• TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Right, which is precisely why everyone things they are highly emotionally intelligent and it’s everyone else that isn’t!

    such a genius metric, it is.

      • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        where is the universally accepted metric for measuring emotional intelligence? clearly there must be a test or something by which we can judge others and ourselves and evalated this ‘skill’.

        oh right, there is none.

          • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            15 hours ago

            Right, so i google both those and find that neither of them is widely adopted or used. they are basically in infancy and have substantial history of use or acceptance… and a few papers both showing their methodology is highly suspect:

            Results showed that this is not the case for most items: The answer indicated by experts as the most correct in several cases was not associated with the highest ability; furthermore, items appeared too easy to challenge individuals high in EI. Overall results suggest that the MSCEIT is best suited to discriminate persons at the low end of the trait. Results are discussed in light of applied and theoretical considerations.

            and around we go.

            • REDACTED@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 hours ago

              But the idea is still clear. Sure, you have essentially steered the argument to “tests are unreliable”, but you haven’t disproved the emotional intelligence itself. You said it - just a buzzword

              • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                13 hours ago

                i can’t disprove the existence of god either.

                are you sure i’m the one shifting the goalposts here?

                my argument form the start was EQ is bullshit, a made up arbitrary metric that has no widespread acceptance. and that is true. And like all bullshit things, people mostly use it to bully and posture each other.

                • REDACTED@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  13 hours ago

                  I guess we will stay true to our beliefs. Being able to rationally understand emotions, reflect, feel empathy, etc. are not some foreign concepts, it’s real, categorizable human psychology (and neurology?) behaviour.

                  • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    13 hours ago

                    and they have no objective measure. you cannot measure a feeling of empathy and compare it across two people. empathy can’t be measured like a discus throw or how fast you can run mile.

                    they are not measurable things, they are contextualized by culture, language, and society. what is empathetic in one society is considered cruelty in another. and further, it will vary a lot depending on relationship, familiarity, and social dynamics.

                    You may think you are the sole arbiter of these things, and you’re welcome to do that in your personal life. but the arrogance it takes you can magically ID people’s ‘empathy’ based on internet posts is just insane ego-projection and and your judgement of how much they say shit you agree with.