Well, thinking that everyone would share equally as much of their income and assets that system would be able to work long-term. I was thinking more about crimes and legal systems and how that would change if everyone would care for each other in the same way we care for ourselves. New problems would most probably arise but that would depend more on the level of empathy we have for one person compared to another than on the reason for the crime itself... If I were to rob a bank in order to help someone in need of money, I would face a moral dilemma trying to see who is more worthy of my help and who would benefit the most of my actions.

Would that be because we in our brain think of ourselves as another person, or as if there's a difference between the brain and the soul? Like we can see ourselves as a person like anyone else but at the same time be ourselves?

For me, "total" empathy means someone that cares for someone solely because they feel empathy for them, and gains nothing by helping or feeling empathy for them. Most things we do nowadays is for personal gain and because we are affected by the consequences of our actions. Most people wouldn't help someone if it would have a negative impact on our life. "Total" empathy means someone caring for another person without caring about how it affects them personally.

So according to you one can not care for everyone at the same time because it's too much to handle? That would support the idea that you automatically care more for some than others, but this doesn't have to be logical or based on how much a person deserves your empathy. Often it's linked to how important a certain person is to you personally or how close you are to this person, which in itself is linked to us caring more about ourselves than others. But if we were to imagine that we cared more for others than ourselves, then how would we sort out who we felt more empathy for (if we can't feel empathy for everyone at the same time)?

I think the biggest reason as to why people feel a lack of meaning in their life is due to us being pushed into the idea that life has to be in a certain way in order to have a purpose. I think it's more about the relationship between purpose and the action of fulfilling the purpose that makes us question our life's meaning. If we were to treat the purpose of our life and our reaction to knowing our purpose as two separate things we would feel content regardless if we achieved our life's purpose or not, because then we would feel safe in the notion that our life has a meaning, but it's up to us if we want to pursue it or not. And this is, of course, a consequence of societal norms.