This research examines why ordinary people often remain passive in the face of global humanitarian, environmental, and social crises, despite widespread awareness and access to information. Rather than treating passivity as a moral failure, the study investigates the psychological and social mechanisms that prevent individuals from translating concern into action.

Using structured qualitative interviews with students and adults, supplemented by comparative analysis of prominent philanthropists' biographies and writings, the research identifies recurring barriers to engagement. Most participants perceived their individual impact as negligible, defined "help" narrowly as large donations or activism, and expressed strong mistrust toward charitable institutions. While suffering was cognitively acknowledged, it was rarely emotionally internalized. In contrast, philanthropists and activists consistently acted after direct exposure to suffering, suggesting that emotional proximity - not superior morality - drives engagement.

The findings indicate that passivity stems primarily from emotional distance and perceived powerlessness rather than indifference or selfishness. When crises are abstract, mediated, and distant, individuals feel neither urgency nor responsibility.

Building on these insights, the paper proposes an engineering concept called the Empathy Booth: a multisensory, technology-driven installation designed to reduce emotional distance by immersing users in real human stories through sound, visuals, environmental feedback, and AI-guided narration. The system emphasizes accessible, non-monetary actions, restoring a sense of agency rather than demanding charity.

This work contributes to human-centered engineering and design ethics by exploring how technology can responsibly foster empathy and motivate action. It argues that if technology can optimize efficiency, it can also be designed to strengthen moral engagement - helping people not only understand global suffering, but feel connected enough to respond.