Hey, I bet you didn't think this was how your thread was going to go? Are you pleased it took this turn? — counterpunch

I didn't expect it to be about me. How about you?

:party:

I didn't expect it to be about me. How about you? — Shawn

So you're surprised? Is it a good surprise?

So you're surprised? Is it a good surprise? — counterpunch

Well, what about you? Do you struggle with depression or other malady of the mind, emotional or otherwise?

I'm just wallowsome, as I've said.

Well, what about you? Do you struggle with depression or other malady of the mind, emotional or otherwise? I'm just wallowsome, as I've said. — Shawn

No, I'm fine. What does wallowsome mean?

Do you not deserve to be satisfied?
— counterpunch

I just wallow. :blush: — Shawn

Had you said "I just swallow," it'd have been much funnier.

I suppose this is mostly about men(?) rather than women? — Shawn

I know more about men (being a man) than I do about women. There seem to be plenty of women around whose EQ is about the same as men -- just flavored differently.

BTW, I don't think it is the 'equipment' that is the problem -- the cell phones, pads, laptops, desktops, gaming consoles, television. On this score I differ from McLuhan: the message is the message and people are immersed in A LOT of messages which have nothing to add to any kind of intelligence, social / intellectual / emotional.

People are "schooled" to be unreflective consumers by all the various sellers out there -- everyone from Apple to Zumiez.

Given that your OP is not based in research — counterpunch

Come now, Of course it's not researched. His OP is a seat-of-his-pants impression. Useful conversation, even in intellectual settings, would come to a screeching halt if we had to stick to even faintly researched phenomenon.

According to my research I am unanimous in this opinion.

It might sound presumptuous to say this; but, are people becoming less emotionally intelligent? — Shawn

If EQ is quantifiable like IQ, the question is an empirical one. You just compare today's numbers to yesterday's. If EQ is a nebulous concept dressed as a scientific one, then that's the bigger problem with EQ.

No, I'm fine. — counterpunch

But, we don't extract precious minerals from sea-water. We don't have geothermal utilized as much as it should be given its LCOE, and we definitely don't have enough nuclear power plants from cheap Ur232 from seawater extracted. We haven't made efforts to extract tritium from sea-water or Lithium-7 and Lithium-6 from seawater for fusion. Why is this all happening, when these are very rational and cheap things for the economy.

Doesn't this make you angry or at least frustrated?

What does wallowsome mean? — counterpunch

It just means that one sort of wallows around, a comfort behavior whenever needed. Eat, sleep, do what you want.

But, we don't extract precocious minerals from sea-water. We don't have geothermal utilized as much as it should be, and we definitely don't have enough nuclear power plants from cheap Ur232 from seawater extracted. We haven't made efforts to extract tritium from sea-water or Lithium-7 and Lithium-6 from seawater. Why is this all happening, when these are very rational and cheap things for the economy.

Doesn't this make you angry or at least frustrated? — Shawn

Yes, I'm absolutely furious about it. That's what makes me fine. You, I'm worried about. What makes you angry?

BTW, I don't think it is the 'equipment' that is the problem -- the cell phones, pads, laptops, desktops, gaming consoles, television. — Bitter Crank

Then where does the problem begin with? Instead of it being a manifestation only apparent with the 'equipment'?

I know more about men (being a man) — Bitter Crank

Yeah, that's how!

If EQ is quantifiable like IQ, the question is an empirical one. You just compare today's numbers to yesterday's. If EQ is a nebulous concept dressed as a scientific one, then that's the bigger problem with EQ. — Hanover

I see, or think I see the problem. So, it's made up or something?

Yes, I'm absolutely furious about it. That's what makes me fine. You, I'm worried about. — counterpunch

Don't worry. Be happy. I already read Silent Spring.

Don't worry. Be happy. I already read Silent Spring. — Shawn

Are you calling me a pest? Then tell me so, you coward.

Are you calling me a pest? Do you want to kill me? Is that it? Do it then, you coward. — counterpunch

Nuu, none of that. I'm just wallowsome. Sorry!

Take care.

:eyes:

You take care too Shawn, and I'm sorry, for trying (unsuccessfully) to make you express any emotion at all. I can only apologise for my conduct, and assure you I had the best of intentions - initially, to understand what you mean by emotional intelligence, but later I became concerned by your apparent absence of emotion. A healthy individual would be calling me names by now.

You take care too Shawn, and I'm sorry, for trying (unsuccessfully) to make you express any emotion at all. I can only apologise for my conduct, and assure you I had the best of intentions - initially, to understand what you mean by emotional intelligence, but later I became concerned by your apparent absence of emotion. A healthy individual would be calling me names by now. — counterpunch

It's a safe-safe. I hope everyone is comfortable.

It might sound presumptuous to say this; but, are people becoming less emotionally intelligent? — Shawn

I think they are.

I mean, when you start reading online responses like, LOL, ROFL, or OMG, then is that indicative of a low EQ? — Shawn

In what sense? Do you mean such responses are rude to others - and so unempathetic? Or is it that they express the emotional state of those who use them, and that's indicative of low EQ?

I hesitate to say this; but, it seems to me that having a developed EQ is becoming harder and harder nowadays in real life. — Shawn

What do you put this down to? Too much screen time not enough social interaction maybe?

I think they are. — counterpunch

What makes you say so?

In what sense? Do you mean such responses are rude to others - and so unempathetic? Or is it that they express the emotional state of those who use them, and that's indicative of low EQ? — counterpunch

I think it was a poor example, yet I also think it expresses as much as the word "dam", "fuck", or "this sucks", does. Does that mean anything? Perhaps, or perhaps not.

What do you put this down to? Too much screen time not enough social interaction maybe? — counterpunch

I don't really know. I sometimes grow tired of English language, or perhaps something else. But, in general I think it has to do with some kind of phenomenon of the current times.

Is emotional intelligence a real thing? Or is it shorthand for something more complex? Perhaps it is how people manifest the big five personality traits. There is a vast literature on this.

extraversion (outgoing/energetic vs. solitary/reserved)
agreeableness (friendly/compassionate vs. critical/rational)
openness to experience (inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious)
conscientiousness (efficient/organized vs. extravagant/careless)
neuroticism (sensitive/nervous vs. resilient/confident)

Agreeableness and conscientiousness would probably explain what some people describe as emotionally intelligent. People low on agreeableness are often described as unable or unwilling to read the room.

People on the Autism spectrum may be experienced as not reading other's queues and perhaps not having a theory of mind which impacts on what people are calling EI. Sociopaths don't care about other's emotions. And many people work in cultures where having empathy and being able to understand others is not valued.

Are people generally less able to pick up on other's needs today than they were, say, 30 years ago? In my experience (which is limited and anecdotal), I have no reason to think it is any worse.

Is emotional intelligence a real thing? Or is it shorthand for something more complex? Perhaps it is how people manifest the big five personality traits. There is a vast literature on this. — Tom Storm

I'm not sure if personality traits are related very much, but I could be wrong.

Here's what a psych-today article reads:

Emotional intelligence refers to the ability to identify and manage one’s own emotions, as well as the emotions of others. Emotional intelligence is generally said to include a few skills: namely emotional awareness, or the ability to identify and name one’s own emotions; the ability to harness those emotions and apply them to tasks like thinking and problem solving; and the ability to manage emotions, which includes both regulating one’s own emotions when necessary and helping others to do the same. — Emotional Intelligence

I know more about men (being a man) than I do about women. There seem to be plenty of women around whose EQ is about the same as men -- just flavored differently. — Bitter Crank

I don't think that you're correct about this, but it doesn't have anything to do with innate femininity. Women have more of a need to analyze social relationships than men, and, so, do tend to be more emotionally intelligent by that account. The paradox to this, however, is that it can make you hypersensitive.

Emotional intelligence refers to the ability to identify and manage one’s own emotions, as well as the emotions of others. Emotional intelligence is generally said to include a few skills: namely emotional awareness, or the ability to identify and name one’s own emotions; the ability to harness those emotions and apply them to tasks like thinking and problem solving; and the ability to manage emotions, which includes both regulating one’s own emotions when necessary and helping others to do the same. — Emotional Intelligence

I think that that sums it up fairly well, but also think that it depends upon the situational context. When people will let you express emotions in certain ways, you can do so better. It otherwise is contingent upon circumstance or relies upon manipulation.

I've spent a lot of time thinking about what waitresses think about as a dishwasher. Managers often don't like what I did to feel welcome among the staff which was to generate a rhythm from the dishwasher so that everyone could work with certain degree of peace of mind and well. It was actually productive, but it convinces managers that they have to compete with you for control over the staff, and, so, they would often produce a situation wherein being friendly with me would put anyone else in a bad sort of way with them. A waitress wants to present herself in such a manner to where they are physically attractive enough to be quote unquote naturally liked without calling too much attention to herself. They also want to offer only the pretense of expressive individuality without having put nearly any thought into doing so whatsoever. You can call their chosen aesthetic something like "slacker punk". Waitresses have to think about things like this, and, so, tend to know more about them than other people do. If you apply such reasoning to other social situations, you can discover how women do know more than us. Anyone who is marginalized, in some ways, does, but there exists situations that require that women find certain things out, which do not arise quite so commonly for men, and, so, they do.

Emotional intelligence refers to the ability to identify and manage one’s own emotions, as well as the emotions of others. Emotional intelligence is generally said to include a few skills: namely emotional awareness, or the ability to identify and name one’s own emotions; the ability to harness those emotions and apply them to tasks like thinking and problem solving; and the ability to manage emotions, which includes both regulating one’s own emotions when necessary and helping others to do the same. — Emotional Intelligence

Clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson (whatever you make think of Lobster Man) says EQ is a myth and maintains that the kinds of behaviour reported above can be explained by where people sit on neuroticism and extraversion. Presumably those high in these two traits are unable to 'read' others and reflect upon the role emotion plays in their own and other's behaviour.

I think this kind of thing requires a fair bit of knowledge and scrupulous respect for the research to properly understand. But pop-psychology is spectacularly attractive to most of us.

I work with two clinical psychologists who also think EQ is dodgy.

It might sound presumptuous to say this; but, are people becoming less emotionally intelligent? — Shawn

See here for some criticism of the EI concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence#Criticisms

Reading Goleman's original book, my own impression is that EI is primarily about having a secular, (upper) middle class mentality and behavior. Esp. in popular use of the term, EQ measures a person's conformity to that particular standard.

Are people generally less able to pick up on other's needs today than they were, say, 30 years ago? In my experience (which is limited and anecdotal), I have no reason to think it is any worse. — Tom Storm

I do. The spread of democracy and the rule of law (which amounts to "power to the most powerful/rich") result in a decline of informal, silent understandings of what is "proper behavior". Where in the past, people would show consideration for others and expect it in return, they can now say "If you don't like something about me, sue me, see if you can do it / if it's worth it to you".

When lawsuits and calling the police were generally not realistic options, people would make an effort to get along with others. Now, with democracy and the rule of law, they don't have to.

Clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson (whatever you make think of Lobster Man) says EQ is a myth and maintains that the kinds of behaviour reported above can be explained by where people sit on neuroticism and extraversion. Presumably those high in these two traits are unable to 'read' others and reflect upon the role emotion plays in their own and other's behaviour. — Tom Storm

What about mindfulness or CBT? Seemingly, if there is an emotional quotient, then CBT seems to score very high on coefficients related to its measure... Ya?

Sorry don't see how this is related to EQ.

I find it absurd to state that EQ is 'made up'.

Though the cause of its measure is seemingly related to experience and emotional disorders (in my case) that had to be dealt with rather than simply 'putting up with them'.

As said, I believe that if EQ is related to measures of emotional tranquility or learned behaviors, then it would be harder to measure than something like a general coefficient like the 'g' factor.