Emotional Intelligence: The Smart Heart
Famous scientists have said that their discoveries seem to be merely following up the revelations of mystics from the past, and even the arrogantly sceptical Freud wrote, "everywhere I go, I find a poet has been there before me". The poets and mystics have always known that true intelligence is a blending of head and heart, of thought and feeling and now psychology is moving towards a definition of what EI might be.
Goleman defines EI as including self-awareness, impulse control, zeal and motivation, empathy and social deftness; these are the qualities he identifies as prerequisites for success in career and in relationships. However the term EI was first formally defined in 1990 by the psychologists Mayer and Salovey as: "1) Knowing how you feel, how others feel and what to do about it. 2) Knowing what feels good, what feels bad and how to get from bad to good. 3) The emotional awareness, sensitivity and management skills which help us maximise our long term happiness and survival." More recently they have updated their definition: "Emotional intelligence involves the ability to perceive accurately, appraise, and express emotion: the ability to access and or generate feelings when they facilitate thought; the ability to understand emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intelligcence"
file=emotional_intelligence
Yeah, so I read that book Emotional Intelligence, or at least got the jist of it. What the author was emphasizing that basically a lot of ppl have emotional intelligence, and usually it's along the line of being aware of your emotions and possibly being able to give names to them like, "okay, I'm getting upset now because of x" thereby allowing you to control...
the author never gives methods of controlling because, perhaps he doesn't have emotional intelligence. like wise, those that do have control are rarely unaware of whereabout they achieved control, they either had control most of their life or didn't. Unless they had some shocking event or down turn that caused them to "change their ways" permanently... in other words those ppl maybe experienced some great trauma that instilled a great sense of "fear" in them in which case, they perpetuated that fear for a while (or rather it was hard not too) and that caused them to have more awareness and control... however, did they choose that fear inducing event? Can you induce it, should you?
Anyways, I'm dissecting this "issue" more and more, and I think the prime difference between the emotionally intelligent (there I go, using the word "prime" and such again) is a difference between being "in" the system and being "out" of the system.
If you're on the inside of the system, then the system affects you. Somebody curses at you, and you get upset, your fists clench, a justification pops into your head, and then maybe you punch them, or just cool off steam. You're unaware of the process, you're just mad, and you want to get that guy, you don't care about it, that's how you feel, then that's how you're gonna act.
being "out" of the system means that you see this process, you watch it happen with a sort of detached air. Like, "oh, heh, look, it's Phil, and he's getting chided, look, that's going to then trigger his defenses and automatically make him pump up with anger, and then subsequently that anger is then gonna make him clench his fists etc.."
The author of "Emotional Intelligence" described it as a sort of "hovering wrath" lingering above you that was aware of what was going on but unaffected by what was going on..
anyways, what's interesting is that once you're "out" of the system, it's hard to go back in. It's hard to submerge yourself underwater once you've had a taste of fresh air. You can let yourself slip in, but never willfully because then you'll just see yourself from the out trying to get in. But now, time can erode your sense of going back in... you could even just go, whoops, I'm gonna let myself back under the gun... now even though you're aware of going under the gun, you initiate a process that could then lead to you forgetting that you made your choice, and then you would be once again, under the gun, or in the system.
now, this is why "know thyself" is a good maxim from the Oracle in the matrix and @ the real oracle because knowing yourself is the key to becoming aware of the system, becoming outside of the system, and thereby getting control. What is the matrix? Control. What are you doing? attempting to control... or respond, in some way...
Now, what happens when teenagers or mid-life-crisisers "find themselves" I think they're doing precisely that... instead of being in the system, a sort of coin in the sea of worldly pressures, they stop for a second and realize that they are this coin and that there is this sea, and embrace it, and then subsequently control it with themselves in mind.
This growth has been described as "surging up in the world" by Sartre... and it's a sort of recognition of the solipsistic aspects of your life and coupled with your desire to take care of yourself, and then subsequently your desire to control your destiny... which requires some element of being a controller from the outside, controlling something that's in.
So... wake UP! (and smell yourself?)
>> yes, I'm starting to agree more and more that this is indeed jerry springer for intellectualism... INTERESTING NOTHELESS I HOPE... my good chum.
Okay, so the latest "mode" of mentality I've been on is this emotional intelligence thing. It actually started well before I read this book. I made for myself a perspective on life that involved responding effectively to how I felt. I had found myself confused and in a rut in many situations, and I was most frustrated by a lack of control. Other people could remain calm while as I'd get angry or stressed out. Yeah, that's what it was, I was trying to improve myself again, and in doing so I saw other models of "the man" and these were people that were very effective at responding to themselves. If they were thinking too much, they'd stop, if they were tired, they'd rest, if they were depressed, they'd cheer themselves up. This gave them easy access to many things in life while as me with my automatic emotional responses would have to find things that would fit me and not the other way around.
So, I did this for a while. Some of the methods I'd employ would be sort of "letting it all out." Self-expression through writing or having an introspective gait to my thoughts would help reveal with an "objective hovering wrath" (as the aforementioned book refers to it) what it was that I desired, and then from there I'd then figure out what to do about it.
It fit well with my "Observe, Analyze, Apply" framework because in fulfilling our information-processing duties, the best observations would probably be those about yourself.
So this worked for a while, in many instances. I learnt many things, one of which is that this emotional intelligence is not as easy as one, two, three. What I did learn though, was that, indeed it did work. One could take a problem, a distress, a feeling inside, deconstruct it, and then manage themselves up to a desirable state. Bingo, instant success for life. You want to make yourself into the state of yourself that you best like, and by accessing and then subsequently managing your emotional state, you will eventually get there.
Or so it would seem.
I went on this for a while, but based on the epiphemerous nature of my other "thinks" I withheld spreading the "gospel." The most I gave to people was this sort of, "I have the KEY, but I'm still experimenting."--as an aside, I've resigned myself to being simply a seeker, *sigh*.
And now, we're at this chapter. And I think I've kind of pinned onto an actual problem with this kind of thinking, almost makes my previous, machine-like approaches to life, more suitable for living. But basically, this kind of thinking, of directly accessing your emotions, and directly manipulating them through activities, internal or external, is somewhat incompatible with the way we are actually programmed to think.
As of now, I'm starting to feel that I move from one fleeting emotion to the next. I sense, I respond. That's all there is to it.
My counter is well, don't people do that anyways? Isn't just responding to their emotions precisely the way people do it. They just run a pop operation on the queue of their feelings, and then spit off what comes "naturally."
Ah, but that's the thing... "naturally." I finally figured what they mean when they say, "be natural." They mean to say, "rely on your passive processes." Funny thing is the context that this is usually dished out by the skeptics. Usually it's dished out in situations related to dating and public speaking. But it's not used in other situations. For example, if you're about to start a difficult program, nobody says, "be natural" or if you're the president negotiating placement of troops in Turkey, Rove doesn't say, "'ey Georgey, just be natual." Well, that's because things like social dances are a very complicated and un-modelable process, so getting out of your conscious interference and relying on instinct will lead you to the better way.
(my apologies for the digression)
Anyways, the problem with this way that I've been playing with is that well, I'm directly accessing my emotions. I'm manipulating myself in a very unnatural way, although naturally for those who are emotionally intelligent, in which case this IS the way. But basically, the best example is I sit around and I go, "hmm, I feel like I need a sense of meaning." And so then afterwards, I then go off and do something "meaningful" like help the needy or setup a religion. But, here's the rub... What does that accomplish? On the one hand, well, I helped the needy and I started a religion for Christssake, but if you dereference those things, I actually was just plugging an emotional hole. I was filling a void. I was going through a phase and I dealt with it appropriately. So the weight of the problem is in that it trivializes the actions we do as just responding to our feelings.
Some people can live that way. They'd say, "yeah, of course, you go with your heart, you go with what you feel inside, and that guides you." But then I respond to that, doesn't that just ruin the meaning of what you're doing. If you're just going with your feeling, then what's to say what you're doing is right and not just some chemical reaction in your head. This issue pricked me when somebody said, in regards to anti-war protestors, "they just can't stand the sight of blood." And that feeling evolves into sympathy, combined with hatred of large hegemonies, mixed with suspicions about oil. Now, fortunately, if you're intellectual, you may do some research and understand what's really happening, but even those intellectuals are swamped by the sheer network effects of other people just urging and suggesting, telling them what they want to hear. Pretty soon it's the bleeding hearts on one side vs. the stern righteous on the other. What suffers is truth and accuracy.
So, where do we go from here. Well, as the current re-design of Philosophistry illustrates, life, at least for me, is a cycle of arcs and what not. Hopefully they spiral up. But essentially, on a concrete level, what's probably next is a slowly dampening of this direct emotional thinking method. The next stage is strange as I'll have no concrete "mentality" in my mind. I actually then truly "go with the flow"---BUT, aren't I THEN just responding again to my emotions, but just in a very passive way. And so, I already see my frustrations manifesting, the subsequent pensive moments, and ladies and gentlemen, there will be a new mode.
Hopefully, though, this is evolution. Fortunately I've gotten a sense of humor to this whole process.
I think, well, I there are these imperatives or directives I used to put in my head. Those used to bother me. You know, like "be right," "do straight," "be satisfied," I'd be so scared if I didn't have any of those, I'd feel like my life was always just hanging up in the air. I dunno man.
I was killing myself today too, thinking. Sometimes, I just sort of, inhibit my thought, have a thought that interrupts a thought, when I have thought I can't get away from, and I'm just trapt in my own thinking, I get really frustrated.
Well, I think you shouldn't put foreign objects in your head, I think like those recurring statements, like "be satisfied," or "don't worry" or whatever, they help for a little while, but then your body just rejects that kind of stuff.
The write-your-emotions-on-your-face/body drive hasn't been rejected it's something your body is yearning and wanting to do anyways. Same with the "bear-pain" directive, that too is something your body just wants to do, to be tough, to just feel something and be strong.
Lessons don't go away too, you learn some lesson, you can tap that for decision making.
Habits
Attitudes.
Knobs of control.
In regards to emotional intelligence, having this hovering wrath of self-awareness, I think that's great, but it shouldn't come in labelling emotions. It's annoying walking around running thoughts in my mind like, "okay, I'm agitated, okay I'm being defeatest, okay I'm over-reacting." But, I think like, you know, our body wants to be un-numb, so if you can amplify that "in-touch" signal, that should be good, help get awareness. I don't think taking a critical view of yourself around with you is healthy. Life is an art thingy, sometimes you self-criticize, sometimes you don't. Sometimes you're in complete control of your reactions, sometimes your not.
Perspectives.
This book "Emotional Intelligence" that I picked up was really good and interesting. Like most books I read, after a few months, I only keep 1-3 key concepts. From this book, it just drove the point home that the ratio of internal weight on our states of emotional powers to intellectual powers is like 24 to 1. I lean more on the rationalist thinking side, and always ignore how I feel. The other major point is the idea that knowing yourself is the key foundation to emotional intelligence. Having an objective awareness of your general sentiments and then manipulating yourself and your environment to effectively manage your feelings is the key to emotional intelligence.
But, I'd still like to find a book of some sort, maybe "Programming the mind." For people like me who like to dig into the source code, change things up a bit, control their life properly. I used to tell people that what I've really been trying to do all this time is to "manually boot" myself, re-learn things, like thinking, feeling, emotion on terms that were outside of the influence of childhood molding by others.