‘Musking’ Empathy: The Future Of Leadership Without Emotional Connection?

Yes, you read it right. I am not talking about Masking Empathy, which could occur when people consciously or unconsciously hide their true emotions, but rather ‘Musking’ Empathy if the English dictionary allows me this creative liberty. I would define it as the act of downplaying, rejecting or even reframing empathy as unnecessary, particularly when coming from individuals who may themselves struggle to experience it.

Elon Musk’s recent comments on The Joe Rogan Experience podcast, released on February 28, 2025, provide an interesting case study. Musk suggested that Western civilisation has a fundamental weakness; what he called the “empathy exploit.” He argued that empathy is being weaponised and that society’s emotional reactions are being manipulated in ways that could lead to “civilisational suicide” (CNN, 2025).

Musk’s perspective seems to suggest that empathy-driven policies are harming society by prioritising individual needs over the collective good.

I couldn’t help but wonder… what if Musk’s rejection of conventional empathy is more than just a philosophical stance? What if it’s, in part, a projection of his own neurological or emotional disposition, an attempt to redefine something he may not experience in the same way others do? Rather than dismissing empathy outright, is he reframing it to fit a worldview where emotional connection is secondary to logic and efficiency?

This brings us to an important question: Can the Nordic countries be entirely wrong in their approach to empathy?

Sweden, along with other Nordic nations, has built some of the world’s most economically stable, socially cohesive and innovative societies; all while embracing empathy as a cornerstone of governance. If empathy were truly a “civilisational weakness,” as Musk suggests, how have these nations managed to thrive in global competitiveness, economic growth and societal well-being?

Perhaps the issue isn’t empathy itself but how it is structured and applied. The Nordic model demonstrates that empathy-driven policies don’t have to lead to inefficiency or societal decline; instead, they can strengthen economic resilience, innovation and long-term stability when paired with pragmatic decision-making. A compelling example of this balance that comes to my mind is Finland’s education system. Unlike many Western nations that prioritise standardised testing and competitive learning, Finland has designed an education model centred on equity, well-being and trust. By prioritising holistic development over rigid academic benchmarks, Finland has cultivated a system that fosters creativity, nurtures student potential and supports economic competitiveness.

Could Empathy be a Flaw?

Musk’s argument is not entirely without merit. Emotional reactions, if unchecked, can lead to impulsive decisions, short-term thinking and an inability to prioritise logic over feelings. History has shown that sometimes, the most effective decisions are made by those who can detach from personal emotions and focus on long-term impact.

In high-pressure environments, such as running a large organisation, launching a rocket or making billion-dollar decisions, excessive emotional involvement can slow progress. Musk himself has been described as an extremely high-functioning individual with a relentless focus on efficiency, problem-solving and innovation. His biographer, Walter Isaacson and various former colleagues have noted that he struggles with recognising and responding to the emotional needs of those around him (Isaacson, 2023).

If someone naturally lacks strong empathetic instincts, it would make sense for them to reframe empathy not as a critical leadership skill but as a liability. If you do not feel empathy as strongly as others, the logical response is to view it as an unnecessary distraction or a flaw in societal thinking.

This raises an important question: If someone influential, like Musk, holds this perspective, how much could it shape leadership trends? Could we see a shift toward a model of decision-making that increasingly deprioritises human connection?

Empathy Must Evolve, Not Be Dismissed

For those of us who have witnessed transformational leadership moments where emotional intelligence, including empathy, has profoundly impacted decision-making and team dynamics, this kind of minimisation of empathy feels unsettling. 

Neuroscientific research shows that empathy is not just a nice-to-have trait; it is central to human cooperation, team cohesion and effective leadership.

Mariano Sigman, a leading neuroscientist, has explored how conversations literally shape the brain. Meaningful dialogue, which requires empathy, influences neural pathways, helping people refine their perspectives, build trust and make better decisions collectively. When we listen to one another with empathy, our brains synchronise. This biological mechanism is not just about being “nice”. It is about maximising collective intelligence.

Brené Brown, another prominent voice in this space, emphasises that true empathy is not about indulging every emotional reaction but about genuinely understanding and acknowledging another person’s reality. As she puts it, “Empathy fuels connection. Sympathy drives disconnection.” Leaders who lack the ability to connect on this level are at risk of alienating their teams and creating environments where psychological safety and thus innovation deteriorates.

A Call for Balance: Empathy in Leadership

While it is important not to be governed solely by emotions, dismissing empathy altogether is just as dangerous. The key is balance. This means integrating both cognitive empathy (understanding perspectives intellectually) and emotional empathy (feeling and responding appropriately).

We must be mindful not to redefine empathy in a way that strips it of its real meaning. Just because one high-profile leader downplays its importance does not mean that it suddenly becomes irrelevant. In fact, the most effective leaders are those who can bridge the gap between emotional intelligence and forward-thinking strategy.

Instead of rejecting empathy as a weakness, we should be asking:

• How can we ensure that empathy remains a guiding force in decision-making without compromising logic and strategy?
• How do we ensure that the next generation of leaders does not lose sight of human connection in pursuit of efficiency?

The real challenge is not whether we should be empathetic, but how we use empathy wisely. Let’s ensure that ‘empathy’ does not become a buzzword that loses its essence, nor a scapegoat for inefficiency.

Sources:

• Isaacson, W. (2023). Elon Musk. Simon & Schuster.
• Rogan, J. (Host). (2025, February 28). The Joe Rogan Experience [Audio podcast episode]. In The Joe Rogan Experience.
• Sigman, M. (2016). The Secret Life of the Mind. Little, Brown and Company.
• Brown, B. (2018). Dare to Lead. Random House.