[One Degree]

The idea of the smartest people not being the richest could be tied to the idea of 'emotional intelligence'. A philosophical understanding of the world often discourages too much interest in wealth accumulation. The search for knowledge is more important. Most of the highly intelligent have a propensity for this I believe.

[Drlee]

The problem is in saying "the smartest are not the richest" is not the same thing as saying that earnings do not correspond to IQ. The notion of "richest" is subjective at best. What the studies show is that earning potential is increased by IQ. This should come as no shock to anyone.

IF IF IF just for a moment I were to grant that many people with very high IQ's are not among the richest people around I would point out that the fields of study into which they go are often not the highest paying. A mathematician does not earn what a successful insurance agent does. A college professor earns about what a senior policeman does. A Sergeant Major in the Army earns about what a pharmacist does. Astrophysicists earn a decent living but not want an MBA may aspire to.

So the deal is that people with high IQs generally earn more than those with lower ones. Only by playing fast and loose with the data can you construct a situation in which the richest people have lower IQs. If you look at any random pool of people those with higher IQs will statistically earn more money and do better in school.

[Besoeker]

The problem is in saying "the smartest are not the richest" is not the same thing as saying that earnings do not correspond to IQ. The notion of "richest" is subjective at best.

OK. How would you define richest?

[Drlee]

I wouldn't. It is not necessary for this discussion. Qatz said that IQ does not affect wealth. It most certainly does. There is a direct correlation.

[QatzelOk]

OK. How would you define richest?

Your're giving his throwaway sentence "The notion of "richest" is subjective at best." too much weight. It means nothing. DrLee just cut and paste an interesting rhetorical structure together and thought that would create an idea. It didn't. It's a familiar structure, but the way it's being used is unconvincing on its own.
.....

"If human vices such as greed and envy are systematically cultivated, the inevitable result is nothing less but the collapse of intelligence." (Schumacher, Small is Beautiful. 1973, 18).

This quote is interesting because in the 90s, when the concept of EQ was being promoted in universities, these same universities were being transformed into centers for corporate skills, and the management of our "higher learning" institutions was being handed over to CEOs looking for trained technicians to make more money.

Greed and Envy took over our schools and taught us that they were "emotionally" intelligent and, therefore, were suitable for the university setting.

[Besoeker]

Drop the word "alone" and you are wrong.

So don't drop it out.

[ness31]

I think, an individual may have a high IQ which corresponds to good earning potential. But, does the same individual possess the EI to extract commensurate wages?

[jakell]

What is the purpose of such a test? Are we now going to decide which personality type is the best one and discourage all others? Hopefully this is just being used for job placement?

An obsession with measuring stuff just for the sake of it and an expression of the feeling that science (etc) is the new philosophy that will lead mankind into a bright new future.

Of course, a degree of measurement is necessary to get a handle on some things, but here I'm talking about it becoming part of a belief system.

On reflection I am being bit hyperbolic here. It could be said that EQ was a reaction to the tendency of some to become pretty anal when it comes to IQ, which after all is just a number and therefore lends itself to pissing contests.

That tendency can later spill into the concept of EQ I suppose, and therefore it is this tendency I am criticising rather than the measurement itself.

[Besoeker]

I wouldn't. It is not necessary for this discussion. Qatz said that IQ does not affect wealth. It most certainly does. There is a direct correlation.

OK. You say it affects wealth. Care to define what you mean by wealth?

[QatzelOk]

I think, an individual may have a high IQ which corresponds to good earning potential. But, does the same individual possess the EI to extract commensurate wages?

If EI is a way to "extract commensurate wages," does it belong in universities, or should it stay on the streets and in the boardrooms behind closed doors?

I.E, "Having a high IQ means you have the potential to become a good pickpocket. But only through EI will you have the necessary charm to approach people without arising suspicion." Is this what you mean?

Also, do the people we used to call "moral idiots" just possess a lot of EI in relation to their IQ?

Seems like moral idiocy also guarantees a much higher earning potential. For one thing, moral idiots have no empathy for other people (except their allies), and don't understand that their own happiness is linked to the happiness of everyone else.

Is morally idiocy a huge part of emotional intelligence?

[ness31]

If EI is a way to "extract commensurate wages," does it belong in universities, or should it stay on the streets and in the boardroojms behind closed doors?

I don't know. But I'd probably start by calling it something like intuition or extra sensory perception. I'm mean geez, they're hardly controversial terms
Also, I have read from fairly reliable sources that authorities pretty much acknowledge everyone having potential to develop and harness what has been labelled "emotional intelligence".

Do you 'democratize' it? Sure, why not...there are probably contingency plans in place to mop up.

I.E, "Having a high IQ means you have the potential to become a good pickpocket. But only through EI will you have the necessary charm to approach people without arising suspicion." Is this what you mean?

Lol, how did you get that from my very straight forward statement?

Also, do the people we used to call "moral idiots" just possess a lot of EI in relation to their IQ?

Seems like moral idiocy also guarantees a much higher earning potential. For one thing, moral idiots have no empathy for other people (except their allies), and don't understand that their own happiness is linked to the happiness of everyone else.

Is morally idiocy a huge part of emotional intelligence?

I don't know

[jakell]

...Seems like moral idiocy also guarantees a much higher earning potential. For one thing, moral idiots have no empathy for other people (except their allies), and don't understand that their own happiness is linked to the happiness of everyone else.

Is morally idiocy a huge part of emotional intelligence?

Well, you've come full circle and now come up with a perfect contradiction, if something is idiotic, then it's not intelligent. Your argument, which was difficult to fathom in the first place, is now non-existent.

[Drlee]

Care to define what you mean by wealth?

Give me a break dude. Make your point or drop it and move on.

[QatzelOk]

Well, you've come full circle and now come up with a perfect contradiction, if something is idiotic, then it's not intelligent. Your argument, which was difficult to fathom in the first place, is now non-existent.

Oh, it's still there. Let me summarize what I've asked about. I'm wondering if:

IQ + moral idiocy = EQ

(Note: moral idiocy is negative)

Is a healthy level of moral idiocy required to be said to have Emotional Intelligence?

[jakell]

Well, I thought this was being too dimissive:

An obsession with measuring stuff just for the sake of it ...

But when someone actually starts making mathematical equations out of what are basically metaphysical concepts, then maybe I was understating things.

Maybe the robot could join in by asking you to define 'moral idiocy'.

[QatzelOk]

Well, I thought this was being too dimissive:

But when someone actually starts making mathematical equations out of what are basically metaphysical concepts, then maybe I was understating things.

Maybe the robot could join in by asking you to define 'moral idiocy'.

It would be mathematical of me to answer your question directly.

So let me try underlining the role of moral idiocy in creating Emotional Intelligence another way:

The truly intelligent realize that selfishness is ultimately and morbidly self-destroying and life quality erasing. The less intelligent often do not, especially if they've been distracted by texts that favor selfishness.

Those who are of average intelligence, but who are unable to understand how harmful selfishness is (thus, they are moral idiots), do much better than those who do understand the damage of selfishness.

[QatzelOk]

IQ + moral idiocy = EQ (Note: moral idiocy is negative)

No one criticized this formula, though it's obviously flawed.

It should be:

IQ X moral idiocy = EQ

See, if moral idiocy is negative, then the higher the IQ is, the more negative the EQ will be. Likewise, the higher a negative number that moral idiocy is, the more the overall EQ will be higher.

People with high IQs and no morality are the most toxic humans on earth. And they currently control a lot of important infrastructure.

[mikema63]

My criticism of EQ is more or less the same as IQ. Your trying to measure some general factor in the brain without understanding how any of the parts work. It's a loose coorelation at best. You really can never really show causation between IQ, EQ, and any other factors internal or external.

[QatzelOk]

My criticism of EQ is more or less the same as IQ. Your trying to measure some general factor in the brain without understanding how any of the parts work. It's a loose coorelation at best. You really can never really show causation between IQ, EQ, and any other factors internal or external.

I agree that both of these concepts are flawed and have an agenda.

But they may have THE SAME agenda: to prove to the rich that they are naturally superior to the people they use and abuse.

[Drlee]

I agree that both of these concepts are flawed and have an agenda.

I don't. The concept of IQ is old and tried. The data is compelling. No conspiracy here.

But they may have THE SAME agenda: to prove to the rich that they are naturally superior to the people they use and abuse.

Balderdash. IQ testing begins in youth. It is a tool for educators and mental health professionals.

You should attend a meeting of Mensa or Intertel some time. You would find not a hint of that stuff.