Emotional Intelligence
Related Topics
"mark lages" m.la...@worldnet.att.net
Any of you here familiar with the idea of "emotional intelligence?" If so, what are your thoughts on the topic? Is this just another pop psychology buzzword, or does the concept have validity?
....Mark
psmith9 ...@aol.com (PSmith9626)
dear mark, Just more psychobabble. Emotional insight does exist, as does social intelligence.
The psychobabbly people love to dilute words and create extra words. Thus empathy instead of sympathy, kinethetic intelligence/gifted ( so that the sports team can get money for the gifted kids).
One might try to say that a greater ability to have emotional insights and to understand their connections is emotional intelligence but that would really a stretch.
In my experience with psychoanalysis such ability is based on ordinary analytical intelligence plus really hard work.
best penny p.s. "I don't have a life style; I have a life."--Emst Strauss ( former ***istant of Einstein) ( personal com 1980)
ipsedi ...@aol.com (Ipse Dixyt)
I believe Daniel Goleman coined the term "emotional intellingence" in his bestseller of a few years ago.
Both of the above, IMO.
I can provide you with lots of web addresses, which you can also find yourself, but I believe you want to initiate a "live" discussion, not an exchange of information, since you asked: One of the main ingredients of EI is resilience. IMO high relisience is at least as important as a high IQ.
"mark lages" m.la...@worldnet.att.net
I agree. So does emotional skill. But I too have a difficult time labelling these as forms of "intelligence." LOL!
....Mark
zookumar zooku...@accesswave.ca
Why? Linear reasoning, spatial reasoning, intuition, verbal skills, emotional insight, etc. ... all originate in the brain. If the brain is the engine for human intelligence, or even its temporary housing (eg. for those who believe the soul exists independently of physical matter), then what makes emotional insight less worthy of the engine (or housing) than, say, spatial reasoning? -zookumar-
"mark lages" m.la...@worldnet.att.net
Actually, I believe he borrowed the term from others.
Yes, there is lots of info on the web and on the bookstore shelves.
Okay. Here is a question I have. Is resilience really a form of "intellegence." Sure it is an important component of success in life. But should we be referring to it as a form of "intelligence?" For that matter, is any emotion really "intelligence?" ....Mark
"Matt Beckwith" doctorbeckw...@yahoo.com
This is an interesting idea. Is emotional resilience the same as having a thick skin? This has been shown to correlate with a higher level of serotonin in the brain.
"mark lages" m.la...@worldnet.att.net
I wouldn't say emotional insight is any less worthy. I simply question whether or not we should be calling it "intelligence." Lots of things originate from the brain. The fact that they originate from the brain does not mean that they are forms of intelligence.
Doesn't intelligence imply reasoning? Don't emotional insights involve mental activities beyond reasoning?
....Mark
zookumar zooku...@accesswave.ca
But why shouldn't it be cl***ified as an element in the set labelled "intelligence".
If they integrate with the decisionmaking, are they not, in fact, bound within the intelligence set? Here, I'm not talking about the brain as an extension of the involuntary nervous system but as a center of conscious decisionmaking. I don't think intelligence automatically implies reasoning. We can call some behaviour of knowledge, reasoning, and define it as a component of intelligence. But knowledge, itself, is a component of intelligence, namely, the database. Now, suppose we define intelligence with at least two identifiable attributes: the data, and the methods on the data. In this definition, reasoning is one "value" for the methods attribute. But why couldn't we say that emotional insight is another "value" for the methods attribute, ie. another method? And since reasoning is a component of intelligence, why can't emotional insights be as well (since they are both methods of the method attribute of intelligence)?
Indeed, I can think of at least one more value for the method attribute of intelligence. Instinct. Not all individuals have the same instincts; some have superior instincts. In decisionmaking, instincts are sometimes just as important as reasoning. Kasparov's instincts in chess, say, are just as important to his dominance in chess as are his reasoning abilities. I mean, if intelligence implies reasoning, as you suggest above, then that is tantamount to saying "only reasoning matters" ... but I'm not sure that is quite the case.
-zookumar-
"Tracy Yucikas" tyuci...@cts.com
good question - --
tracy
deletethisbit.mcar ...@ozemail.com.au (Edward McArdle)
I think I am probably high on emotional intelligence, in that I am aware that (a) most people like me (b) I can often get people to do what I want them to do (c) I have a lot of empathy In general I am aware of my own behaviour and its effects on others.
On the other hand, I am very inhibited emotionally. I don't become emotionally involved. I worried about this. I don't become upset if someone I know dies, because I know that is life, but I do become upset when someone is sick, because I am not able to do anything to help. I was a little relieved to discover I did not become emotionally involved when I had prostate cancer for a time, so it is not only an emotional detachment from others. I thought it was interesting, and ***umed I would get better, or not.
my URL, http://www.ozemail.com.au/~mcardle
psmith9 ...@aol.com (PSmith9626)
dear tracy, Terror states also originate in the brain.
Is that a kind of intelligence?
best penny I did say, that I prefer the term "emotional insight".
zookumar zooku...@accesswave.ca
Well ... it's much more difficult for less intelligent brains to act more intelligently than for more intelligent brains to act less intelligently. In any event, I was referring to the brain as a conscious decision-making center. A sleeping IQ of 200 is less intelligent than an awakened IQ of 100. In addition, a terrorized IQ of 200 tends to act less intelligently than the same IQ when it's not under perceived threat. Anxiety also originates in the brain. I suppose to the extent that anxiety affects decision-making, it can be viewed as a kind of anti-intelligence, ie. an element of the intelligence set oriented against the set. I mean, could we not liken terror states and anxiety states as transitory autoimmune diseases (of the mind)? Eg. with the optimized state of intelligence being that state of the brain when all its "autoimmunities" are turned off? IOW, terror, anxiety, arousal, (-)instincts, etc. being elements of the intelligence set that are configured to destroy intelligent processes; with linear reasoning, spatial reasoning, intuition, (+)instincts, etc. being elements of the intelligence set that help construct intelligent processes? In this modelling, to the extent that one has a surfeit or deficit of any of the different elements in the intelligence set ultimately determines the quality of one's intelligence (of relative intelligence, in general). To wit, think of intelligence as a linear combination of the elements of the intelligence set; with three types of elements in the set: the mind expanders, the mind diminishers, and the mind bystanders. Individuals of exceptional intelligence probably have combinations with a surfeit of expanders and/or a deficit of diminishers.
Yup.
-zookumar-
"Tracy Yucikas" tyuci...@cts.com
dear penny, "emotional insight" is probably better terminology in that it is more descriptive. Maybe because the vocabulary for emotions has been around longer than the vocabulary for intelligence.
Terror states might be a more limbic reaction and possibly serve as a survival mechanism; little or no "thinkning" involved. So I'd hesitate more on applying the "intelligence" label.
Emotional insight on the other hand, seems to involve a degree of "fact-sifting" and situation-analysis. Like a lot of "intelligence" factors, much of the "reasoning" takes place at other-than-consciousness levels, and is only explained in retrospect at a conscious level in a rationalization modality.
This is not unlike mathematical understanding (at least at times when "flashes of insight" occur out of the blue and can only be explained afterward via a form of narratization that is sorta "logical" in structure ...tells the path of "how to get there next time" ... but not 'how I got there the *first* time" ) Like the difference between scientist and technician.
The location of all mental activity is in the brain I suppose, but the *ability to process* mental "stuff" is maybe what is (admittedly "loosely") refered to as intelligence.
I don't think that a person who "eats well" has "appetite inteligence".
I had a girlfriend long ago who I called "emotionally intelligent" more or less spontaneously (before the term became a rallying banner for those who couldn't do spatial reasoning <ducks for cover>) ... She just amazed me at her ability to "get thru" emotional obstacles that tripped up "less emotionally insightful" people.
ok, probably better than "emotionally intelligent" ...
-- - -
tracy ...
"mark lages" m.la...@worldnet.att.net
Here is a partial dictionary definition of intelligence: "The ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations" This would seem to support your thoughts.
....Mark
ipsedi ...@aol.com (Ipse Dixyt)
I agree that 'intelligence' in "emotional intelligence" connotes a slightly different meaning. As you said about cognitive styles, EI is a different dimension.
But I wouldn't call it maturity, because I ***ociate 'maturity' with (old) age.
One can display a high level of EI at a very early age, while many senior citizens are emotionally... imature.
"outstanley" curti...@gte.net
I tend to agree. However, haven't more than a few of us met a person who can do math intuitively, or solve a given problem without any reasoning? Or draw like Raphael at first pencil?
There is an architect, quite prominent, who never went to school.
There is a poet who never studied English.
We should never put a limit on what we are allowed to draw from. Dubuffet never studied art, yet he is one of our great designers. Francis Bacon took no art lessons, but still one of the great painters of this century.
It is OK to draw from any data base, including emotional.--dennis ...
"outstanley" curti...@gte.net
Tracy-- Your post is one that will resonate and will take time to respond adequately to. Emotions are personal firecrackers.
Some don't know how to set them off, nor how to appreciate them, once they explode.
As for me, I am a bit of an emotional time bomb. Little things set me off.
You build up a relationship and then that person leaves and aww shit-- I tear up, like a big sissy. I hate huggy-kissy stuff.
So I keep my distance. thsi is an example of an emotional IQ.
To be sure, not a good one, or mature one, but one that i am aware has a bearing on my life. I would not change it. I think of the people who have helped me, who have helped others. I rather like emotion and see no reason why it shouldn't be included in some IQ test. Schiller liked it too. To cry and yell lets you know you are alive. --dennis ...
"outstanley" curti...@gte.net
Penny-- Hold on a sec. Emotions have a great play in our daily lives.
What is the harm in investigating the source of emotional perpsectives? It is likely the least developed of our senses.
It may be psycho babble merely due to the interference of psychiatrty. If we have a range of emotions, I think there is a very good reason for having that. I have more to say, but am waithing to see responses.---dennis ...
"outstanley" curti...@gte.net
Let's say that ALL human responses have the potential for a certain intelligence. Let's ***ume that advanced motorskills, ESP, Savantism, OBE, Emotianalism, and any number of other human traits have the potential for research and recognition.
To my view, the potential of the human brain is the last frontier, and one that will be capable of investigation for a long time to come.
It is how and IF we use these skills that define us as civilised beings. --dennis ...
"Tracy Yucikas" tyuci...@cts.com
Dennis - - - hope you're doing ok dealing with yer own emotional state <jk> ... I've heard mention of an "EQ" for "emotional quotient" similar to the obvious and maybe les controversial. Emotions and intelligence are fer sure two different things and it' seems plain goofy to try to measure them both with a single number/single scale.
maybe, just maybe people would be better off if there actuially was an EQ test that you took along with the standard gamut of aptitude testing and there was open discussion on where people were coming from and it was just an accepted part of life instead of the way it's dealt with now.
I remember a blue primal scream alongside the levees of the Rio Grande way late at night decades ago and it sure did feel alive and all the night creatures were silent for a few mnutes ... or maybe it was the ears remembering how to hear the small sounds again.
rolller coaster riding on thin ice over eggshells juggling cats and chain saws and drinkning MacDonalds' coffee without getting to cool it off falling asleep by the swimming pool during a stage three power alert and wondering where you left the SPF 5000 life-savers as you find yerself in cl*** dressed in underwear wondering how the helll all this stuff happened.
But it's just another day.
dunnno, tracy ...
zookumar zooku...@accesswave.ca
Not really. Emotion and emotional intelliegnce are two different things. Emotion is a noun. Emotional is an adjective for the noun intelligence. Why can't intelligence be categorized with "emotional" being one of the categories? Other categories could include "abstract", "scientific", "artistic", "visual", "olfactory", "extrasensory", etc. I mean, a dog's superior sense of smell would make it more intelligent than humans in that one area, no? Really, what is intelligence if not a tool that acquires and/or processes knowledge. And a superior intelligence would be a superior tool, no?
To wit, Deep Blue versus Radio Shack's best chess software. Now, is that a watering down of the term *intelligence*, an overloading of the term, or adding full dimension to the term? I think it's the last. Intelligence need not always be useful ... but who are we to deny the fit of creativity above no matter how bizarre it may seem to us? Indeed, on a standard scale of creativity, it would be low-grade ... but it *is* creative intelligence, nonetheless.
-zookumar-
"outstanley" curti...@gte.net
Tracy--- You are a hell of a writer. Wish I could write like you, so impromptu.
Of course I did not mean to evaluate EQ , IQ, or several other "Q's" by the same number, result, or fact gathering. Emotions, at least to me, stay well in the background. Not to worry. You seem to hint that emotions should be more, um, accepted in that it is a field little known or cared about in terms of other avenues; august areas like physics, medicine, math, astronomy and so on. Emotions have a very real, if poorly defined, place in life, whether human or animal, or even plant. It was proved long ago that plants and lower organisms have a pleasure-pain mechanism for survival. Can we say that emotions are the gut reaction? The so called instinct? The hunch? Or even the Attila of the Hunch?
Emotions and intelligence may be two different things, but are connected none the less. My sub-point was to have emotions looked at more throroughly by scientists, and see if, what,and how emotions affect everday life planet-wide. Emotions can be controlled and channeled. Tremendous source of individual energy, and potential. Some call it p***ion. ----dennis ...
pepe_le_ ...@435.org (Pat Sullivan)
> If so, what are your thoughts on the topic? Is this just another pop
> psychology buzzword, or does the concept have validity?
> ....Mark Hi Mark, How would you develop a test for EI (emotional intelligence)? How could you grade one? Can a researcher provoke a desired emotional state in a research subject? Can any human researcher filter his/her own emotional bias from testing results?
I say emotions are too ambiguous to codify along the lines of cognitive abilities. I agree that a certain set of emotional skills are far more important to successful living than pure cognitive skills. But saying that somebody has the "right" emotional responses and somebody else has the "wrong" responses just doesn't sit well with me.
I prefer to think of emotional intelligence as the skill to read non-verbal communications of others. This can be taught and therefore is subject to increase over one's lifetime, unlike purely cognitive abilities.
Later, Pat Sullivan
"Tracy Yucikas" tyuci...@cts.com
yo dennis ...
alla time impromptu ... but you see what I'm saying and understanding stuff is a BIG talent. I rememeber seeing the stuff about "plant feeling" a few years back and thouhgt about hooking up some meters to talk to the critters and see the woreld thru their eyes for a while.
And yep, no sense mucking up measurements by trying to make a 2D measurement of 2 separate 1D quantities ... I took a programming cl*** once where teach said that you COULD make 3D arrays, but the increase in storage capability was not worth the effort except in very special cases .. and IQ / EQ sure ain't one of them .. tho I'm off by one dimension, same argument applies .... and nothing reallly matters except what gets done with the data to "improve things" anyway.
and now we're lost in a strange little blind alley where hyper-location says to make a new paragraph.
Attila the Hunch There was a science-fiction story (I think it was ACClarke) where the eaerth was contacted by an galactic intelligence and in order to form a psychic bridge fore successful coommunication, it was decided that the only way to generated sufficient "psychic force" was to have the entire planet experience simultaneous orgasm, ... cool whimsical little story .
( ... standard ACClarke disclaimer here ... ) ( ... standard sex-reference disclaimer here ... ) and whether emotions are cause or effect or something else in the world-wide balance of happiness, I still gotta believe that de-stigmatizing the subject couldn't hurt.
oh well, just opinion of course ...
traCY ...
| To Top |