Empathy has been in the news lately after Elon Musk stated, during the Joe Rogan Podcast, “The fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy.” This quote has been taken out of context in the media. Musk was not condemning all empathy, and also said, “A future with more empathy would be wonderful, but this can only be done from a position of strength. If the weak favor empathy, but the strong do not, the weak will be enslaved or killed.” While there are still concerns about Musk’s understanding of empathy and its implications, the focus on this quote provides an opportunity for a deeper analysis of empathy in the public realm.
Viewing empathy as a weakness is not new. In contemporary culture, it is often suggested, if not stated explicitly. But most people do not want to be seen as callous and uncaring. Devaluing and distorting empathy has the potential to be more than just part of a reprise of toxic masculinity and encouragement to be “tough.” It has implications for society, including diminishing mental health.
Humanistic and existential psychology know something about empathy. When statements by influential leaders devalue emotions, compassion, concern for others, or empathy, mental health professionals have a responsibility to speak. Empathy is not a weakness—it is desperately needed.
Devaluing Empathy and Idealizing Mental Toughness
Troubling trends in the United States are impacting mental health. Support for authoritarian leaders has been increasing (Hussain, & Ahmad, 2020), many of whom promote mental toughness, often without displaying good emotional regulation themselves, as evidenced by their defensiveness and reactivity. The mental toughness approach bears similarities to the “survival of the fittest” mentality. In the contemporary world, this mentality is not just about the toughest surviving. Rather, this often represents a survival of the most selfish, ruthless, and discompassionate. This mentality favors those who care the least about others.
Evolutionary perspectives maintain that working collaboratively is beneficial for survival (Tomasello & Gonzalez-Cabrera, 2017). While this arguably remains true, as the world has changed it becomes easier for people with power to survive and thrive by dominating and exploiting others. We are witnessing leaders around the globe ascend to influential leadership positions while promoting a selfish and self-serving mentality that is resonating with people. If history and evolution have much to say about this trend, it is not sustainable.
The Need for Empathy
Throughout history, testaments to the need for a more compassionate worldview abound. Consistently across the sacred scriptures and wisdom literature of the major world religions are messages of love, compassion, and concern. Revered historical leaders, such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Mother Theresa, Mahatma Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, Desmond Tutu, and Saint Theresa of Avila, consistently had a message of compassion and justice, even if these were nuanced. Leaders who promoted the message of “me first,” “us first,” hate, or conquest have been widely condemned by history. Yet, today, the latter leaders are thriving.
As these leaders prosper, increased concern emerges about the widening gap between the wealthy and poor or marginalized (Horowitz, 2000; Wine et al., 2025). In a New York Times article, words such as “people-centered care,” “person-centered,” “underserved,” “belong,” “traumatic,” and “injustice” are included in a list that “agencies have flagged. . . to limit or avoid, according to a compilation of government documents” (Yourish, et al, 2025). The limitation of these words is part of the move against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and what is viewed as “woke” initiatives. Yet, it seems clear that compassion, particularly for people who have been marginalized, is a target.
Empathy requires courage and strength. Without empathy, it is easy to comfort ourselves with the assumptions that our knowledge, experience, and worldview is similar to others. When we open ourselves to empathy, we are impacted and challenged at times. The discouragement of empathy also serves authoritarian approaches to leadership and governance. When people are discouraged from being empathetic and considering how their actions impact others, it is easier to persuade them to align with the “truth” of the authoritarian leadership and naively view people and groups they do not understand as the problem.
The Benefits of Empathy
Bohart and Greenberg (1997) described one role of empathy as developing an experience-near understanding of the other person. In this way, empathy can be understood as a way of knowing. In Western society, we often devalue any way of knowing that is not rational. However, human beings have been gifted with different ways of knowing. Through utilizing these we can more fully understand issues and other people. Knowledge, without empathy, often lacks accurate understanding. Our different ways of knowing sharpen and clarify our comprehension.
The benefits of empathy are widespread individually, socially, and culturally. In psychotherapy, empathy is one of the most rigorously supported aspects of successful therapy (Bohart et al, in press; Elliott et al., 2019; Wampold & Imel, 2015). Elsewhere, I have discussed that empathy has direct and indirect benefits (Hoffman, 2020). Indirectly, empathy contributes to building a therapeutic relationship and empowering other interventions. The provision of empathy also has direct benefits facilitating healing and growth.
Empathy is also valuable socially and culturally. A foundational premise of Stay Awhile: Poetic Narratives on Multiculturalism and Diversity (2005), which I edited with Nathaniel Granger, Jr., was that cultural empathy can deepen understanding across cultural differences. Often, when conversations about cultural difference remain on the cognitive or rational level, the result is increased conflict, disagreement, and polarization. When empathy is used to more deeply understand the other person, new avenues for understanding and relating to each other in compassionate ways emerge.
Conclusion
We need empathy. Far from being weakness, empathy requires courage. This courageous empathy allows us to consider perspectives and experiences of other people. It pushes us to consider different opinions that may make us uncomfortable and grow. It is a courage that forces us to look beyond what is best for us as an individual to considering what is best for us as a community, country, and a human race.