Empathy vs Telepathy

[wolfdancer]

WOW! I didn't realize I had never responded to this. I commented on it to DA, but never posted anything. Please forgive me.

That is wonderful!!! I am glad you have developed some control and hope it is developing well. Have you reached the point where you can use both simultaneously to varying degrees? I know it has been a month and a lot can develop in that time, so I thought I would ask. Hope to see you again soon.

~Wolf

[rayndragon06]

First thing, there is no difference between empathy and telethapy.

I do not feel like typing alot so I am going post something from an article that I wrote a while back on the subject.

"Think of this. The consciousness being a core. A computer that is constantly creating mental activity activity with cognitive processess and emotional processes taking place within it. From this core, waves can be said to be emitted. One could think of them as an echo of the processes that take place within it. A low level telepath/empath would be sensitive to these emanations. Depending upon the parties involved, and other variables, it could manifest as an intercepted thought, emotion, sense, etc. and depending upon the low level telepath/empath, one might be able project ones waves or emanations of consciousness(thoughts or emotions). Telepathic/Empathic links operate on this principle. A link is made between the two consciousnesses as a bridge to thoughts and or emotions. The emanations of the psyche act as a medium between the low level empath/telepath and the psyche of other people. This way serves merely as a bridge.

The human mind thinks in terms of concepts. Symbals, rather visual or acoustic, serve to convey concepts without the thing in question being there. For example, "I saw a dog last night." The word dog allows us to understand and convey the concept of dog without having an actual dog present. So therefore, the concept of dog resonates with the actual dog. Through this you could say a virtual model of the dog is created within the brain of the person. This model arises from the shared concept that arose from a shared perception of what a dog is. So on the mental plane, this creates a dog.
Everything that we can experience exists to the brain as various stimuli and concepts to be decoded and integrated into what we believe to be true, which in turn is linked to what I am going to call the consensus. Me and my brother share a perception of what a dog is, which resonates with that concept thus creating a link, which furthermore resonates with the personal perceptions that me and my brother would have, which could carry on. With all the concepts and resonations going on, you could say that they form one big mental landscape.
A high level telepath does not act as a reciever or transmitter of waves, but rather, has the ability to expand and project ones consciousness to ride the winds of the mental landscape. The mental landscape is just as real as the physical landscape, to a high level telepath. To a high level telepath, concepts, thoughts, emotions, and the like are real. Let us say that a a high level telepath projected himself into a part of the mental landscape that belonged to a person. The emotions and thoughts attached them would manifest as actual things or beings. Let us say that person had anger issues, due to being beaten by his father. The anger issues would manifest as a thing itself that could affect the telepath. What if manifests as depends on the telepaths."

In other words empathy and telethapy act on the same dynamic. A strong telepath picks up everything. Thoughts in the form of words, images, physical stimuli (direct perception of what another person physical feels), emotional stimuli (what another person feels emotionally), etc. Most people only have a fragment. For example, some are good at picking up words from another persons mind. Some images. Others various emotions.

Projective anything requires both a "telepathic" and an "empathic" suggestion (diving them up for the sake of an example). If I project a feeling to a person without a why, the mind will automatically reject it and telepathic communication without an emotional counterpart is equally useless.

Dividing up empathy and telethapy is like diving up kinetic gifts. Like pyrokinesis, telekinesis, aquakinesis. They are all forms pf psychokinesis, which is simply consciousness affecting matter, so therefore they would all be the same.

[The Devil's Advocate]

Then explain me?

I can categorically differentiate between telepathy and empathy they are not joined in any way shape or form. They give very different TYPES of information. I received and projected Empathically for nearly 2 DECADES without one whif of telepathy (Empathic reception of triple digit miles.) It was only when I attempted to use empathy to receive information (SPECIFICALLY receive information) rather than feelings/emotions/what have you that I started developing telepathy. The stimulus required to reach overload on either skill is different as are the overload symptoms. It requires DIFFERENT specific shielding to block out each type of input. I have a friend who is a very strong empath and one who is a very strong telepath, and the mental processes are different between the two, they are not interchangeable.

Your analogy is wanting, while neither telepathy nor empathy have the same restrictions of say radio waves (no observable refraction or reflection or absorption), neither do they require any quasi-out of body experience to traverse a mystical landscape of locations. To anyone concepts, thoughts, and emotions are real. After all you get angry, you experience love, you write these words on the screen. They are real. No telepath can pick up a thought and paint it green. No Empath can pick up love and paint it purple. They are not physical objects on any level of existence (and you might want to read my post about what I get when I scan on the "What is Psi" thread to reference this).

There are 'layers' of energy but they are all tied to our physical reality in on shape or another. Emotion isn't one of them. Concept isn't one of them. Psi isn't even a 'layer'. It simply permeates the layers and our reality. None of these qualify as a 'mental plane'. If everyone in the world forgot about the concept of 'dog' there would still be 'dog'. That creature would still need to eat, sleep, breath, etc. Emotions and concepts have point sources. If you don't believe that they can be mass broadcast, you've never experienced Empathic or Telepathic overload, which makes me doubt your passive range immensely. Without a passive range I am forced to consider you might not have the experience you profess.

You cannot claim a 'strong telepath' can pick up everything. As I mentioned in my first paragraph, I am a VERY strong empath and have been for many, many years, long before I ever received my first telepathic concept. I was dealing in high level reception and projection for a good portion of it. There was never a sense of 'else where' as when dealing with the Astral, everything was and still is handled on this plane of existence. And I have projected at people without a 'why' attached to it regularly and gotten a reaction, on an empathic level. I have been projected at (and AM projected at constantly by every person in the state and probably farther, my range has gotten to the point my previous test methods no longer function.) without a why constantly. The volume of it is such that if I do not shield constantly I overload constantly.

This is separate from the equally broad spectrum conceptual bombardment I receive on a telepathic level (enough that I'm sorry I ever bothered with that skill!) The protective methods for one are NOT proof against the other. If they were the same thing one protection method would provide coverage of both areas.

Trying to say Telepathy and Empathy are the same is like trying to say energy manipulation is Telekinesis. They are categorically different, even though they both move things (one energy, one matter.)

~The Devil's Advocate

[rayndragon06]

Let me ask you this, how are they different? One deals with emotions, the other thoughts. Well define emotions and thoughts for me and then tell me how they are different, and then tell me how stimuli contributes to them.

Also keep in mind that the interpretation of said empathic or telepathic information depends on the person.

Also, keep in mind that thoughts and emotions are compounded together. For every emotion there is a thought and vice versa.

Personally, there is no difference in emotions and thoughts. They are one in the same to me. There is no difference to me. Behind every "thought" is an "emotion". It is mental stimuli. The only thing different are the brain waves.

When I turn you can say my mental senses on a person, I do not see them as a person in a conventional sense. I see them as a sun, you could say. They emnate various things, but I am able to perceive and pick it all up. Emotions, thoughts memories, images,... everything.

That being said of empathy and telethapy are different, then tell me, what would you call me? The same senses that you use to pick up a persons thoughts, you use to pick up emotions, however, the only difference is whether or not the person can interpret said data or whether or not it is within its range.

"You cannot claim a 'strong telepath' can pick up everything. As I mentioned in my first paragraph, I am a VERY strong empath and have been for many, many years, long before I ever received my first telepathic concept. I was dealing in high level reception and projection for a good portion of it. There was never a sense of 'else where' as when dealing with the Astral, everything was and still is handled on this plane of existence."

Why not, I do? You need to study up on some stuff. Everyone lives in and quite possibly creates a unique universe that can never be 100% identical to that lived in by another. In other words my sense of sight is telling me that there is a mouse on the ground. My brain interprets the information and tells me that there is a mouse, that is my reality. It is called a sphere of perception. Every person's perception due to various senses creates a different reality in a sense. In other words, a person's mind can be called a different world and the connecting consensual perception acts as the universe or space.

You could say that I have your basic practical senses, then I have senses that allow me to perceive mental activity. I do not have to go into an OBE state.

You mentioned the "astral". That is an esoteric term and even that, you should pick up a book by Robert Bruce. You are confusing esoterics with psionics. Esoterics are metaphysical paradigms. It differs from basic parapsychology or psionics greatly.

"Trying to say Telepathy and Empathy are the same is like trying to say energy manipulation is Telekinesis. They are categorically different, even though they both move things (one energy, one matter.)"

Energy and matter are the same thing. Energy can be divided into said particles. These said particles come together into atoms which come together into molecules which is matter. It is basic chemistry.

"There are 'layers' of energy but they are all tied to our physical reality in on shape or another. Emotion isn't one of them. Concept isn't one of them. Psi isn't even a 'layer'. It simply permeates the layers and our reality. None of these qualify as a 'mental plane'. If everyone in the world forgot about the concept of 'dog' there would still be 'dog'. That creature would still need to eat, sleep, breath, etc. Emotions and concepts have point sources. If you don't believe that they can be mass broadcast, you've never experienced Empathic or Telepathic overload, which makes me doubt your passive range immensely. Without a passive range I am forced to consider you might not have the experience you profess."

A concept is a form of a prototype that fits into a persons schemata. It is a psychological construct. If everyone forgot about the concept of the dog, overtime the concept of dog would fade away. It would not be a real thing. It is a called an archetype. Language exists to communicate and convey concepts. Through this communication, pictures and images are drawn upon and created. It is basic cognitive psychology, it has nothing to do with "psi". Language like senses can serve to join perceptions so that a common consensual perception is attained. Without that, there is no commonality if a person experiences it individually. The concept would exist within the mind of the person.

I am not sure what you say by passive range. I guess you are talking about my telepathic/empathic range. That depends on alot of things. It is extremely wide, but what I do is I narrow my mind or consciousness to said things. I can not get overloaded by something if I do not perceive it. Shielding works horribly for me. If I shift you can say the frequency of my perception, I do not get interference.

I created a creature that would be my concept in my mind. If I drew the creature and showed it to someone else, he would be a concept within their mind. We would be sharing the concept, but if the drawing was destroyed and that person forgot about it, it would exist within my mind unless I too forgot it.

[goliath797]

Empathy, im afraid, is impossible to explain. I dont know about the rest of you empaths, but theres no way to explain exactly how empathy works. So therefor i cant really compare and contrast empathy and telepathy. Only real thing i can say about empathy however, is the fact that, Hanging out with a bunch of moody people, will kinda bend your emotion too, but not make you completely emo. If you're in a mix of people, i can almost never EXACTLY pinpoint whos emotion is whos. You just kinda suck everybodys emotion in, and whichever emotion is dominating, you absorb that one and become it, and the second in lead kinda defines it. So if your in a group of 9 people, 5 sad, 3 pissed, and 1 happy. You'll be sad with a pinch of pissed off . So in reality, your just like that one takamari game or whatever where he rolls that gigantic ball around and sucks everything inside. Thats all i can really say.

Telepathy, or anything close to telepathy, is kinda a different story. For me personally, its not natural, its something i had to work up to. Now, i dont know if this is EXACTLY telepathy, but here goes.

Me and my friends were being interrogated by some people, and i tried to transfer directly a script of words to say. Since this decided whether or not i would be charged with something, it was pretty vital. Amazingly, everything i wanted him/her to say, he/she said it, i knew this because i could vaguely make out what they were saying. How i did this however, was by looking at the person / visualizing the person, and pretend as if i was next to him, and then i said the words, they come out all misty and flexible, and then they suck into the persons brain. Sometimes however though, if im lazy and sloppy i just think of the person and the phrase and let it go.

This too im not sure if it is telepathy, but when i tell somebody to do something, i will know the outcome. This seems more like precognition (). I told somebody to choose a color of the rainbow, i guessed purple, and they said purple. I asked them A B C or D, and i guessed C, they said C. Dont know if thats exactly telepathy, but how i do it is, i look at the available options, and then i search among them for some kinda sign that shows that one is the option they are going to pick, Reading on the article about psionic signatures helped a bit, but yet it was just subconciously done, so there is no real way to explain exactly.

In the end, i say this

Empathy = feels a bit more natural, just comes to you, no message is shown you can only feel it "in your heart" shall we say

Telepathy = A bit more forceful, you have to tell it to get it your way

[innerfire]

Empathy obviously is possible to explain for some people or there wouldn't be so many posts in this thread. What you're describing about not being able to pinpoint things is probably because you aren't at seasoned as an empath as some of the other contributors to this thread, control comes with time and practice.

What you described with the guessing of colors/letters is basic telepathy. I'm not so sure about the other case, just that if it was so easy to be that suggestive to someone, we'd have a lot more interrogations not working.

I don't think myself telepathy sounds like it'd be more forceful, but I'll leave commenting on that to people that actually do telepathy.

[goliath797]

Empathy is actually something that comes natural to me...and what i meant by you cant pinpoint is you dont know which emotion came from who exactly when you suck it in, but if i want to i can dig deeper and specifically wretch out what emotion they're hiding / really feeling

[innerfire]

*nods* Just be careful with that, should you ever try to do that to another psychic at best they'll consider it rude, at worst it will be considered an attack and they may respond.

In both these and other recent posts with you I'm in the male equivalent of mother hen mode So I mean no offense, just trying to make sure you're at least aware of the dangers of some of these actions (and also that anyone reading your posts is aware as well).

[wolfdancer]

goliath797 said:

Empathy, im afraid, is impossible to explain. I dont know about the rest of you empaths, but theres no way to explain exactly how empathy works. So therefor i cant really compare and contrast empathy and telepathy.

Not being able to explain exactly how something works does not prevent you from comparing your observations of the two. It may be impossible for you to explain right now or lack a standardized explanation and understanding, but what empathy is is possible to explain enough for discussion purposes. Even words such as supercalifragilisticexpialidocious are explainable enough for these purposes.

goliath797 said:

Only real thing i can say about empathy however, is the fact that, Hanging out with a bunch of moody people, will kinda bend your emotion too, but not make you completely emo. If you're in a mix of people, i can almost never EXACTLY pinpoint whos emotion is whos. You just kinda suck everybodys emotion in, and whichever emotion is dominating, you absorb that one and become it, and the second in lead kinda defines it. So if your in a group of 9 people, 5 sad, 3 pissed, and 1 happy. You'll be sad with a pinch of pissed off . So in reality, your just like that one takamari game or whatever where he rolls that gigantic ball around and sucks everything inside. Thats all i can really say.

I’m afraid I have to disagree. Empathy is not like that for all people. I don’t have what I would consider a high level of empathy (compared to my friends), but I can tell where emotions are from even in a crowd. I also do not have the problem now of their emotions controlling mine. My emotion may be responses to what I am picking up, but does not necessarily mirror their emotions. Some of this is dependent upon the level of projection of each individual in the group in relation to the whole and that can effect which emotion is dominant even if it is not what is felt by the majority. This is something that must be taken into consideration.

goliath797 said:

Telepathy, or anything close to telepathy, is kinda a different story. For me personally, its not natural, its something i had to work up to. Now, i dont know if this is EXACTLY telepathy, but here goes.
Me and my friends were being interrogated by some people, and i tried to transfer directly a script of words to say. Since this decided whether or not i would be charged with something, it was pretty vital. Amazingly, everything i wanted him/her to say, he/she said it, i knew this because i could vaguely make out what they were saying. How i did this however, was by looking at the person / visualizing the person, and pretend as if i was next to him, and then i said the words, they come out all misty and flexible, and then they suck into the persons brain. Sometimes however though, if im lazy and sloppy i just think of the person and the phrase and let it go.

OK. Well, this is telepathy. Not a use that I would necessarily approve of, but whatever. I don’t know the whole story. The images you describe, I suppose can work, but they are not clear. Are you offering suggestion or are you trying to put words directly into their mind to replace what they already have.

goliath797 said:

This too im not sure if it is telepathy, but when i tell somebody to do something, i will know the outcome. This seems more like precognition (). I told somebody to choose a color of the rainbow, i guessed purple, and they said purple. I asked them A B C or D, and i guessed C, they said C. Dont know if thats exactly telepathy, but how i do it is, i look at the available options, and then i search among them for some kinda sign that shows that one is the option they are going to pick, Reading on the article about psionic signatures helped a bit, but yet it was just subconciously done, so there is no real way to explain exactly.

Telepathy, yes, though I have only seen you post about projective telepathy and no receptive. That might be an area you want to consider developing or at least paying attention to.

goliath797 said:

In the end, i say this
Empathy = feels a bit more natural, just comes to you, no message is shown you can only feel it "in your heart" shall we say
Telepathy = A bit more forceful, you have to tell it to get it your way

I would have to disagree with this breakdown as well. Empathy can be very natural and is very emotion based and subjective on that level. Telepathy while more idea and verbal based can be just as natural. It can be utilized to enhance a message when trying to describe a scene to another person who is receptive. It can also be a natural outcome of emotion and thought such as a message being sent when you are running late, but everything is ok to the person who might be worried about you.

There are a lot of distinct differences between these two skills as well as some wonderful similarities. They can both be very natural. They can both result in overloading (which does not mean absorbing the strongest emotion or thought---it is a totally separate reaction). They are in my opinion wonderful skills to be used with care and consideration.

~Wofld@ncer

[goliath797]

To wolfdancer;

That was based on my opinion as you can see, and if you have seen anything on this site about me, you would know i am a somewhat natural empath, but telepathy is new to me.

[The Devil's Advocate]

Yes, but you made generalizations and applied them to all telepathy and empathy without, as I could see, actually taking your own inclinations into consideration in your analysis.

I am a natural empath, and as I have been very, very harshly reminded lately, my passive range is huge. (Not unlimited but huge.) My ACTIVE range is virtually unlimited as long as I have an idea of what I'm 'looking' for. Things /I/ have observed over my going on oy, 19 years now that I actively REMEMBER using empathy (though it's been much fewer that I called it that. It is possible to track the 'source' of empathy if you're paying enough attention. It is the rough equivalent of recognizing someone's voice. You can usually tell, if you listen hard enough if the voices you hear are one voice or many voices. Then if you are sufficiently familiar with the voice in question you can usually identify who is speaking even if you cannot hear the words. Just like you can tell if you're listening to an orchestra or a violin. A good conductor can tell you what instruments are in an ensemble just by listening. some people can tell you how many... some people can tell you who's playing if they known an individual musician's style. Empathy works the same way. There are subtle differences between a burst of outrage from an individual, or joy for that matter, than from a group, and if it's someone I know I can usually tell WHO is having the burst of emotion, usually what that emotion is, but not why.

'Why' is, in my experience, the realm of telepathy. It gives much more detail. Much of the 'why' behind malice, behind hate, behind anger, joy, happiness, excitement... yet alone it misses many of the subtler details. The best analogy I can find: Telepathy is like spoken word, Empathy is like tone of voice. Each individually can tell you much, together they tell you much, much more.

~The Devil's Advocate



(modified for slight spelling and grammar corrections to improve clarity ~Wolf)

[nervous]

Sept 28, 2006 19:45:32 GMT -5 The Devil's Advocate said:

iluveire said:

In MY expierience empathy was/is colours. Mad is red sad is blue etc etc etc. When people feel that emotion i start thinking "oh he's red...dont mess with him. I am colour blind, so I dont know why I am so attached to colours.

I am a natural empath. Empathy is NOT associated with any physical sense. Emotions do not come across as a sound. They do not come across as a color, a texture, a taste, a smell, or anything else related to that which we can directly percieve. What you describe is much closer to what I have heard Telepathy described as. I am not a natural Telepath, but what you describe as "empathy" does not match my own experience with the empathy, nor anything the two other empaths I consulted on the topic.
~The Devil's Advocate

It depends on how your sub con interprets it, you can get colors. That's how you see aura's, or atleast how I see them.