERMANY: A. D. 1900 (OCTOBER 9).
CHINA: A. D. 1900 (July).

American troops sent to co-operate with those of other Powers.
Capture of Tientsin by the allied forces.
Death of Colonel Liscum.
Reported massacre of foreign Ministers and others in Peking.
The long month of dread suspense.
Overtures from Earl Li Hung-chang for negotiation.
"On the 26th of June Major Gen. Adna R Chaffee, U. S. V., was
appointed to the command of the American forces in China. He
embarked from San Francisco on the 1st of July, reached
Nagasaki on the 24th, and Taku, China, on the 28th. … On
reaching Nagasaki he received the following instructions,
dated, … July 19: 'Secretary War directs that you proceed at
once with transport Grant, Sixth Cavalry, and Marines to Taku,
China, and take command of American land forces, which will be
an independent command known as the China relief expedition.
You will find there the Ninth and Fourteenth Infantry, one
battery of the Fifth Artillery, and one battalion of Marines.
Sumner sailed from San Francisco July 17 with Second Battalion
of Fifteenth Infantry and recruits to capacity of vessel.
{129}
Reinforcements will follow to make your force in the immediate
future up to 5,000, and very soon to 10,000. … Reports now
indicate that American Minister with all the legation have
been destroyed in Pekin. Chinese representative here, however,
insists to the contrary, and there is, therefore, a hope which
you will not lose sight of until certainty is absolute. It is
the desire of this Government to maintain its relations of
friendship with the part of Chinese people and Chinese
officials not concerned in outrages on Americans. Among these
we consider Li Hung Chang, just appointed viceroy of Chili.
You will to the extent of your power aid the Government of
China, or any part thereof, in repressing such outrages and in
rescuing Americans, and in protecting American citizens and
interests, and wherever Chinese Government fails to render
such protection you will do all in your power to supply it.
Confer freely with commanders of other national forces, act
concurrently with them, and seek entire harmony of action
along the lines of similar purpose and interest. There
should be full and free conference as to operations before
they are entered upon. You are at liberty to agree with them
from time to time as to a common official direction of the
various forces in their combined operations, preserving,
however, the integrity of your own American division, ready to
be used as a separate and complete organization. Much must be
left to your wise discretion and that of the admiral. At all
times report fully and freely to this Department your wants
and views. The President has to-day appointed you
major-general of volunteers.' …
"In the meantime the Ninth Infantry, from Manila, reached Taku
on the 6th of July. Two battalions of that regiment, under
Colonel Liscum, pressed forward to Tientsin, reaching that
point on the 11th, and on the 13th took part with the British,
French, and Japanese forces in an attack upon the southwest
part of the walled city of Tientsin, which had been rendered
necessary by the persistent shelling of the foreign quarters,
outside of the walls, on the part of the Chinese troops
occupying the city. Colonel Liscum's command formed part of a
brigade under General Dorward, of the British army, and was
assigned to the duty of protecting the flank of the allied
forces. In the performance of that duty it maintained a
position under heavy fire for fifteen hours, with a loss of 18
killed and 77 wounded. Among the killed was the gallant
Colonel Liscum, who thus ended an honorable service of nearly
forty years, commencing in the ranks of the First Vermont
Infantry at the outbreak of the civil war, and distinguished
by unvarying courage, fidelity, and high character. The
regiment was withdrawn from its position on the night of the
13th, and on the morning of the 14th the native city was
captured, and the southeast quarter was assigned to the
American forces for police and protection. …
"At the time of the capture of Tientsin the most positive and
circumstantial accounts of the massacre of all the ministers
and members of the legations in Pekin, coming apparently from
Chinese sources, had been published, and were almost
universally believed. The general view taken by the civilized
world of the duty to be performed in China was not that the
living representatives of the Western powers in Pekin were to
be rescued, but that their murder was to be avenged and their
murderers punished. In the performance of that duty time and
rapidity of movement were not especially important. The
resolution of the commanders of the allied forces,
communicated by Admiral Kempff on the 8th of July, to the
effect that 80,000 men would be required—20,000 to hold the
position from Taku to Tientsin and 60,000 to march to Pekin,
while not more than 40,800 troops were expected to have
arrived by the middle of August, practically abandoned all
expectation of rescuing the ministers and members of the
legations alive, for it proposed that after the middle of
August any forward movement should be still deferred until
40,000 more troops had arrived. On the 11th of July, however,
the American Secretary of State secured, through the Chinese
minister at Washington, the forwarding of a dispatch in the
State Department cipher to the American minister at Pekin, and
on the 20th of July, pursuant to the same arrangement, an
answer in cipher was received from Minister Conger, as
follows: 'For one month we have been besieged in British
legation under continued shot and shell from Chinese troops.
Quick relief only can prevent general massacre.' This dispatch
from Mr. Conger was the first communication received by any
Western power from any representative in Pekin for about a
month, and although it was at first received in Europe with
some incredulity, it presented a situation which plainly
called for the urgency of a relief expedition rather than for
perfection of preparation. It was made the basis of urgent
pressure for an immediate movement upon Pekin, without waiting
for the accumulation of the large force previously proposed."
United States, Secretary of War,

Annual Report, November 30, 1900,
pages 14-16, 19-20.
As mentioned above, in the instructions of the American

government to General Chaffee, the veteran Chinese statesman
and diplomat, Earl Li Hung-chang, well known in Europe and
America, had now been recalled by the Peking government to the
viceroyalty of Chili, from which he was removed six years
before, and had been given the authority of a plenipotentiary
to negotiate with the allied Powers. He addressed a proposal
to the latter, to the effect that the Ministers in Peking
would be delivered, under safe escort, at Tientsin, if the
allies would refrain from advancing their forces to Peking.
The reply from all the governments concerned was substantially
the same as that made by the United States, in the following
terms: "The government will not enter into any arrangement
regarding disposition or treatment of legations without first
having free communication with Minister Conger. Responsibility
for their protection rests upon Chinese government. Power to
deliver at Tientsin presupposes power to protect and to open
communication. This is insisted on." Earl Li then asked
whether, "if free communication were established, it could be
arranged that the Powers should not advance pending
negotiations," and was told in reply: "Free communication with
our representatives in Peking is demanded as a matter of
absolute right, and not as a favor. Since the Chinese
government admits that it possesses the power to give
communication, it puts itself in an unfriendly attitude by
denying it. No negotiations seem advisable until the Chinese
government shall have put the diplomatic representatives of
the Powers in full and free communication with their
respective governments, and removed all danger to their lives
and liberty."
{130}
CHINA: A. D. 1900 (July-August).

Boxer attack on the Russians in Manchuria,
and Russian retaliation.
See (in this volume)

MANCHURIA: A. D. 1900.
CHINA: A. D. 1900 (August).

Appointment of Count Waldersee to command the allied forces.
Field-Marshal Count von Waldersee, appointed to command the
German forces sent to China, being of higher military rank
than any other of the commanding officers in that country, was
proposed for the general command of the allied armies, and
accepted as such. Before his arrival in China, however, many
of the American, Russian, and some other troops, had been
withdrawn.
CHINA: A. D. 1900 (August 4-16).

The advance of the allied forces on Peking and the capture
of the city.
The following is from the report of General Chaffee,

commanding the American forces in the allied movement from
Tientsin, to rescue the beleaguered Legations at Peking: "On
my arrival at Tientsin I called on the various generals
commanding troops, and on August 1 a conference of generals
was held at the headquarters of Lieutenant-General Linivitch,
of the Russian army. Present at the conference were the
commanding general of the Russian army and his chief of staff;
Lieutenant-General Yamagutchi and his chief of staff;
Major-General Fukushima, of the Japanese army;
Lieutenant-General Gaselee, of the British army, and his chief
of staff, General Barrow; General Frey, of the French army; the
Germans were also represented by an officer of the German
navy; myself and Major Jesse M. Lee, Ninth Infantry, and
Lieutenant Louis M. Little, of the marines, who speaks French.
The purpose of this conference was to decide whether the
armies were ready to make a movement for the relief of Pekin.
It was disclosed in the conference that the Japanese, whose
forces occupied the right bank of the river in and about
Tientsin, where also were located the British and American
forces, had by various patrols determined that the Chinese
were in considerable force in the vicinity of Pei-tsang, about
7 miles distance up the river from Tientsin, and that they
were strengthening their position by earthworks extending from
the right bank of the river westward something like 3 miles,
and from the left bank east to the railroad embankment was
also being strengthened. The forces were variously estimated,
from reports of Chinese, at from 10,000 to 12,000 men in the
vicinity of Pei-tsang, with large bodies to the rearward as
far as Yangtsun, where it was reported their main line of
defenses would be encountered.
"The first question submitted for decision was 'whether a

movement should be made at once,' which was decided in the
affirmative, two Powers only dissenting, and these not
seriously, as their doubt seemed to be that the force we could
put in movement was not sufficiently strong to meet the
opposition that might be expected. The decision was that the
attack should be made on Sunday, August 5, and as the
Japanese, British, and American forces occupied the right bank
of the river, the Russians the left, the attack should be made
without change of situation of the troops, the British to send
four heavy guns to aid the Russian column. The strategy on the
right bank of the river was left to the determination of the
British, American, and Japanese generals. The force reported
to the conference as available for the movement was: Japanese,
about 8,000; Russian, 4,800; British, about 3,000; American,
2,100; French, 800. With special effort on the part of
Captains Byron and Wood, Reilly's battery was gotten to
Tientsin August 3 and assembled. We were also able to make one
pack train available on the 4th, just in time to march with
the column. The marines and Sixth Cavalry were gotten off the
'Grant' and to Tientsin August 3. The presence of the Sixth
Cavalry at Tientsin, dismounted, enabled me to take all
available men of the Ninth and Fourteenth, also all the
marines except one company 100 strong, left to assist the
civil government of the city. By arrangement prior to my
arrival the officers selected to establish a civil government
for Tientsin were to be allowed a military force, of which the
United States should furnish 100. I was compelled, of course,
to leave the Sixth Cavalry, because the horses had not
arrived. … The troops moved out from the city of Tientsin
during the afternoon and night of August 4 and bivouacked in
the vicinity of Si-ku arsenal, the same that was taken by
Admiral Seymour in his retrograde movement."
The Chinese were driven from the Arsenal by the Japanese,

before whom they also fell back from Pei-tsang, and the first
serious battle was fought at Yang-tsun, on the 6th. Having
rested at Yang-tsun and cared for its sick and wounded, on the
7th, the army moved forward on the 8th, encountered slight
resistance at Shang-shia-wan on the 11th, found Tong-chow
abandoned, on the 12th, and reached Pekin on the 14th, having
suffered more from heat, fatigue, and the want of potable
water on the march, than from "Boxers" or imperial troops.
Returning now to the report of General Chaffee, we take from

it his account of the final movement to the walls of Pekin, of
the forcing of the gates and of the clearing of Chinese troops
from the city: "The Japanese when taking possession of
Tong-Chow in the morning [of the 12th] advanced troops toward
Pekin for a distance of 6½ miles. It was finally agreed that
the next day, the 13th, should be devoted to reconnaissance;
the Japanese should reconnoiter on the two roads to the right
or north of the paved road which is just north of the canal;
the Russians on the paved road, if at all; the Americans to
reconnoiter on the road just south of the canal; the British a
parallel road 1½ miles to the left of the road occupied by the
Americans. On the 14th the armies should be concentrated on
the advance line held by the Japanese, and that that evening a
conference should be held to determine what the method of
attack on Pekin should be. On the morning of the 13th I
reconnoitered the road to be occupied by the Americans with
Troop M, Sixth Cavalry, Reilly's battery, and the Fourteenth
Infantry up to the point specified in our agreement, or about
7 miles from Tong-Chow. Finding no opposition, I directed the
remainder of my force to march out and close in on the advance
guard. This force arrived at midnight. The British
reconnoitered their road with some cavalry. The Japanese
reconnoitered their front and also the front which properly
belonged to the Russians.
{131}
"For reasons unknown to me the Russians left their camp at

Tong-Chow about the time that my troops were marching to close
on my advance guard. They followed the road which had been
assigned to them, and about nine o'clock heavy firing was
heard in the vicinity of Pekin. It was the next day
ascertained that they had moved forward during the previous
evening and had attacked the 'Tong-pien-men Gate,' an east
gate of the city near where the Chinese wall joins the Tartar
wall. Very heavy artillery and considerable small-arm firing
was continued throughout the night. At the time of the
occurrence I supposed the firing to be the last efforts of the
Chinese troops to destroy the legations. …
"The 14th being the day decided upon for the concentration on
the line 7 miles from Tong-Chow, I made no preparations for
carrying on any operations beyond a small reconnaissance by a
troop of cavalry to my front, which duty I assigned to Captain
Cabell. … My cavalry had been absent not more than an hour,
when Mr. Lowry, the interpreter who had accompanied it, raced
back and informed me that Captain Cabell was surrounded by
Chinese cavalry. I immediately ordered a battalion of the
Fourteenth Infantry to fall in, and we went forward about a
mile and a half and found Captain Cabell occupying some
houses, firing from the roofs on a village in his front. I
insisted on the French troops giving me the road, which they
reluctantly did. Having joined Cabell, I continued the
reconnaissance to my front, wishing to get as near the wall of
the city as I could, but not expecting to move my whole force,
which was contrary to the agreement at Tong-Chow on the
evening of August 12. Without serious opposition we arrived at
the northeast corner of the Chinese city, having brushed away
some Chinese troops or 'Boxers' that fired from villages to
our left and front. About 10 o'clock I saw the advantage of
holding the ground that I had obtained, and directed all my
force to move forward, as I had then become aware of Russian
troops being in action on my right, and could also hear the
Japanese artillery farther to the right. My left flank at this
time was uncovered, except by a small force of British
cavalry. The British troops did not advance from Tong-Chow
until the 14th, owing to the agreement previously referred to.
On that day they marched for the line of concentration and
found my force advancing on Pekin. At noon a British battery
was at work a mile to my left and rear.
"At 11 a. m. two companies of the Fourteenth Infantry, under

the immediate command of Colonel Daggett, had scaled the wall
of the Chinese city at the northeast corner, and the flag of
that regiment was the first foreign colors unfurled upon the
walls surrounding Pekin. The two companies on the wall, with
the assistance of the troops facing the wall, drove away the
Chinese defenders from the corner to the east gate of the
Chinese city, where the British entered without opposition
later in the day. About noon it was reported to me that the
Russians had battered open 'Tung-pien-men gate' during the
night and had effected an entrance there. I arrived at the
gate soon afterwards and found in the gate some of the
Fourteenth Infantry, followed by Reilly's battery. The Russian
artillery and troops were in great confusion in the passage,
their artillery facing in both directions, and I could see no
effort being made to extricate themselves and give passage
into the city. One company of the Fourteenth Infantry deployed
itself in the buildings to the right of the gate and poured
effective fire onto the Tartar wall. Captain Reilly got two
guns through a very narrow passage to his left, tearing down a
wall to do so, and found a position a few yards to the left of
the road where he could enfilade the Tartar wall, section by
section, with shrapnel. The Fourteenth Infantry crossed the
moat and, taking position paralleling the moat, deployed along
a street facing the Tartar wall, and with the aid of the
artillery swept it of Chinese troops. In this way, gradually
working to the westward, the Tartar wall was cleared of
opposition to the 'Bait-men gate' and beyond.
"Orders were sent to the Ninth to follow up the movement of

the Fourteenth Infantry and Reilly's battery as soon as the
wall was cleared of Chinese; also to follow the movement to
the 'Chien-men' gate of the Tartar city. The marines were to
follow the general movement, but later were ordered to protect
the train. At about 3 o'clock p. m. our advance had arrived
opposite the legations, the fire of the Chinese having
practically ended, and we drew over to the Tartar wall and
entered the legation grounds with the Fourteenth Infantry by
the 'water gate or moat,' Reilly's battery passing through the
'Chien-men' gate, which was opened by the American and Russian
marines of the besieged force. The Fourteenth Infantry was
selected on this occasion in recognition of gallantry at
Yang-tsun and during this day. The British troops entered at
the 'Shahuo' gate of the Chinese city, and following a road
through the center of the city to opposite the legations,
arrived there through the 'water gate or moat' in advance of
the United States troops. Having communicated with Minister
Conger, I withdrew the troops from the legation and camped
just outside near the Tartar wall for the night. My casualties
during the day were 8 enlisted men wounded in the Fourteenth
Infantry, 1 enlisted man wounded of Battery F, Fifth
Artillery, and 1 officer and 2 enlisted men wounded of the
marines. …
"I was informed by Mr. Conger that a portion of the imperial

city directly in front of the Chien-men gate had been used by
Chinese to fire on the legations, and I determined to force
the Chinese troops from this position. On the morning of the
15th I placed four guns of Reilly's battery on the Tartar wall
at Chien-men gate and swept the walls to the westward to the
next gate, there being some slight opposition in that
direction, supported by poor artillery. About 8 o'clock a. m.
the Chinese opened fire on us at Chien-men gate, from the
second gate of the imperial city north of Chien-men gate,
whereupon I directed an attack on the first gate to be made,
and in a short while Lieutenant Charles P. Summerall, of
Reilly's battery, had opened the door of this gate. Our troops
entered, and were met with a severe fire from the next gate,
about 600 yards distant. Fire was directed upon the second
gate with the battery and such of the infantry as could be
elevated on the Tartar wall and side walls of the imperial
city and act effectively. In the course of half an hour the
Chinese fire was silenced, and Colonel Daggett led forward his
regiment to the base of the second gate. Lieutenant Summerall
was directed to open this gate with artillery, which he did.
The course just indicated was pursued for four gates, the
Chinese troops being driven from each gate in succession, the
fourth gate being near what is known as the 'palace grounds,'
which is surrounded by the 'imperial guards.'
{132}
"At a conference that afternoon it was decided not to occupy

the imperial city, and I withdrew my troops into the camp
occupied the night before, maintaining my position on the
Tartar wall at Chien-men gate. The idea of not occupying the
imperial city was not concurred in by the ministers in a
conference held by them the next day. In their opinion the
imperial city should be occupied. It was later decided by the
generals to occupy the imperial grounds, and in consequence of
this decision I reoccupied the grounds we had won on the 15th,
placing the Ninth Infantry within as guard at the gate where
our attack ceased.
"During the 15th and the attack upon the gates referred to our
losses were 2 enlisted men killed and 4 wounded, Ninth
Infantry; 3 enlisted men killed and 14 wounded, Fourteenth
Infantry; 1 enlisted man, Battery F, Fifth Artillery, wounded.
At 8.50 o'clock a. m. of this date Captain Henry J. Reilly,
Fifth Artillery, was struck in the mouth and almost instantly
killed when standing at my left elbow observing the effect of
a shot from one of his guns by his side.
"At a conference of the generals on the afternoon of the 16th

the Chinese and Tartar cities were divided to the various
forces for police and protection of the inhabitants. The
United States troops were assigned to the west half of the
Chinese city and to that section of the Tartar city lying
between the Chien-men gate and Shun-chin gate of the south
wall of the Tartar city and north to the east and west street
through the Tartar city, being bounded upon the east by the
wall of the imperial city."
United States, Secretary of War,

Annual Report, November 30, 1900,
pages 61-71.
CHINA: A. D. 1900 (August 5-16).

The horrors of the allied invasion.
Barbarity of some divisions of the army in the march
from Tien-tsin to Peking.
Murder, rape, pillage and destruction.
Of the conduct of some divisions of the allied army which

advanced from Tien-tsin, and which represented to "the heathen
Chinee" the civilized and Christian nations of Europe and the
Western world, a writer in "Scribner's Magazine," who
evidently shared the experience and witnessed the scenes of
the march, gives the following account: "The dreary stretches
through which the Pei-ho flows, never attractive to the
Western eye, presented, as the allied armies slowly traversed
them, a scene of indescribable desolation. … In a region which
usually contained a population of many millions, scarcely a
human being, besides those attached to the allied armies, was
to be seen. Towns and villages were completely deserted. In
China an ordinary town will have from one to three hundred

Full Chapter The Development of Empathy Phenomenology Structure and Human Nature 1St Edition Zhuravlova PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Chapter The Development of Empathy Phenomenology Structure and Human Nature 1St Edition Zhuravlova PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Development of Empathy

Phenomenology Structure and Human

Story Structure and Development 1st Edition Craig

The Logical Structure of Human Behavior First Edition

The Nature of Human Intelligence Robert J. Sternberg

The Concise Laws of Human Nature Robert Greene

Phenomenology of illness 1st Edition Carel

Justifying Ethics Human Rights And Human Nature Jan

Human Nature David Berlinski

Thirteen Theories of Human Nature Leslie Stevenson

‘The Development of Empathy focuses primarily on the positive aspects of

This thought-provoking volume offers psychological perspectives on the

Larysa Zhuravlova is Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Academician of

Oleksiy Chebykin is Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Academician of the

Larysa Zhuravlova and

1 Theoretical and methodological principles of

2 Conceptualizing the genesis and development of

3 Phylogenetic preconditions for the development of

4 Psychological features of the ontogenesis of

5 Determining factors of personality development in the

6 Actualization and the development of empathy 216

•• a method of cognition of an object or subject (“living life”, consciousness);

•• an emotional process of experiencing the affective state of another being

A number of psychological studies are dedicated to building a hierarchical

•• a formally dynamic level includes dynamic (features of occurrence and

•• sympathy (empathy) is viewed as a psychophysiological property of ani-

•• the development of cognitive processes (Allport, 1924; Bronfenbrenner,

The making of a theory of any psychological phenomenon, including empa-

1.2. Methodological basis of studying human empathy

Compassion or empathy assumes that I myself experience what was expe-

Such an attitude toward the other person is proclaimed in a number of philo-

•• The existence of one isolated consciousness, i.e., a person without other

"Yet even in this decree there was a complete 'volte-face.'

"Meanwhile, the armistice continued, if armistice it can be

Two days after the cessation of hostilities Prince Ching 'and

"Evasive replies were given to these communications. … Our

"On August 10, Friday, a messenger succeeded in passing the

"Yesterday [August 13] passed under a continuous fusillade

"Peking, August 15. On reading over my narrative of the siege

"To-day the Pei-tang Cathedral was relieved. Bishops, priests,

CHINA: A. D. 1900 (June-December).

CHINA: A. D. 1900 (July).

See (in this volume)

CHINA: A. D. 1900 (July).

United States, Secretary of War,

As mentioned above, in the instructions of the American

CHINA: A. D. 1900 (July-August).

See (in this volume)

CHINA: A. D. 1900 (August).

CHINA: A. D. 1900 (August 4-16).

The following is from the report of General Chaffee,

"The first question submitted for decision was 'whether a

The Chinese were driven from the Arsenal by the Japanese,

Returning now to the report of General Chaffee, we take from

"For reasons unknown to me the Russians left their camp at

"At 11 a. m. two companies of the Fourteenth Infantry, under

"Orders were sent to the Ninth to follow up the movement of

"I was informed by Mr. Conger that a portion of the imperial

"At a conference that afternoon it was decided not to occupy

"At a conference of the generals on the afternoon of the 16th

United States, Secretary of War,

CHINA: A. D. 1900 (August 5-16).

Of the conduct of some divisions of the allied army which

1.2. Methodological basis of studying human empathy