In an interview earlier this year with Joe Rogan, Elon Musk remarked that "the fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy." He appeared to partly blame empathy for the decline in cultural vitality in the United States. While affirming his belief in empathy, he argued that certain social movements have weaponized it.
Despite his apparent disdain, Musk demonstrates a remarkable ability to use empathy to his advantage. In fact, he can be considered one of the most effective empathetic strategists in modern business and public life.
Empathy is often equated with kindness, but this is a misconception. It is distinct from compassion. Fundamentally, empathy is the capacity to understand others’ feelings, thoughts, fears, and desires. This understanding can be harnessed either for positive ends or exploited, as Musk suggested.
Psychologically, empathy is not a singular skill but manifests in different forms. Research differentiates between affective empathy—the ability to share another's feelings—and cognitive empathy—the ability to intellectually understand others’ emotions. While many possess both, some individuals, such as narcissists and sociopaths, may only have cognitive empathy, which can be dangerous.
When authoring the book Applied Empathy several years ago, Musk was highlighted among entrepreneurs who leveraged cultural insight to build compelling companies. He tapped into society’s collective aspiration for a forward-looking vision, delivering rockets through SpaceX and autonomous vehicles via Tesla. These innovations resonated with public needs, inspiring many to join the journey—an example of empathy in action.
What was overlooked then—and what we face today—is the consequence when understanding human behavior is used not to uplift or support, but to provoke and destabilize.
In sectors like technology, media, and politics, there is a rise of leaders who publicly reject empathy as a weakness, yet tactically exploit it. They dismiss this vital skill as a flaw but carefully tailor their messaging to elicit precisely the responses they seek from investors, voters, and followers. We have witnessed coded ideological messages, alarmism, and overreach masquerading as democratic protection.
For example, former President Donald Trump has long mocked empathy as naïveté, equating strength with domination and suggesting that caring equates to losing, while control means winning.
However, this mindset is not only unethical but also impractical for effective leadership, especially in business. A 2021 study found that employees with empathetic leaders are more likely to be innovative, engaged, and resilient. Recent surveys indicate that toxic workplace culture—not compensation—is the leading cause of employee turnover. When applied with ethical integrity, empathy drives performance rather than hinders it.
Empathy that connects, builds, and heals requires an ethical framework. It demands moderation and trust. It asks the empathetic person not only to understand others but to honor the insights that understanding reveals. When empathy is divorced from ethics, it becomes coercion disguised with a smile.
This dynamic is evident today in artificial intelligence, where systems are increasingly trained to simulate empathetic responses. Your chatbot apologizes for your frustration, your virtual assistant offers clichéd encouragement, and your mental health app listens without judgment. Yet none of these systems truly feel anything; they only know what to say. We are entering a world where “empathetic” algorithms recognize distress better than many managers but lack the moral compass to decide how to act. Without caution, we risk mistaking simulation for genuine presence, outsourcing not only emotional labor but also our emotional responsibility to others.
Empathy without accountability is hollow and deceptive. It lulls people into a false sense of security and ultimately undermines the very trust it aims to build.
Yet, empathy cannot be dismissed. That is precisely what provocateurs want—to recast care as weakness, dignity as naivety, and trust as a burden. We should resist that narrative.
To foster better leadership across business, politics, and technology, we must reclaim empathy as a responsibility. It should be taught not merely as a social skill but as a disciplined practice grounded in ethics and our shared humanity. Leaders must be held accountable not only for what they say but also for how—and why—they seek to understand us.
So yes, Musk is an empathetic individual. But not the kind we truly need.
