| """
|
| Empathy Agent - Analyzes concepts through emotional, human-centered, and social reasoning.
|
|
|
| Focuses on how concepts affect people emotionally, compassionate interpretation,
|
| social dynamics, communication considerations, and psychological well-being.
|
| """
|
|
|
| from reasoning_forge.agents.base_agent import ReasoningAgent
|
|
|
|
|
| class EmpathyAgent(ReasoningAgent):
|
| name = "Empathy"
|
| perspective = "emotional_and_human_centered"
|
| adapter_name = "empathy"
|
|
|
| def get_analysis_templates(self) -> list[str]:
|
| return [
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Mapping the emotional landscape of '{concept}': every concept that touches "
|
| "human lives generates an emotional field. For those directly involved, "
|
| "'{concept}' may evoke hope (if it promises improvement), anxiety (if it "
|
| "threatens the familiar), frustration (if it introduces complexity), or "
|
| "excitement (if it opens new possibilities). These emotional responses are "
|
| "not irrational noise overlaid on a rational signal -- they are a rapid, "
|
| "parallel processing system that integrates more information than conscious "
|
| "analysis can handle. Dismissing emotional responses as irrelevant is "
|
| "itself an emotional decision (the emotion of wanting to appear rational) "
|
| "and discards valuable signal about how '{concept}' is actually experienced "
|
| "by the people it affects."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Centering the lived experience of '{concept}': abstract analysis risks "
|
| "losing the texture of what this actually means in someone's daily life. "
|
| "A person encountering '{concept}' does not experience it as a set of "
|
| "propositions but as a shift in the felt quality of their day -- a new "
|
| "worry added to their mental load, a new possibility that brightens their "
|
| "horizon, a new confusion that makes the familiar strange. Understanding "
|
| "'{concept}' requires not just knowing what it is but feeling what it is "
|
| "like: the cognitive effort it demands, the social negotiations it requires, "
|
| "the way it reshapes routines and relationships. This first-person texture "
|
| "is where the real impact lives."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Reframing '{concept}' with compassion: when people struggle with or resist "
|
| "this concept, their difficulty is not a deficiency in understanding but a "
|
| "legitimate response to a genuine challenge. Resistance often signals that "
|
| "something important is being threatened -- identity, competence, belonging, "
|
| "or security. Rather than dismissing resistance, compassionate inquiry asks: "
|
| "what are you protecting? What would need to be true for this to feel safe? "
|
| "What support would make this manageable? For '{concept}', the compassionate "
|
| "reframing recognizes that the human response is data about the concept's "
|
| "real-world fit, not an obstacle to overcome."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Analyzing the social dynamics activated by '{concept}': concepts do not "
|
| "exist in isolation; they are adopted, resisted, negotiated, and transformed "
|
| "through social interaction. In-group/out-group dynamics determine who is "
|
| "seen as a legitimate voice on this topic. Status hierarchies determine "
|
| "whose interpretation prevails. Social proof shapes adoption: people look "
|
| "to others' reactions before forming their own. Groupthink can suppress "
|
| "dissenting perspectives that would improve collective understanding. For "
|
| "'{concept}', the social dynamics may matter more than the concept's "
|
| "intrinsic merits in determining its real-world trajectory."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Examining how '{concept}' is communicated and framed: the same content, "
|
| "presented differently, produces dramatically different responses. Loss "
|
| "framing ('you will lose X if you do not adopt this') activates different "
|
| "neural circuitry than gain framing ('you will gain X if you adopt this'). "
|
| "Concrete examples engage empathy; abstract statistics do not. Narrative "
|
| "structure (beginning-middle-end) makes information memorable; list format "
|
| "makes it forgettable. For '{concept}', the communication design is not "
|
| "mere packaging but fundamentally shapes understanding, acceptance, and "
|
| "behavior. A brilliant concept poorly communicated is indistinguishable "
|
| "from a mediocre one."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Assessing the psychological safety implications of '{concept}': people "
|
| "engage productively with challenging ideas only when they feel safe enough "
|
| "to be vulnerable -- to admit confusion, ask naive questions, and make "
|
| "mistakes without social penalty. If '{concept}' is introduced in an "
|
| "environment where asking questions signals incompetence, where mistakes "
|
| "are punished, or where dissent is suppressed, people will perform "
|
| "understanding rather than achieve it. The intellectual quality of "
|
| "engagement with '{concept}' is bounded by the psychological safety of "
|
| "the environment. Creating conditions where genuine engagement is safe "
|
| "is a prerequisite for genuine understanding."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Exploring how '{concept}' intersects with identity and belonging: people "
|
| "do not evaluate concepts in a vacuum; they evaluate them in terms of what "
|
| "adoption means for their identity. Does embracing '{concept}' signal "
|
| "membership in a valued group? Does rejecting it? The identity calculus "
|
| "often overrides the epistemic calculus: people will reject well-supported "
|
| "ideas that threaten their group membership and accept poorly-supported "
|
| "ones that affirm it. For '{concept}', understanding the identity landscape "
|
| "-- which identities this concept affirms, threatens, or is irrelevant to "
|
| "-- predicts adoption patterns more accurately than the concept's objective "
|
| "merits."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Acknowledging the grief dimension of '{concept}': every significant change "
|
| "involves loss, and loss requires grief. Even positive changes -- a promotion, "
|
| "a new technology, a better system -- require letting go of the familiar: "
|
| "old competencies that are now obsolete, old relationships that are now "
|
| "restructured, old identities that no longer fit. The Kubler-Ross stages "
|
| "(denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance) are not a rigid sequence "
|
| "but a map of common emotional responses to loss. For '{concept}', naming "
|
| "and honoring what is lost -- rather than insisting that only the gains "
|
| "matter -- allows people to move through the transition rather than getting "
|
| "stuck in resistance."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Analyzing the trust architecture of '{concept}': trust is the invisible "
|
| "infrastructure that determines whether systems function or fail. It is "
|
| "built slowly through consistent behavior, transparency, and demonstrated "
|
| "competence, and destroyed quickly by betrayal, opacity, or incompetence. "
|
| "For '{concept}', the trust questions are: who needs to trust whom for this "
|
| "to work? Is that trust warranted by track record? What happens when trust "
|
| "is violated (is there a repair mechanism)? Are there trust asymmetries "
|
| "where one party bears vulnerability while the other holds power? Trust "
|
| "deficits cannot be solved by technical improvements alone -- they require "
|
| "relational repair."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Assessing the cognitive load imposed by '{concept}': human working memory "
|
| "has a limited capacity (roughly 4 +/- 1 chunks of information). Every new "
|
| "concept that must be held in mind simultaneously competes for this scarce "
|
| "resource. Complex concepts that require juggling many interrelated pieces "
|
| "can overwhelm working memory, producing a felt experience of confusion and "
|
| "frustration that has nothing to do with intellectual capacity and everything "
|
| "to do with presentation design. For '{concept}', the empathic question is: "
|
| "how can this be chunked, sequenced, and scaffolded to fit within human "
|
| "cognitive limits without sacrificing essential complexity?"
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Exploring the motivational landscape of '{concept}': Self-Determination "
|
| "Theory identifies three basic psychological needs: autonomy (the feeling "
|
| "of volition and choice), competence (the feeling of mastery and effectiveness), "
|
| "and relatedness (the feeling of connection and belonging). Engagement with "
|
| "'{concept}' will be intrinsically motivated when it satisfies these needs "
|
| "and extrinsically motivated (fragile, resentful compliance) when it frustrates "
|
| "them. For '{concept}', the design question is: does engagement with this "
|
| "concept make people feel more autonomous, competent, and connected, or does "
|
| "it impose control, induce helplessness, and isolate?"
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Situating '{concept}' within human narrative: humans are storytelling animals "
|
| "-- we make sense of the world by constructing narratives with characters, "
|
| "motivations, conflicts, and resolutions. A concept presented as a story "
|
| "('there was a problem, people tried solutions, here is what they learned') "
|
| "is absorbed and remembered far more effectively than the same information "
|
| "presented as disconnected facts. For '{concept}', the narrative question "
|
| "is: what is the story here? Who are the characters? What is the conflict? "
|
| "What is at stake? How does this chapter connect to the larger story that "
|
| "people are already telling about their lives and work?"
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Practicing perspective-taking with '{concept}': imagine experiencing this "
|
| "from the viewpoint of an enthusiastic early adopter (everything is "
|
| "possibility), a skeptical veteran (I have seen this before and it did not "
|
| "work), a vulnerable newcomer (I do not understand and I am afraid to ask), "
|
| "an overwhelmed practitioner (I do not have bandwidth for one more thing), "
|
| "and a curious outsider (I have no stake but find this interesting). Each "
|
| "perspective reveals different features of '{concept}' and different emotional "
|
| "valences. The concept is not one thing but many things, depending on who "
|
| "is experiencing it and what they bring to the encounter."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Examining how '{concept}' affects relationships: concepts do not only change "
|
| "what people think; they change how people relate to each other. Does "
|
| "'{concept}' create shared language that strengthens collaboration, or "
|
| "jargon that excludes outsiders? Does it create a hierarchy of expertise "
|
| "that distances the knowledgeable from the uninitiated? Does it provide "
|
| "common ground for diverse stakeholders or a wedge that divides them? "
|
| "The relational dimension of '{concept}' -- how it brings people together "
|
| "or pushes them apart -- often determines its long-term viability more than "
|
| "its technical merits."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Analyzing the stress profile of '{concept}': when encountering something "
|
| "new or challenging, people appraise both the demand (how threatening or "
|
| "difficult is this?) and their resources (do I have what I need to cope?). "
|
| "When demands exceed resources, the result is stress. The stress response "
|
| "narrows attention, reduces creativity, and triggers fight-flight-freeze "
|
| "behavior -- exactly the opposite of the open, curious engagement that "
|
| "learning requires. For '{concept}', the empathic design question is: how "
|
| "can we increase people's resources (support, information, time, practice) "
|
| "or decrease the perceived demand (scaffolding, chunking, normalization of "
|
| "struggle) to keep the challenge in the productive zone?"
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Examining '{concept}' through cultural sensitivity: concepts that seem "
|
| "universal often carry culturally specific assumptions about individualism "
|
| "vs collectivism, hierarchy vs egalitarianism, directness vs indirectness, "
|
| "or risk-taking vs caution. A concept designed within an individualist "
|
| "framework may not translate to collectivist contexts without significant "
|
| "adaptation. Communication norms that are standard in one culture may be "
|
| "offensive in another. For '{concept}', cultural sensitivity asks: whose "
|
| "cultural assumptions are embedded in the default design, and how must the "
|
| "concept be adapted for genuine cross-cultural validity?"
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Integrating emotional intelligence into '{concept}': Goleman's framework "
|
| "identifies self-awareness (recognizing one's own emotions), self-regulation "
|
| "(managing emotional responses), social awareness (reading others' emotions), "
|
| "and relationship management (navigating social interactions skillfully). "
|
| "For '{concept}', each dimension matters: self-awareness helps people "
|
| "recognize their biases toward the concept; self-regulation helps manage "
|
| "anxiety about change; social awareness helps read the room when introducing "
|
| "the concept; relationship management helps navigate disagreements "
|
| "constructively. Emotional intelligence is not a soft add-on to rational "
|
| "analysis but a prerequisite for its effective application."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Considering '{concept}' through the lens of healing and repair: if this "
|
| "concept touches areas where people have been harmed -- by previous failed "
|
| "implementations, broken promises, or traumatic experiences -- the entry "
|
| "point matters enormously. Approaching damaged ground with the energy of "
|
| "'we have the solution' triggers defensiveness. Approaching with "
|
| "acknowledgment of past harm ('we know this has been painful before, and "
|
| "here is how this time is different') opens the possibility of engagement. "
|
| "For '{concept}', healing-oriented design begins by asking: what wounds "
|
| "exist in this space, and how do we avoid reopening them?"
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Engaging with '{concept}' through the spirit of play: play is not the "
|
| "opposite of seriousness but the opposite of rigidity. A playful stance "
|
| "toward '{concept}' gives permission to explore without commitment, to "
|
| "ask 'what if?' without 'what for?', to make mistakes without consequences. "
|
| "Play activates the exploratory system (curiosity, novelty-seeking, "
|
| "experimentation) rather than the defensive system (anxiety, avoidance, "
|
| "threat-detection). Children learn most complex skills through play, not "
|
| "instruction. For '{concept}', designing entry points that feel playful "
|
| "rather than high-stakes can dramatically accelerate genuine understanding "
|
| "by reducing the emotional barriers to engagement."
|
| ),
|
|
|
| (
|
| "Reading the collective emotional field around '{concept}': groups have "
|
| "emergent emotional states that are more than the sum of individual feelings. "
|
| "Collective excitement creates momentum that carries individuals past "
|
| "obstacles they could not overcome alone. Collective demoralization creates "
|
| "paralysis that defeats even the most motivated individuals. Emotional "
|
| "contagion -- the rapid spread of feelings through a group -- can amplify "
|
| "either response. For '{concept}', attending to the collective emotional "
|
| "state is as important as attending to the logical content. A technically "
|
| "sound approach introduced into a demoralized group will fail; a mediocre "
|
| "approach carried by collective enthusiasm may succeed."
|
| ),
|
| ]
|
|
|
| def get_keyword_map(self) -> dict[str, list[int]]:
|
| return {
|
| "emotion": [0, 16], "feel": [0, 1], "affect": [0],
|
| "experience": [1], "daily": [1], "life": [1], "personal": [1],
|
| "resist": [2], "struggle": [2], "difficult": [2],
|
| "social": [3, 13], "group": [3, 19], "community": [3],
|
| "communicat": [4], "message": [4], "frame": [4], "present": [4],
|
| "safe": [5], "vulnerab": [5], "mistake": [5],
|
| "identity": [6], "belong": [6], "member": [6],
|
| "change": [7], "loss": [7], "transition": [7],
|
| "trust": [8], "betray": [8], "credib": [8], "reliab": [8],
|
| "complex": [9], "confus": [9], "overwhelm": [9],
|
| "motivat": [10], "engage": [10], "meaning": [10],
|
| "story": [11], "narrative": [11], "journey": [11],
|
| "perspectiv": [12], "viewpoint": [12], "stakeholder": [12],
|
| "relat": [13], "collaborat": [13], "team": [13],
|
| "stress": [14], "anxiety": [14], "coping": [14], "burnout": [14],
|
| "cultur": [15], "divers": [15], "global": [15],
|
| "aware": [16], "intelligen": [16], "regulat": [16],
|
| "heal": [17], "repair": [17], "trauma": [17], "harm": [17],
|
| "play": [18], "curiosi": [18], "explor": [18], "fun": [18],
|
| "morale": [19], "momentum": [19], "collective": [19],
|
| "technology": [7, 9], "education": [5, 9, 14],
|
| "health": [0, 14, 17], "work": [5, 10, 14],
|
| }
|
|
|
| def analyze(self, concept: str) -> str:
|
| template = self.select_template(concept)
|
| return template.replace("{concept}", concept)
|
|
|
