HN Explorer

Ask HN: How to build empathy?

212 points by break_the_bank ↗ HN
As an engineer I run cycles of listening, paraphrasing and then solutionizing almost every day. This doesn't translate well in friendships & relationships where the other person just wants someone to listen. At the same time I rate lowly on empathy scoring tests on the internet. Other technical folks here who might have gone through this,

1. How did you develop your listening skill?

2. How to be more empathetic?

Update: Some more questions

1. What common failure modes do you hit in your relationships as a low empathy person?

2. How do you avoid them?

173 comments

[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 228 ms ] thread
herodotus
Here is one tip: when someone tells you something, even it is a problem they are having, they don't want you propose a solution. What they want is to heard. If they really want you to suggest a solution to their problem, they will ask you directly: "Can you suggest what I should do about this?"

Example: "My manager really demands too much of me!" Good: "I am sorry to hear that." Bad: "Why don't you arrange a 1 on 1 and tell him that his demands are decreasing your productivity, which is obviously against his interests".

Only offer the second comment if you are asked directly!

casi
Similar I read a line a year or so ago (can’t remember where) that really stuck with me:

All anyone ever really says is “I love you” or “help me”.

I try remember this whenever I am frustrated with what someone is saying to me. You can’t always help them, and sometimes it’s hard to love them, but you can reframe where they are coming at as being from them not about you, and with that resist arguing and feeling insulted or threatened.

jack_pp
Would ” That sucks, have you tried doing something about it?” be good? As in, use the socratic method to help them come up with a solution.
thestepafter
I am learning empathy myself and I think this would imply that they are being lazy and could come across as condescending. “That’s too bad, if I had that problem I would do something about it.”
Ariez
I was just thinking about this I think you're right. Such small differences in phrasing can have a big difference.

I think a great response would be "That sucks, do you THINK if you spoke to them something would change?" Rather than "have you tried to speak to them?"

The first is a question, that will prompt them to think and then maybe act. The second is a question that is a little accusatory (you should have already spoken to them about it)

Conversation is hard!

[deleted]
(comment deleted)
kibwen
The Socratic method is very good at problem solving, but when it comes to interpersonal communication it often comes across as aggressive and condescending. If you're going to use it, make sure it's in a purely problem-solving context, and that the other person is aware of what you're doing and has some degree of familiarity with you so that they don't assume the worst.
mjwhansen
"That sucks" may be intended as empathetic, but usually comes off as callous.

You might try the combination of [name the feeling] + [broad question], like:

"That sounds frustrating. What have you tried to solve that?"

or ismply stating the feeling and letting them move towards solution ideas after their feeling has been established, like:

"It sounds like this is taking a lot of energy from you."

(wait, let them reply)

"Can you tell me what you're working through to try to fix this?"

readflaggedcomm
That may fit professional relationships, but close informal relationships demand more-intimate problem solving. That doesn't always mean suggesting obvious things, but thinking a problem through aloud can help.

Plus, friends don't always know exactly how they can help. Airing laments can collect solutions without having to catalog each others' resources and limitations or trespassing on power structures, like in a workplace.

break_the_bank
That is good advice though saying "I am sorry to hear that", seems a little shallow.

I think I solutionize cause I care or maybe I just like problem solving. Though coming up with an answer instantly belittles their problem.

mjwhansen
What you're hitting on is the difference between sympathy and empathy. Both have a role in helping people.

"I'm sorry to hear that" = sympathy

"It sounds like you're exhausted by that." = empathy

Notice the noun in those sentences: first one is you, second one is them.

What matters is what we say after those, too. There's a big difference between, "It sounds like you're exhausted that. [Solution proposal]" and "It sounds like you're exhausted by that. [Pause, wait for them to expound]"

Proposing solutions can have a role, and is a form of caring. But only if we get permission for it first, and do so in a rubber-duck way (ex "what have you already tried to fix that?")

temp0826
>> What matters is what we say after those, too. There's a big difference between, "It sounds like you're exhausted that. [Solution proposal]" and "It sounds like you're exhausted by that. [Pause, wait for them to expound]"

Really glad you brought up this point too. It comes off as extremely condescending if you don’t fully give someone space to express themselves. Simple follow up questions can be useful to help them develop their thoughts further, but firing back a solution instantly against something they may have put a great deal of thought into isn’t the right thing to do.

timthorn
Careful though - "It sounds like you're exhausted by that" can also come off as sounding quite patronising.
mjwhansen
Absolutely - tone of voice matters a lot.
fsociety
Perhaps “that sounds exhausting”, so that you are communicating that you too would be exhausted by that.
readflaggedcomm
Also, proposing solutions is distinct from suggesting ways to search for solutions. Confusing those explains most of the sentiment that solutions belittle someone.
User23
The main difference[1] between sympathy and empathy is that sympathy means actually sharing the emotional experience, whereas empathy merely means understanding someone is having an emotional experience. A sociopath devoid of sympathy could be highly empathetic and they often are, because it aids emotional manipulation.

For example something like "you clearly feel unappreciated, but I don't care so stop telling me about it" is empathetic. This leaves me wondering why exactly there is such an obviously submarined push for empathy in the software industry. Is the idea to get unsympathetic persons to learn enough empathy to convincingly feign sympathy? If so, what outcome is that dishonesty meant to achieve?

[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/sympathy-empat...

psychiatrist24
What if I don't think the person is "exhausted by that", but displays some other psychological issue, like blaming other people for their problems? Wouldn't that also be emphatic?

I give that example because it is common for people to bond via complaining about stuff (like their bosses), which I think is a bad habit that leads to negative outcomes.

And why are the people who just want to hear "I'm sorry" in the right, and not the people who want to find solutions? Why do the people who don't want solutions get to make the rules?

leetcrew
> And why are the people who just want to hear "I'm sorry" in the right, and not the people who want to find solutions? Why do the people who don't want solutions get to make the rules?

it's a set of tools, not a set of moral imperatives. worrying about which conversation style is "correct" is not a practical way to approach social interactions.

unless the person is a close friend or their behavior is harming you somehow, just keep the negative feedback to yourself. just tell them your best guess at what they want to hear and move on.

nickjj
I like that you went with "It sounds like you're exhausted by that" instead of "Wow, that would make me exhausted too".

Because the 2nd one sets a totally different tone which might be seen as you wanting to stop talking about them and now it's your turn to guide the conversation and make it about you. It's also making a pretty big assumption about them being exhausted in which case you might drop the "too" to get rid of that assumption but you're still trying to sound like you're shifting things to be about you instead of them.

indigo945
This is definitely an important thing that more people, especially tech people, should keep in mind. However, this doesn't really apply in all situations, and I actually disagree about the example which you give.

When someone shares a problem with you, you may want to ask yourself two questions to evaluate whether you should give advice: 1. Can you suggest any action that the other person wouldn't already have taken if it were feasible? This isn't necessarily limited to you being a subject matter expert, it also includes situations where personal or interpersonal factors are at play: for example, when the person you're talking to is very shy or reluctant to formulate clear demands, empowering them to talk to their manager can be very beneficial. On the other hand, if they already are a person who feels very comfortable with meetings and social situations, they will likely already have considered the option and decided that it won't help, so you're adding nothing useful. 2. Is the problem at hand highly emotional, or is there something else suggesting that solving it right now is crass? For example, if your coworker told you that the family dog died, she's probably not looking for advice on funeral arrangements.

So, what it comes down to in the end is considering the context. Some people might be very happy to receive advice, and might be very thankful in the long run if you encourage them to talk to their manager about a career step they have been meaning to take. Even then, of course, compassion is never misplaced, and people will always be thankful if you show understanding for how the problem troubles them emotionally as well. If you want to encourage a shy person to have a conversation, you shouldn't pressure them. And so on.

herodotus
I agree with your points, but the OP was specifically asking for tip on building empathy and becoming a better listener. Software types like me are problem solvers, and to us, problems exist to be solved. It took me many years (and my late Wife's great help) to understand that not every complaint was a request for a solution.

So I stick by my initial suggestion, until at least the person trying to learn listening skills feels that they are making progress.

psychiatrist24
Is that even true? I seriously can't relate. What is the point of "being heard"? And I don't think people would usually ask directly "can you suggest what I should do about this", they would consider it too demanding and perhaps they don't even know who could help them.
herodotus
Well I cannot say whether or not it is true, but it certainly is for me. There is a lot of point to "being heard". Here is a short essay on giving advice that you may find interesting:

https://tinybuddha.com/blog/10-tips-advise-wisely-how-to-giv...

Here is a section from that page: ----

2. Give them a rant window.

Oftentimes when people ask for advice, what they really want is to rehash something they can’t get off their mind—something they’ve probably talked about repeatedly to lots of different people (maybe even anyone who’d listen).

The best way to be a friend is to enable both what they want to do and what they need to do. Want: tell the story repeatedly, as if they can change how they feel if they just talk about it enough. Need: work through it and let it go. Tell them you’re there to listen to everything they need to say. Once they’ve gotten all out, you’d love to help them move on.

psychiatrist24
I remember from Chris Voss Masterclass about Negotiation (which I unfortunately did not really finish), that he simply repeated what the other person said, with a questioning tone. Like if they say "I feel tired", he would say "you feel tired?" and so on. And I think he would sometimes interpret what the other person said to frame their personality for them (I think he called that "labelling"). Like say some terrorists takes hostages to pressure to USA to stop using oil, he could say "it sounds like you are really concerned about climate change and the well being of people" - completely made up and he would do it better, but that way, he could make that person think of themselves as a caring person who is worried about people rather than as a terrorist who is prepared to shoot hostages to get their way.

I can relate to that, sort of, I just don't think one should be supposed to fake feeling sorry or other emotions.

specialist
Voss' "radical empathy" is not faking emotions. It's a communication technique.

Choose to drop your preconceptions. Hear what the other person is really saying. Increase likelihood of a successful negotiation.

jmcqk6
>I can relate to that, sort of, I just don't think one should be supposed to fake feeling sorry or other emotions.

No one is suggesting that. if it's fake, it's not going to work. You need to actively take an interest in what the other person is saying.

Look at what you're describing. It's an algorithm for appearing interested, without any of the actual interest. Your goal here is purely your appearance to the other person.

And it can work. But the follow-up question is: what is your goal?

If your goal is only to get what you want, there are much more effective ways than this sort of insincerity.

If your goal is to have a meaningful reaction with the other person, there is no substitute for mindful presence.

If you're not actually interested in what the other person is saying, examine your won mind for why that is, and decide whether you need to make a change.

But the most important thing is to forget about how you're appearing to the other person. By definition, it removes the authenticity from your interaction.

Now that can be problematic, for a number of reasons. I'm someone who's authentic self has been rejected by many people I've met in life. The temptation is to try to work on how I'm 'appearing' in order to avoid that rejection. But it doesn't work that way.

It turns out I needed to find more compatible people, instead of expecting to be compatible with everyone.

__s
I've dealt with this, my family was very providing so if you hinted at some problem they'd try to solve it. But I might just be shooting the shit, if I complain about the weather I'm just observing the hassles of everyday life. I've had to work on not repeating this mistake

Reminds me of this line from Stallman's rider: https://github.com/ddol/rre-rms/blob/fb39b3d0bc29805519a57ca...

When you start proposing solutions you're essentially assuming lots of information. Then you enter into an argument to clarify those assumptions. Continue listening & maybe relate, it depends, there's no real script, but when you propose a problem there's an implicit implication that it's simple, when it probably isn't, the person has probably thought about it more than you have in the last ten seconds, so if it were so simple they'd've dealt with it already. Not to say never offer advice, but try get a read on whether advice is being asked for. Seek to increase information rather than make assertions

edit: full disclosure, I struggle with being empathetic, so ymmv etc

scott_s
For many people, being head validates their experiences. It’s reassuring to be accepted by another person.
softwaredoug
Work on understanding your own emotions and you’ll be better at empathy. Two things that help me a lot are journaling my feelings and meditating.
vbsteven
I can’t give you actionable advice since I’m struggling with this (and a recent autism diagnosis) myself. But it might be interesting to research the empathising/systemising theory.
tubularhells
I struggled with this my whole life, until a diagnosis of autistic personality at the age of 34. Therapy helps you understand people because you can ask the therapist for the behaviours people expect from others. It's called masking.
mponw
First, make sure this is really what you want and need.

It helps to be a Jungian personality type that has a strong focus on the feeling cognitive function, i.e. Fi/Fe. If that's not you, then empathy/sympathy will probably not come natural to you.

Also, I have personally found that a very refined culture of giving and receiving empathy is found in the Non-Violent Communication (NVC) "universe" created by Marshall Rosenberg.

laurent92
A lot of people implement NVC wrong and it becomes a codeword to divert the results of the discussion to /dev/null. “I’d like that we solve X” => “So I hear X makes you feel really bad, right?” => “Yes exactly, what can we do about it” => “Can you tell me more about X?” and so on. In fact, I have not seen people who talk about NVC and are able to listen to my request (well listen they do, but “act upon” they don’t). It becomes a passive strategy to soothe the other while avoiding what he needs, and yet, still rephrase it perfectly.

To counter that, I use another strategy: Threat. I say “If you keep rephrasing like this, I will pour acid on the roots of a tree until it dies.” And they know I am capable of it.

At least it has the effect of snapping the person into stopping his NVC and actually telling me he/she has no intent on solving the issue which, as an Asperger, is much easier to deal with, because I can quit, deal with it another way - at least the cards are on the table. I can’t stand social games, and NVC became so misused by polite-agressive people that it became a social game.

I feel sorry for the people who invented NVC, it’s certainly not what they built it for.

mponw
Well, thank you for you honesty and openness. (How does that sound to ears that are averse to classical NVC?)

Kelly Bryson ("Don't be nice, be real") mentioned how he experienced Marshall Rosenberg being quite torn about teaching people to be overly empathic as a habit. Kelly recommends radical honesty as an antidote to that.

laurent92
It’s cool, we’re online anyway. Yes, radical honesty is much easier to manage, because it doesn’t require trying to guess what the other is playing, and it doesn’t create unmerited expectations. I didn’t know Kelly Bryson, I’ll look into it.
gregd
I've gotten in the habit of asking if they want someone to just listen or if they want help finding solutions.

More often than not, people just want to know they've been heard.

As for building empathy, this is a tough question and I'm not really sure how to answer it. What makes you think you aren't empathetic already, outside of some rando internet test for empathy? I'm not sure I'd put a lot of stock in that kind of testing. Are you getting this type of feedback from loved ones?

gregd
Another thing that may help you in the long run and I can't recommend this enough, is a book called, The Four Agreements by Don Miguel Ruiz.
jugjug
I use two complementing strategies:

- Developing empathy towards myself first, that is, being able to observe feelings that arise within me and then being able to accept these feelings as they are. I have found this to be very relieving. A technique that helped me was meditation; training the mind like a muscle to be able to observe & recognize feelings.

- Turning this outwards to others, the works of Marshall Rosenberg on the NonViolent Communiction (NVC) [1] had a profound impact on my perception of feelings of others. I'm trying to follow the essence of the book, rather than copying the phrases outlined there. I'm seeing more and more that NVC can be applied to business as well as personal relationships [2]

Applying these to your example, it might be interesting to explore what do you _feel_ when the other person just wants you to listen. What is it that you _need_ out of the relationship and what is it that the _other_ side needs [3]?

[1]: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/71730.Nonviolent_Communi...

[2]: https://marcel.is/contractor-didnt-deliver/

[3]: https://marcel.is/conflict-resolution/

zo7
Adding to this, there is a specific kind of meditation you could try called metta (aka loving-kindness) where you focus on cultivating benevolence towards yourself and all things. During a session you follow a similar sequence: first focus on cultivating loving-kindness towards yourself (since this is the base from where empathy grows) then you gradually extend it to people you love out to people who you have difficulty with. If mindfulness is an exercise to train your mind to observe itself, metta trains your mind to observe other minds.

Also second Rosenberg's book. It can come across as condescending if applied too heavily but it's a great analysis on language during conflict.

stonecraftwolf
I would add that this can be extremely challenging (and possibly triggering) for people who had traumatic childhoods. In those cases it is best to start with loving compassion towards a beloved pet, for example — something simpler, that is not so emotionally charged.

Either way the metta instruction I’ve encountered has often failed because it failed to emphasize the sensation of emotion. It’s not lying there thinking about how much you love something. It’s thinking of the thing or person you love and trying to locate the specific sensation in your body, and then grow it.

Many people mistake ritual dissociation for meditation, which can be really really harmful.

nullserver
Can confirm. Was very empathetic towards others.

Repeated tragedies, pain and abuse can make you lose most or even all empathy. Even as an adult.

I have some back now, but nothing like I used to be.

Someone at work was very sad the other day, and I actually felt a little bad for them. First time in several years I felt anything at all. Hopefully get more back.

stonecraftwolf
I bet you will. Try to be kind to yourself as it happens. My experience is that it can be very painful — like when your leg falls asleep and then you suddenly get circulation back, but for emotions — but worth it.
cushychicken
Big fan of nonviolent communication. It's a great framework for telling folks that you feel wronged by their behavior.
nullserver
Be mindful of how far you go with this. If they have empathy they will feel bad. Some people absolutely will take advantage of this to control them.
feydaykyn
Non violent communication seems so weird at first, and people think I never criticize... In the beginning. After a while, most of the people I work with openly recognize that they don't want to go back to the level of aggressiveness which is the norm in communication.
earljwagner
Yes, learning NVC can really help in hearing where the other person is coming from. It's also useful for expressing yourself in a way that's least likely to trigger the other person. All of this takes practice, of course.

I've taught it to over 3000 Google employees as a 20% project over the past 7 years. I've also developed a team of volunteer facilitators who help people practice in weekly workshops. We're happy to talk about the program and answer questions on Clubhouse (currently Sunday afternoons at 1pm PT):

https://www.joinclubhouse.com/club/Compassion-in-Tech

jlos
Take some classes towards some kind of counseling certificate, specifically ones where you can observe experienced counselors. You'll see people with expert listening skills use them to help people.

That's what I did and it changed my perspective permanently. Before becoming an engineer I studied theology, which is actually a pretty technical discipline that requires insane amounts of reading (i.e. not people oriented). Afterwards, I took a counseling degree. Digging into people's lives, their struggles, and watching my professors help people really opened my eyes. It helped me see where I was being rigid and taught me some amazing listening skills.

halfmatthalfcat
You have to learn how to put yourself into other people's shoes. It sounds simple but it is incredibly difficult. You really have to step outside of your ego and try to view things through another person's eyes.

A key part is understanding who the person is. What experiences they've had. Truly what their life is. Some of this you can extrapolate from where they were born, how they were raised, their heritage, race, sex, gender, sexual orientation, etc. None of these defines an individual though, so you really have to navigate each person and truly want to learn what makes them tick.

Once you learn a person's wants and needs, then you can start to reflect that off of your own experiences and start to live in someone else's shoes.

_5659
This may sound obvious and pedantic but by practicing it.

Getting yourself in someone's head is something you should return to casually, formally in various contexts and subtexts.

I like to use this one: "What part of their day is this?", which feels more relevant since I work across timezones now.

[deleted]
(comment deleted)
mjwhansen
It says a lot about you that you recognize that this is a skill that you need to work on and is worth working on.

It is completely normal that you see yourself being sympathetic by creating solutions, when people are asking you for empathy.

I'm writing a book aimed at developers on building empathy and applying it to business, called Deploying Empathy [1]. I'm writing it in public as a newsletter. I'm detailing specific actions you can take in conversations and customer interviews to build empathy.

One of the things about listening to people is that the more you do it, the more empathetic you become as a person. It takes practice, but I promise you will get there.

One of my own favorite books on this is Practical Empathy by Indi Young.

Self-empathy is also an important step, and if you find you don't have the tools to show empathy in conversations, there's a good chance this is a skill you weren't taught growing up. For that, therapy is invaluable.

[1] https://www.getrevue.co/profile/mjwhansen

alfl
Reading fiction builds empathy.
[deleted]
(comment deleted)
devinegan
By learning about EQ. I recommend picking up the book “Emotional Intelligence 2.0,” taking the assessment, read it, and focus on areas you can improve. Then revisit and practice the tips over the next 3 months (their timeline) and reassess. It is ongoing after that but it is a good starting point with actionable tips.
hirundo
Apply your existing analysis skills. Build a mental model of a person as you would with a device. Your growing understanding of a device is a kind of empathy, enabling you to live with it in greater harmony. We organic devices are just more of the same. Given the low computational threshold for the emergence of complex behavior, heuristics are frequently conserved between software and wetware. Many people will respond positively to the same degree of attention and care you give to your code editor configuration.
calamityjam
I also do things this way. I have low empathy in that I do not literally feel sad when someone feels sad (or the feeling is less by several orders of magnitude). I build a mental model of the person based on past experiences and literature. Then I apply that and I attempt to predict the emotions they might feel in the situation. I believe this understanding is a form of empathy, but I think other people expect the other kind of empathy. I get feedback about whether my predictions are correct by making confirming statements that are either validated or denied. "That must've made you feel undervalued." "Did you feel disrespected in that situation?"
peterthehacker
Depending on your personal situation you might want to seek professional help. But here are some ideas to get you started:

Practice making eye contact especially when someone is opening up about their feelings. Then say things that show you know how they feel. Human brains can mirror feelings, like pain, from another humans [0]. So, to empathize with someone you need to get on their level emotionally and really feel how they are feeling.

[0] https://www.ted.com/talks/vilayanur_ramachandran_the_neurons...

temp0826
>> Then say things that show you know how they feel.

Take care not to “me too, <personal anecdote>” as it can detract from the person seeking empathy.

highempathi
As someone who sits at the opposite end (way to empathetic) I can share this:

I read once that bending your neck down (like when you look at your phone) lowers empathy. So to raise empathy practice looking up. This sounds like bs at first to me but when you think about it there's probably something to it as you look down at people beneath you and up at people above you. I find those towards the bottom of totem poles tend to be more empathetic (on average).

arsalanb
How has being way too empathetic affected your life?
highempathi
It increases the attack surface for people to ask me to do things that aren't beneficial (or are even detrimental) to my life because they want help and I feel bad and sad sometimes if I don't help them. It's something I'm working to get better at.

edit: this is different from being intimidated into helping people. If someone threatens me I'm not going to help them. for example frequently people will come to me and ask for something I can do that they can't and I will want to help them and will then end up in a worse situation because of it.

ZEFuVQU3WpZz
It's easy to extrapolate people's motivations and beliefs, aka jump to conclusions, because you think you understand what you're hearing. Instead, take in and verify what they're saying without agreeing or disagreeing. When you say non-judgmentally "I'm hearing that you think/feel/experienced ...", you'll be amazed how often they tell you that you misunderstood. That's totally fine, because they'll correct you, and after a few rounds of that you'll really get where they're coming from and they'll know it, which is what empathy's all about. You don't need or want to take on their feelings and beliefs though, because integrity is an important part of empathy. So a respectful "that's really important to you"-like comment again makes them feel understood without in the least compromising your own principles. Once you and they both are certain you get where they're coming form, then the conversation can move on from there as appropriate.
_y5hn
Avoid immature unempathic communications and behaviours: "Lots of trash answers. All of them in fact!"

Instead:

1) The Golden Rule: Treat others as you'd yourself want to be treated. This is an ever-evolving loop of growth and learning throughout your life. You are never finished!

2) In job, service, family, nearly everywhere, people respond better to you when your behaviour and communications reflect the same shared goal. What might those goals be. As with #1 this is also a life-long quest.

3) As you gain better responses with people or get to know people better, you might consider asking for information, how to do stuff, help or start leading new initiatives.

At the same time, it is important to realize how the responsibility areas work within your organization, and avoid taking on work that you shouldn't take on!

koolba
> The Golden Rule: Treat others as you'd yourself want to be treated. This is an ever-evolving loop of growth and learning throughout your life. You are never finished!

I prefer the silver rule: Do not treat others in ways you do not want to be treated

Though neither really involves empathy as they’re based on your own feelings of a situation.

gms7777
And note that the golden rule and its counterpart the silver rule are only a fall back for when you don't have enough information to apply the platinum rule: "Do unto others as they would want done to them"
pje
You may not know what's best for other people!

Instead of the Golden Rule, think of it this way:

"Ask others how they want to be treated, and then treat them that way."

_y5hn
It doesn't help when people have no broader vision, plan or clue.

I engage people for shared understanding and work instead, but is counter to expectations.

proc0
This is the right attitude but unfortunately I don't think it can be asked straight forward that way. The answer is best attained through listening and observing, but intentionally it's this principle balanced with the golden rule.
carapace
There's a simple technique that often helps: Let's say you're talking to someone and it's not going well, empathy-wise. (If you like, you can remember a situation from your past now to try this out with.) Allow your locus of perception to move from your physical point-of-view to the outside, so that you can see both yourself and the other person. Then (and this is the important bit) move around so that you are hovering above the other person's shoulder looking back at yourself. Now review (literally re-watch) the situation from the other person's (literal) POV. This will often present you with new and useful insight into your communications and relationship with others.
bsrhng
I think a very important step is acknowledging that the person standing in front of you has the capacity to feel whatever negative or positive emotion that you can feel.

(That is regardless of whether you can quote research to the contrary. That is, statements that some people in some cases given some environment in a given moment or period could not pass some bar that some researcher has set.)

Your goal is to discover the person standing in front of you by allowing yourself to see them as a fully capable and imaginative human.

The other thing is to acknowledge that everyone is at some stage in their life. They have realized some things and others not. You want to know how they see the world and how they interpret what happens to them. Usually here you'll discover that they make some rigid assumptions about the world whenever they are mentioning some issue. And usually that issue has something to do with their relationship with other people or with the way that they view themselves.

Within all this is of course you as the listener. If something is making you uncomfortable in this process you should be very honest with yourself what that is. There are of course cases where people are very deeply entangled in their own world and I don't think in those cases it is beneficial for either of you to participate in the conversation.

To add to the previous point, I think realizing that there is a lot to be learned by allowing people to share the way they think with you. I think you would be surprised by what people are willing to tell you if you allow them and the kind of deep relationships you can form that way. It's also very surprising to realize that most issues that people have beneath a very shallow surface of circumstances are really almost the same. And they mostly have to do with the way that they talk to themselves about what happens to them.

xbar
Hold babies. Hold puppies. Hold kittens. Hold baby chicks. Hold lambs. Hold calves.

30 minutes per day. Every day. Your empathy will skyrocket.

goldeneye13_
I really enjoyed reading Time to Think: Listening to Ignite the Human Mind. It is more for the professional setting but I think a lot of it is applicable to personal life as well.
johnsmith4739
(disclaimer?) I teach empathy, and maybe this helps:

1 - most people did not get what is called an "emotional education." What are emotions and how they guide our behaviour? What are habits and how they differ from intentional activities? What motivates human behaviour? What are biases and how they actually help us 98% of the time, etc.

2 - most people are exposed to pseudoscience and outright wrong information - jungian personality types, maslow's pyramid of needs, win-win negotiations, and so many other models only generate confusion and unproductive biases

And to work toward a solution:

1 - read up on psychology, there are many 101s good enough to get you a head start

2 - read on subjects as "active listening," jobs-to-be-done, non-violent communication, and "FBI behavioural change stairway"

And find a practice-buddy. I work pro-bono with a couple of fellow startup founders exactly on this skill, because our day-to-day work forces us most of the time in a problem-solution mentality. It is so much more precious to get and offer understanding, the non-judgemental type, and acceptance, without any intention of change.

Let me know if I can be of service here

_dps
I'd be interested in reading suggestions for criticism of Maslow or "win win".

The few criticisms I've found of Maslow seem to be that it's not 100% universal across individuals and cultures. This is true, but I think not much of a criticism of a model that's meant to be a rough guideline to a very complex topic. If Maslow is only 80% valid across all of humanity I think that's a pretty decent model, but if there are deeper criticisms I'd be interested to learn.

Similarly I'm not aware of any criticism of the concept of "win win" which, in my understanding, is just a definition of certain kinds of mutually beneficial situations. So I don't even have a frame for how it could be wrong :) Any reading advice on this subject would also be appreciated.

johnsmith4739
Happy to do so, here is the data I operate with:

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is supposed to provide a prioritisation of needs - physical needs take priority over self-actualisation. If the model is wrong you would see many inversions. As in people prioritising self-actualisation to shelter - live in worse situation but get a better education. Therefore the pyramid does not provide a model that can reflect reality in an accurate way and we have inversions all over the place - from students going to better universities to people climbing dangerous summits.

There is a much better model - based in neuroscience, meaning that it has physiological proof to back it up. The Grawe consistency theory (neuropsychotherapy) has a much simpler approach:

3 needs we share with the whole living entities: Orientation/Control; Pleasure Maximisation/Pain Minimisation; Attachment; and one specific to humans Self-Enhancement (my work is, among others, focused on what causes this specific need, btw)

The needs are acted out through "behavioural schemas" - either approach or avoidance behaviours.

With this basic model you can empathise much better with anyone - when they do this, do they want to get something or get away from something? Does that give them more or less control, or maybe attachment? Nothing in Maslow's model can deliver this kind of understanding.

Win-Win is related to behavioural change, that is rooted in empathy. How can you change behaviours if you don't understand them? Win-Win (Harvard model) is competing with the FBI model of behavioural change (the stairway). While the former implicitly expects us to be rather similar (playing the role of businessmen) the latter does away with ego and focuses all efforts in understanding the overt and subconscious motives of the other part, and then presents a solution that is connected to that. And it works much better in practice, mainly because is meant to work when our motives can seem incompatible - try a win-win with a hostage-taker.

Anyway, remember that all models are wrong, but some of them are more useful. Part of this journey is to practice models and see what helps you get the results you want.

_dps
This is very interesting and helpful, thank you!