Empathy (Psychic) is the psychical influence of emotion via experient influence over the emotional basis of consciousness and the mental and physiological processes associated with a wide variety of emotional experiences. Emotions are defined as an episode, which suggests the concept of a dynamic process, of interrelated, synchronized changes in the states of all or most of the correlated organismic subsystems [e.g. central, neuroendocrine, and somatic nervous systems] in response to the evaluation of an external or internal stimulus event as relevant to major concerns of the organism. (Kelly, 2012)
The English word empathy is derived from the Greek ἐμπάθεια (empatheia), “physical affection, passion, partiality” which comes from ἐν (en), “in, at” + πάθος (pathos), “feeling”. The term was adapted by Theodore Lipps to create the German word Einfühlung (“feeling into”) from which the English term is then more directly derived. 
The function of emotion is speculated to include the evaluation of objects and events, system regulation, preparation and direction of action, communication of reaction and behavioral intention, and the monitoring of internal state and organism-environment interaction. Current thought leaders in regards to the psychology of emotions support a component process model of emotion involving cognitive, neurophysiological, motivational, motor expression, and subjective feeling components. In addition, psychical empathy can involve the influence of affective phenomena such as moods. However, this appears to apply only when an element of telepathy or clairvoyance is involved, as affective phenomena such as moods involve more than just emotional content. It is an experient of empathic phenomena’s natural endowment in which enables their influence over emotion whether phenomena is the result of conscious or subconscious performance.(Kelly, 2012)
The first type of regulation strategy is called antecedent-focused, which refers to what an empathist does prior to experiencing a particular emotion and can influence their physiological and behavior responses (e.g. viewing a failure as an opportunity to try something new).
(1) Situation selection, which refers to approaching or completely avoiding particular people, places, or things as a means to regulate emotion. Here the empathist must evaluate what situations are negative verses positive alternatives, necessary and unnecessary (i.e. assessing consequences and importance), and short- or long-term emotional benefits (i.e. short-term emotional benefits with long-term negative consequences, or vice versa). (2) Situation modification, whichrefers to changing a situation to soften emotional impact when ones feels or thinks they are on the verge of entering into a situation that will have a negative emotional affect. An example of this modification would be when a friend prompts the empathist for emotional support when the empathists is emotionally fatigued and the empathists prompts themselves to change the subject until the empathist is well rested. (3) Attentional deployment, which refers to selecting one of numerous aspects of the situation the empathist will supply their focus. For example, the empathist may chose to focus on the “the big picture,” on the positive aspects of a distressing conversation or distract him or herself from a conversation that they find distressing by thinking about something else (e.g. counting in-mind, thinking of a pleasant memory, checking or responding to text messages, etc.). This can also include the empathist devising a plan to leave the situation (e.g. “I have to make a call”). (4) Cognitive change, which refers to selecting one of numerous meanings he/she will correlate to the aspect they find negative (e.g. in regards to the distressing conversation, the empathist may remind themselves that it is “only their opinion, not necessarily the truth”). In other words, cognitive change is utilized to decrease emotional response. (Kelly, 2012)
In addition to the above use, the term empathy is also used by some people to signify their heightened or higher sensitivity to the emotions and state of others. Empathy may be here conceptualized as the ability to fully “read” another person, completely translating each movement into understandable conversation. This, reportedly, can lead to both positive aspects such as a more skilled instinct for what is “behind the scenes” with people, but also to difficulties such as rapid over-stimulation, or overwhelming stress caused by an inability to protect oneself from this so-called ‘pick-up’. Such people may for example find crowds stressful simply due to picking up what is often described as “white noise” or multiple emotions as they pass through it, a phenomenon not to be confused with agoraphobia and sometimes informally known as crowd-sickness. A recurrent theme of discussion on such websites relates to the impact upon individuals, and therefore also methods (including mental practices, emotional processes and ritual) which anecdotally can help reduce the intensity of empathic reactions to others’ feelings to a more bearable level (informally called ‘shielding’ or emotional detachment).
Empathy in this sense is ascribed by such people to various mechanisms. These include simply more sophisticated subconscious processing of sensory cues or stronger emotional feedback than the norm, (i.e. the normal human experience but more so), and therefore fit within present models. Some people, perhaps due to synesthesia, believe it instead to be a direct emotional sense or a feel for others’ “energy”. The New Age religion(s) have constructed belief systems around anecdotal evidence of persons who claim to be empaths in this sense. This aspect of empathy is not clinically recognized, and someone calling themselves an “empath” usually does not intend to imply that they are gifted with any psychic ability.
In general empathy may be painful to oneself: seeing the pain of others, especially as broadcasted by mass media, can cause one temporary or permanent clinical depression; a phenomenon which is sometimes called weltschmerz. However, since a basic emotional understanding of others is an important pre-requisite of human relationships, subjects face a dilemma to protect oneself from the pain of empathy or seek to relate to other humans despite the potential risk of injury. 
Phases of Empathy
In regards to phases of empathy, current modeling suggests three phases. (1) The first phase is characterized by the formation of a quantum entanglement state of one human brain with another human brain or one human brain and an informational system within Nature. During this phase, the quantum states of the brains of the subjects, or one brain and the informational system of Nature, are entangled via either spatial proximity or some form of interaction or association. (2) The second phase is characterized by the sustainment of the entangled state of the two brains, or one brain and the informational system. In this phase, it is assumed that the formed entangled state of the two brains, or one brain and the informational system, may hold for an extended period of time in a region of the brain under special conditions. (3) The third phase is characterized by the collapsing of the entanglement state between the two brains, or a brain and informational system. It is when the entangled state of the two brains, or brain and information system, is collapsed by the measurement of one of the brains that the brain states of both individuals synchronize to be definite states from an entangled state. At this time, in regards to tele-empathy, the other individual, at-a-distance, will perceive the change. In regards to clair-empathy, the experient, regardless of space-time variables associated with the informational system or the group or populous they retrieve emotional experiences regarding, will perceive the change. Such modeling continues by assuming that when information is in an entangled state [superposition] no definite perception in relation to the state yet exists. However, when the superposition state collapses into a defined state, a definite perception in relation to the collapse appears. It is at this time that the assumed empathic effect becomes perceptible. (Kelly, 2012)
Types of Empathy
Empathic simulation has been defined as “a case in which an individual’s emotional experience appears to directly produce a similar emotional experience in someone else without the intervention of the five senses.” In other words, the empathist’s emotional experience produces a similar emotional experience in subjects or vice versa. Via this type of empathy, the subjects and empathist do not “know” the emotional experience of the other participants, nor is the emotional experience “impressed.” In the case of this type of empathy, the empathist does not “know” empathically what the emotional experience of the subjects are, but rather it appears that the emotional experience of the empathist and subjects instantaneously become qualitatively identical. However, reports in regards to this form of tele-empathy suggest exact, or nearly exact, emotional experiences. This type of empathy also appears to be more non-invasive as subjects are typically is unaware that, or do not “know” that, the emotional experience is “not their own,” as it appears to be less intrusive than empathic cognition or impression. The skilled empathist would however be able to identify that the simulated emotional experience originated from him/her if the empathist knowingly shared the emotion with subjects. In other words, the empathist can share his/her own emotional experiences with subjects, or the empathist can evoke the sharing process of the subject’s emotional experience to replace his/her own emotional experience. In the end, I believe the most efficient way to view empathic simulation is as though the emotional experiences have be shared via the exact transmission of the experience from one participant to the other. The most common way in which this type of empathy is utilized is to provide comfort and or motivation. In regards to comfort, if the empathist and subjects find themselves in a situation in which only the empathist feels comfortable or safe [e.g. a lacking of fear], or vice versa, the empathist can share his/her own emotional experience, or fear-neutral emotional episode, with the subjects, whereby non-invasively sharing his/her sense of security and comfort with the subjects. A similar instance of this involves the sharing of the empathists feeling that an action is a “good idea,” possibly due to neutralizing the emotional experiences of the subjects in regards to fear, shame, guilt, etc. This sense of security is shared with the subjects leading the subjects to often bypass their natural tendencies. (Kelly, 2012)
Empathic interaction is the causal influence of one mind on another’s emotional state without the intervention of the five senses.” Per my own research, individuals who engage in empathic interaction [i.e. empathic impressionists] appear to do so in an authoritative manner as a command. These commands can be either suggestive, which is characteristic of a mild likelihood of influencing the emotions of subjects per the needs of the empathist, or compulsive, which is characteristic of a very strong likelihood of influencing the emotions of subjects per the needs of the empathist. The empathic impressionist does this as a means to instruct subjects to feel a particular way that is accommodating to the empathist. However, it appears that there may be an associated hypnotic element in regards to empathic interaction. Hypnogenic empathic interaction is a form of empathic interaction that is assumed involved in causing a mild hypnotic state in subjects, possibly involving impressed emotions related to relief, which results in the behaviors of relaxation or decompression, via an empathists command. This relaxed state allows for a more dominant approach by the empathist in influencing the emotions of others, and allows subjects to be more susceptible to impression. Unlike empathic simulation, this impressionistic process is void of the empathist having a similar emotional experience at the time of impression on subjects. In other words, the empathist is not simulating their own emotional experience onto subjects, rather the empathist is “generating” an emotional experience of their choosing in others that will be accommodating to the empathists needs/intentions. Hypnotic empathic interaction appears to be the strongest form of empathy and the most dangerous, raising an assortment of moral and ethical questions as to how such an ability should be utilized in practical applications. In regards to the emotional state of the empathist, in intentional empathic interaction, the empathist is typically in a relaxed state, while in regards to spontaneous empathic interaction, the empathist is typically in a stressed state. (Kelly, 2012)
Empathic cognition is defined as “the phenomenologically indirect knowledge of the collective emotional experience of a large group or population via Nature.” In cases of empathic clairvoyant cognition, an experient is retrieving information from Nature, i.e. the experient is able to “pick up on” a current collective emotional experience recorded in Nature. (i.e. even if the emotional experience is current, it is assumed that Nature “knows” about the experience, and therefore has a “record” of the experience). The informational system from which the collective emotional experience originates does appear to play an intentional part in the emotional information teleportation processes. In other words, the process is not assumed entirely evoked by the empathist, whereby possibly suggesting Natures ever-present contribution to the survival (well-being) of the empathist. Here, the empathist will become aware of Nature-based information (e.g. collective emotional experiences), but should be able to clearly identify that the information did not originate in their own mind. Here the emotional information is received and perceived by the empathist, but the information did not develop from a chain of prior emotions belonging to the empathist. Experient of spontaneous empathic clairvoyant cognitive phenomena are those who’s acquired emotional experience appear to “pop up” rather than being intentionally requested. Empathists of intentional empathic clairvoyant cognition are experients whom select or specify a particular group from which they wish to extract collective emotional information regarding. A single temporal facet of empathic clairvoyant cognition appears to exist, which is a contemporaneous temporal facet in which seems to involve the “perception of emotional information about organisms or events involving organisms through psychical means during the time at which they are occurring.” (Kelly, 2012)
- Kelly, Theresa M. (2012) Empathy: A Quantum Approach – The Psychical Influence of Emotion,
Charleston, South Carolina USA (ISBN: 9781105482885).
- Empatheia, Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, at Perseus
- Preston, Stephanie D. and Frans B. M. de Waal. 2002. Empathy: its ultimate and proximate bases.
- Wikipedia – No source cited.
- Kelly, Theresa M.(2013) Quantum Psychics – Scientifically Understand, Enhance and Control Your Psychic Ability,
Charleston, South Carolina USA (ISBN: 9780557034024).
- Kelly, Theresa M. (2012) Empathy: A Quantum Approach – The Psychical Influence of Emotion,
Charleston, South Carolina USA (ISBN: 9781105482885).
- Science Degrees in Empathic Studies – Empathic Studies with the University of Alternative Studies.
- Professional Certification Program in Scientific Empathology – University of Alternative Studies.
- Empathy Course of Instruction – Become a student of Empathic Studies.
- Empathy Courses & Degree Programs – An array of courses and degree programs offered online.
- Empathy Resource Center – An array of resources, links, publications, and more.