Genuine question - are you on drugs?

Pulls out a mirror

Just because I try to be respectful and talk like an adult, does not mean I’m postering myself above others. If my way of talking makes you think less of yourself, that really isn’t my problem.

Your comparison is so wild… And your assumptions are not really matching my real world experience. I wish you the best, but there’s obviously no point to continue

I never said you have low EQ. You said it yourself - no objective way to measure it, and I myself have never thought about others EQ, I just recognize it as group/complex of psychological/personal traits that affect your neurological behaviour.

However, it is interesting to me how angry/personal you seem about this argument. I’m going to assume this isn’t your first time talking about this, and getting disagreed with.

Just because you can’t objectively measure amount of love between two people, doesn’t mean it’s invalid theory. You are overthinking this too much, using weird arguments and then try to push a narrative that says “anything that isn’t standardized is meaningless”. By the same logic, pretty much every psychological/personal trait is a buzzword that cannot be objectively measured, and so it’s meaningless. It’s intellectually lazy argument.

And no, empathy or ethics or emotions are not race-based (referring to your previous argument where it could be different between groups)

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.

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

MSCEIT and BarOn Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i 2.0)

No, that’s just Dunning Kruger effect

Yeah, I strongly disagree. It’s a genuinely valid way to figure out someone better. While the tests and all that aren’t really standardized, the idea is quite clear, and the idea works. Just because it was made mainstream, does not mean it’s suddenly bad. Just because the origins are sketchy, does not mean the theory is invalid. It just essentially means one’s ability to objectively assess your own and other’s emotions, feel empathy (not just understand it, but feel it), low emotional intelligence people would be less rational about their own and everyone’s else’s emotions. You simply cannot argue against this. It’s a skill/mechanism that makes society function better.

I genuinely don’t understand your argument. Are you saying it’s not a valid measurement system because humans came up with it? Just like everything else? What is your actual argument against emotional Intelligence as a metric besides the fact that it was created by someone you don’t like? Are you in control of your own emotions (part of emotional intelligence), or are you writing this shit just because?

Nobody was talking about ‘emotional intelligence’ 5 years ago in popular culture. Now it’s ubiquitous.

This is so incredibly false. Just look at the google trends. In 2004 it’s popularity was similar to that of 5 years ago, and even back in my teenager years I constantly heard it around and was part of studies.

I don’t understand what does actual buzzwords have to do with measurement system. They pretty much never go away just like IQ.

Everything can be a buzzword if it doesn’t directly apply to a selfish person with low EQ