| """ |
| 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) |
|
|
