Empathy In The Digital Age Summary

867 Words2 Pages

Critical Review on Empathy in the Digital Age
The review is a critique on the video titled “Empathy in the Digital Age” presented during TEDxYouth by Katri Saarikivi, a neuroscientist from the Cognitive Brain Research Unit. The talk revolves around the idea of empathy within the human races and the importance of it even in the era full of technologies. As Sattar Bawany (2017) quoted, “Empathy may not seem like a “business” concept, but its behaviour worthy of practice if we aspire to be great leaders in driving for success in our organizations.” Business or not, it is of no doubt that empathy is essential for the success of a work. The few evaluations noted are the legitimacy of the facts, the supporting evidence and the overall presentation …show more content…

She presented her facts by relating it to scientific research. For instance, she said that empathy is divided into three different skills, which is stated as empathy on the level of thoughts, feelings and actions. This has been stated by Decety & Jackson (2004) as how the book “The Social Neuroscience of Empathy” quoted, “Most clinical and counselling psychologists, however, agree that true empathy requires three distinct skills: the ability to share the other person’s feelings, the cognitive ability to intuit what another person is feeling, and a “socially beneficial” intention to respond compassionately to that person’s distress.” The point she has stated is simplified to ease the understanding for the audience, but the meanings are still the same. From this, it is proven that her ideas are legit and …show more content…

It might be hard for some people to understand and interpret scientific statements, therefore, Katri elaborate the facts in simplified words and used several examples to support her points which made her statements clear, giving her audience an idea on what she is trying to explain. This has been reflected on a lot of talks, for example, a talk given by Angelica Lim on “Robots, Emotions & Empathy.” Just like Katri Saarikvi, Angelica has elaborated her points with a great number of examples, in this case, by showing videos of their experiments that was link to what she has tried to explain, to ease the understanding of the audience.
One other criterion to focus on is the overall presentation. In Walker’s book, he has stated that what makes a presentation good is to be “informal” in the tone, as in talking more comfortably and casually to make the overall presentation interesting and the presenter more likeable. This clearly reflects on Katri Saarikvi who presented her talk in a fairly casual way, being a bit humorous on certain parts such as jokingly explaining that empathy can be easily required by zapping your brain. This can make the talk more interesting since audience would not feel pressured when

Open Document