Elephants are magnificent creatures that have ancestors dating back to before human existence. The elephant is ranked among the best in animal intelligence. It’s massive size and valuable tusks make it seem extremely dangerous and aggressive, however elephants are some of the only animals known to grieve. Perhaps the most unique part of these animals is their brain. Along with its massive size in comparison to humans, the elephant brain is qiute similar to the human brain in structure and function.

Throughout the class we have analyzed empathy in many contexts. From social media and justice to disease and the mentally ill, we have discussed quite a bit. What I bring forth is another topic of discussion, empathy in animals. This is not exclusive to only domesticated animals like dogs, my goal is to relate human empathy to that of the elephant. Empathy in a dog that has been long domesticated and has large amounts of human exposure each day is easier to connect and understand. However in a wild, typically undomesticated animal, empathy may find its own roots in the brain and may even shape social interactions and cultural norms of the animal herd. I aim to answer the question: What are the similarities between the human and elephant brain that tie them together? Based on the similarities, are elephants capable of the human empathy we exercise daily?  And if not, do elephants practice their own form of empathic emotion that simply may not fit the human definition?

Answering this question will require using sources from many different perspectives. The neurological point of view will be necessary to identifying the structures and pathways within the brain that make the elephant brain resemble the human brain. For example, a source located on the Frontiers in Human Neuroscience peer reviewed webpage suggests an evolutionary similarity in one of the specific neurons in the human brain and the mammalian brain. Other sources with a similar focus will be used as well. Once, that background has been established, I must turn my focus towards a scientific perspective to be able to fully define empathy in order to determine, through experiments, if elephants meet the criteria. Experiments such as those discussed in the scholarly articles, “Self Recognition in an Asian Elephant” and “Phylogenomic analyses reveal convergent patterns of adaptive evolution in elephant and human ancestries” have been run and approved by the Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences of the United States of America. The articles identify the traits experimentally discovered in elephants that are necessary to establish and practice empathy. Also, “Elephant Cognition: A Review of Recent Experiments” by Moti Nissani will add to the depth of information in regards to neurological research about the elephant brain. Finally, I must utilize a significant amount of research on the social constructs that make up elephant herd culture. This way, if I discover that elephants do not exercise the human form of empathy, I will be able to identify how elephants may practice their own form of empathic emotion. This research may include ecological sources as well as recent observational experiments done on elephants to analyze the way they live, interact with their environment and one another, as well as the way they die and the toll that such an event can take on the group. In my preliminary research I have found many sources to supplement this portion of the question at issue. For example, “Beyond Words: What Animals Think and Feel” by Carl Safina gives many examples elephant culture through observational analysis. In addition, “Elephant Memories: Thirteen Years in the Life of an Elephant Family” by Cynthia Moss will lend a great deal of information about the close bonds among an elephant family.

Altogether this cluster of source will allow me to develop a well researched thesis in response to the question at issue.

Works Cited

Cauda F, Geminiani GC and Vercelli A. “Evolutionary appearance of von Economo’s neurons in the mammalian cerebral cortex.” Front. Hum. Neurosci. Web. 8 Nov. 2017. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00104

Plotnik, Joshua M., Frans B. M. de Waal, and Diana Reiss. “Self-Recognition in an Asian Elephant.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (2006) Web. 8 Nov. 2017.

Nissani, Moti. “Elephant cognition: A Review of Recent Experiments.” Gajah 28 Goodman, Morris, et al. (2004) Web. 8 Nov. 2017.

“Phylogenomic analyses reveal convergent patterns of adaptive evolution in elephant and human ancestries.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2009) Web. 8 Nov. 2017.

Safina, Carl. “Beyond Words: What Animals Think and Feel” 1st ed. Henry Holt and Company, 2015.

Moss, Cynthia J.. “Elephant Memories: Thirteen Years in the Life of an Elephant Family” University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Morgellons disease is a highly controversial, self-diagnosed condition that involves the emergence of substances or objects from the skin. The unfortunate victims of this condition suffer from the feeling of threads, flecks, fuzz, and/or other creatures moving just beneath the skin or seeping through it. To add a new depth of understanding to the intricacies of this condition, Leslie Jamison’s “Devil’s Bait” tells the story of her trip to Austin, Texas to visit the Charles E. Holman Foundation’s annual conference for health care providers, researchers, and patients of Morgellons (Jamison 43). By being at the conference Jamison was able to truly see into the lives of the many patients suffering from Morgellons. She observed how their search for relief consumed their lives, yet she struggled to fully empathize, by definition, with the feelings of the patients because she could not understand the medical basis of their illness. No doctor seemed to believe any of these people. When victims of Morgellons seek help, clinicians typically refer them to a psychologist to treat the illness as if it were all caused by the mind. Yet, the author still found herself relating to some of the patients, and even understanding their feelings on a surface level. Jamison then asked, “Is it wrong to call it empathy when you trust the fact of suffering but not the source?” This raises a broader, yet valid, question. In the context of mental or physical illness, is it possible for an outsider free of the illness to fully empathize with the victim, or just sympathize with them? If not, what factors limit an outsider’s ability to empathize?

To answer this question, two unique articles, with different perspectives were analyzed. The first, “The Challenge of Morgellons Disease” by Caroline S. Koblenzer, MD., takes a predominantly factual and medical approach to understanding the positions of patients suffering from emotions and symptoms that are foreign to the listener. Despite the specificity of this article in its focus on Morgellons, it still gives insight into how to doctors attempt to understand and treat those who suffer from an illness that is not understood by anyone but its victims. Clinicians must be capable of empathizing in order to establish effective relationships and a sense of trust with their patients.

The article discusses how dermatologists go about treating patients who present themselves as having Morgellons. Due the power and accessibility of the internet, the news about Morgellons is easily found by patients who decide to search the right words. Anyone can suspect themselves of having Morgellons after reading the information found on the “Morgellons Research Foundation” website (Koblenzer 921). However, there are still no positive confirmatory tests to suggest that the phenomena that define Morgellons actually exists. Thus leading dermatologists to come to the conclusion that the condition must be one propagated solely by the brain or other contributing mental factors. So, clinicians have now become aware of the phenomena and have each developed their own effective way of working with the patients of Morgellons so that they accept one form of medication that is known to be effective (Koblenzer 921). What is crucial about this approach is the use of empathy on behalf of the doctor. “It is important that one acknowledges to the patient that what the patient describes is exactly what the patient experiencing” (Koblenzer 921). In sum, acknowledging the patient’s pain allows one to better empathize with their other life circumstances and thus develop a “therapeutic relationship” and implement effective treatment(Koblenzer 921).

The second article, “Empathic Foundations of Clinical Knowledge” by Nancy Nyquist Potter, takes on patients from a psychiatric perspective (Potter 1). Rather than using empathy as a tool to implement treatment, this article views empathy as crucial for developing an understanding of any patient in order to establish a healthy patient doctor-relationship and in turn find a treatment that best fits that individual patient.

First one must look past the general information about a patient and “recognize the subjectivity of that patient while feeling and expressing empathy towards him or her” (Potter 3). Next, one must force themselves to recognize that the patient’s life and situation has a significance, all the while using practical reasoning to guide your empathic actions. How does one empathize with the patient? The answer is given two-fold. The article suggests that empathy is a virtue that anyone can choose. “Place-taking” alone is not empathic (Potter 5). Empathy involves the conscious act of emotion that an individual makes as a result of their attitudinal orientation that can be learned and is voluntary (Potter 9). In addition to empathizing with the average patient, the article states that one can empathize with the mentally ill by practicing a unique process called “world-traveling”, whereby an individual is able to understand not only a particular mental illness but also “ how that specific person experiences his or her world” (Potter 11). By traveling to the patient’s world, one can understand “what it is to be them and what it is to be ourselves in their eyes”, thus allowing the most effective form of treatment or care to be provided (Potter 13).

Both of theses articles will pave the way for an in depth analysis of the question at issue.

Works Cited

Jamison, Leslie. The Empathy Exams: Essays. Graywolf Press, 2014.

Potter, Nancy Nyquist. “Empathic Foundations of Clinical Knowledge”. The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy and Psychiatry. Edited by K.W.M. Fulford, Martin Davies, Richard G.T. Gipps, George Graham, John Z. Sadler, Giovanni Stanghellini, and Tim Thornton. Oxford University Press, 2015.

Koblenzer MD, Caroline S.. “The challenge of Morgellons disease”. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology. Vol. 55, issue 5. American Academy of Dermatology, Inc., 2006.

Morgellons disease is a self-diagnosed condition that involves the emergence of substances or objects from the skin. Victims of the disease experience threads, flecks, fuzz, larvae and more seeping from their skin or moving just beneath it. However, the primary struggle of these victims is not finding a cure, it is getting their doctors and families to believe them. The disease was coined in 2001 when a mother, Mary Leitao, sought a diagnosis for her child who felt as though bugs were crawling under his skin. When several doctors failed to find an issue with her son, they began to diagnose Mary with Munchausen syndrome by proxy. So, Mary created a diagnosis herself, thus Morgellons was born.

This excerpt by Leslie Jamison follows the author on her journey to Austin, Texas to be a part of the annual conference led by an advocacy organization called the Charles E. Holman Foundation. The conference welcomed victims, researchers, and healthcare providers to meet and discuss the many aspects and developments of the disease. During the visit, the author met many unique victims suffering from their own variation of Morgellons, all the while she questions the legitimacy of their ailments. A woman named Sandra suffers from wriggling larva seeping from her skin while she bathes (Jamison 50). Dawn, a nurse from Pittsburgh, was covered in the white patches that results from excessive scratching of lesions (Jamison 31). One person that the author interacted with on a deeper level was a woman named Kendra. She suspects that the fibers that she finds coming from her skin are due to Morgellons, and she hopes to get a microscope session at the conference to “see more” and finally understand what’s going on inside of her, why the “things” she tries to get out seem to be moving away from her (Jamison 36).

People are willing to put themselves through copious amounts of pain in order to relieve themselves from the psychological suffering of their contagion.Through Kendra, the author is able to deeply analyze the psychological intricacies that are involved with the disease.   Kendra is walking on the edge of diagnosis. She is sick of trying to figure out her symptoms herself, being at the conference helps her feel like she’s not the only one. Otherwise she would start to think that she’s crazy again, like the doctors have been telling her. Victims like Kendra soon become trapped in a life that revolves around keeping “them” at bay, “them” being the foreign objects or creatures that reside within them. The conference gives the victims the empathy that doctors and onlookers have denied them, but it does not offer a cure. If anything, the conference provides a satisfactory disappointment in the fact that their suspicions of a lack of cure are confirmed. In addition, it offers a safe place for the disease-consumed victims to share their stories and finally be themselves.

This raises the question, does expressing empathy to victims validate the existence of Morgellons? And if so, does this validity provide freedom from the grasp of the disease or secure the victim’s’ life-long suffering? These are important questions to ask because they challenge not only the attitude with which one should approach a situation such as this, but it also brings the light a reason that doctors may be denying the disease’s existence. Perhaps rejecting the disease will in turn allow victims to move on, rather than accept their fate and continue harming themselves in an effort to find internal peace.

Works Cited

Jamison, Leslie. The Empathy Exams: Essays. Graywolf Press, 2014.

The film A Time to Kill has a plethora of examples of the invocation of empathy, whether real or apparent. While some scenes display this invocation clearly, like Jake’s closing statement scene, others go about it in a more subtle, rather impactful way. Rather than inspiring apparent empathy openly, these scenes both pull on the heartstrings as well as challenge the foundation of one’s character as the real empathy that is invoked also draws forth guilt.

In a particular scene, Jake visits Carl Lee in jail to give him bad news regarding the outlook of the trial. Jake tells Carl that they are going to lose the case, “there are no more points of law to argue” and he wants to move forward to reach a plea deal (TK 2:08:45-2:08:57).  He continues to explain that the jury needs to identify with the defendant, and at the moment they could not relate at all with Carl Lee. “We are not the same Carl Lee… They see you they see a yard worker, they see me they see an attorney,” Jake elaborates. However, Carl Lee quickly responds, “you white and I’m black” (TK 2:09:12-2:09:30). This response was the initial shattering of the unspoken divide between these two characters. Throughout the film, the viewer sees Jake Brigance as a sort of hero. He repeatedly reminds himself that amidst all of the racial turmoil that the case has catalyzed, he is one of the ‘good guys’. The viewer carries this idea of Jake and his team until this scene. Carl Lee realizes in this moment, Jake has no idea who he is or why he was chosen for this difficult task.

In order to make Jake understand, Carl Lee reveals the truth behind his choosing Jake to defend him. “You’re just like them, don’t you see?” Carl Lee asks (TK 2:09:39-2:09:45). He continues, explaining to Jake that they never walk the same streets and their children will never play together. When it all comes down to it, “America is a war, and you’re [Jake] on the other side.” No matter how many times Jake eats at ‘Claud’s’ and no matter what he says about the ideal of not seeing color in society, Jake is one of the bad guys. “No matter how you see me [Carl Lee] you see me as different” (TK 2:11:02-2:11:09).

This comes as a shock to Jake and the viewer alike. We feel a new level of real empathy for Carl Lee as we realize that even the white people that are there to help him cannot help but see him for what he is on the outside, not a man, a black man. A new, more authentic view of Calr Lee’s predicament is exposed as he asks, “how a black man ever gone get a fair trial with the enemy on the bench, in the jury box…?”. In reality, his life is in “white hands” (TK 2:10:35-2:10:45). This statement allows the Jake and the viewer to see the trial and the world from Carl Lee’s eyes. His only chance to be set free is to use one of the ‘bad guys’ to relate to the enemies deciding his fate.

This real empathy extends to Jake as well. He realizes that all this time he struggled to feel true empathy for Carl Lee, instead he had felt pity, and a selfish guilt for having not stopped the crime. Now, Jake sees himself in a new light. He went from having to reassure himself that he was the ‘good guy’, to being exposed as the ‘bad guy’ that he has been his entire life. This harsh exposure allowed him to feel real empathy for Carl Lee and thus devise a plan to draw that same empathy from the jurors the next day. Carl Lee has no problem telling Jake the truth. If it meant that he would be set free, he was willing to shatter Jake’s unrealistic view of himself. In doing so, he allows Jake to truly empathize with him and in turn feel guilty for struggling to feel real empathy for so long.

Works Cited

A Time to Kill. Dir. Joel Schumacher. Warner Bros., 1996. Swank Motion Pictures. Web. 21 September 2017

Gentlemen of the jury, you have heard and pondered all of the evidence brought before you today. As witnesses came forth you listened and evaluated their honesty. You have navigated this trial with a critical and nearly errorless mind. You were chosen to give a ruling in this court case and with that choice you now control a black man’s fate. You hold in your hands the future of a black man, Tom Robinson.

What I ask of you now may seem trivial, yet it is no small feat. Gentlemen, I ask you now to close your eyes. Yes, close them. Eliminate the image of Tom Robinson from your minds, forget that he is black, and listen to the simple facts of this case again.

Mayella Ewell was brutally beaten, as described in detail by Officer Tate. He says she was “pretty well beat up” with obvious visual evidence that damage had been done. According to Mr. Tate, it was clear that something had happened (TKM 1:10:15 – 1:10:21). However, no doctor was called. Looking beyond the lack of regard for the severity of Ms. Ewell’s injuries, without a doctor’s examination there is no proof of a rape even being committed. Why not call the doctor if a young girl is hurt? What were the Ewell’s hiding?  Keep your eyes closed.

Next, Mayella Ewell’s bruises were consistent with a beating from someone who was left handed. If not left handed, the true criminal must have at least had to ability to use their left hand. The man who stands before you accused of beating her has no use of his left hand. He hasn’t been able to use it since he was 12 years old. How could he have caused Mayella harm? Who really beat her?

Thirdly, Mayella Ewell has been asking favors from Tom Robinson for quite some time now. This man has “busted chiffarobes” and done other “kindling” for Mayella free of charge. Despite being offered money, he works simply as a favor to this woman and then goes on about his day. What motive would he have to take advantage of Mayella? Keep your eyes closed.

Finally, the victim, Mayella Ewell, has been the shakiest of all of the witnesses brought to the stand today. She has gone from accusing Tom Robinson of assault and rape, to not being able to “recollect if he hit [her]” (TKM 1:18:50 – 1:19:01). As the plaintiff’s case loses credibility, ask yourself, how can you base this entire case on the story told by an angered, ignorant father, and his indecisive, skittish daughter?

Now turn the eyes inside of your head back to the face of the accused. See him as not a lowly black man, but just a man. A man with a family, a job, a duty to fulfill at home. A man of sound mind and body, yet willing to aid those in need. A man, like all of you, who has been thrown into the midst of one family’s inescapable turmoil. Tom Robinson is innocent. There is not one shred of evidence that points toward his guilt except for the immensely questionable and previously contradicted statements made by the Ewell family. So what is keeping you from making the right ruling?

Open your eyes. Look before you and realize that the only thing separating Tom Robinson, an innocent man, from any of you is the color of his skin. If the world was colorblind, this case would not have come to trial.

See now that this case is much simpler than you are making it. I beg of you now to defy the gravity of your engrained, yet false, beliefs about black men. Turn away from the despicable lies that have brought us here and look forward towards the truth. The truth that will set Tom Robinson free is the same truth can potentially set this society free from it’s dark past. The only thing Tom Robinson is guilty of is being a black man in Maycomb. So “in the name of God, do your duty”, and set this man free (TKM 1:38:05 – 1:38:24)

Work Cited

To Kill a Mockingbird. Dir. Robert Mulligan. Universal International Pictures, 1962. Swank Motion Pictures. Web. 13 September 2017