IQ vs EI: brains or charm?

Community
1

We used to think that people with higher IQ would be more successful, they were more intelligent and they could learn quicker than a regular person like me. Well, of course they do have to do something to earn that success! Obviously, you don’t get anything for nothing, no matter how intelligent you are. But things should be easier for them. Normal beings have to work harder to get to the same point, don’t they?

But now we know that there’s something called emotional intelligence. And this make a difference. These people are really charming (well, not all but many) and could sell a swimming pool even to an Eskimo. They know how to relate to people, how to talk to them and show empathy.

The right combination of both would be ideal but does it really exist? Too often we see people that can program like no one else, or can build a rocket and yet their salaries are so low while the not-so-smart-but-really-charming guy makes good money even when he doesn’t even know what a derivative is.

If you had to choose, what would you prefer: brains or charm? I confess I’m divided. Being the intellectual type, I prefer the brains. Learning is a passion for me but… since I’m terrible selling my own services, when I look to the charming guys sometimes I wouldn’t mind the extra income

Of course, I woudn’t mind to have the two :wink: but I’m afraid that I don’t come extra smart or extra charming :lol:

2

Bolding is mine. That is key - enjoyment of attempting to do it, not being born with an ability to do it. Those babies will eventually grow up to be charming people, but not because they were born charming. Throw them in a cave now where they will have no people to attempt to communicate with and they will be as charming as bats.

It has nothing to do with the definition of “work”. The difference is between inborn and acquired. There are no inborn talents, as natural as breathing, the cave effect is all proof you need.

I’d say tell that to Einstein if he was alive. I just paraphrased his words, and I can dig up the exact quote if you like.

Lucky and knew people? :slight_smile: That’s an excuse for failure, not a proof of talent.

BTW, early industrialists could not have read Atlas Shrugged, it was published in 1957. :slight_smile:

Yes, Mozart was born with the ability to compose music and in fact, he’s written his first symphony when he’d just popped out of his mom and was still in the towels. It’s called “The Cry of the Baby”, you must’ve heard that. Please excuse my sarcasm but it’s just too funny. It’s BS and you know it.

You’re basically justifying your own inability to do certain things. When you see a 10 year old kid playing piano flawlessly and seemingly effortlessly, what do you think? He’s a genius with an inborn talent to play piano! I say, he’s spent the last 5 years practicing several hours every day. Had I put in so much effort in the last 5 years, I’d play just as well and perhaps even better myself.

Yes they have, and yes it is. I seriously don’t understand people like you who think that some people are born gifted. And this thinking is baseless. I agree that you can think this way, either way it doesn’t change someone having ability however they’ve acquired it. But by following this thinking you basically deprive yourself of acquiring new abilities, which ironically means that even if you had an inborn talent for something you wouldn’t know it because you reject the thought of learning something new.

3

you betcha !!!

:smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

4

It is my experience that both are learned. A person is not born with high IQ or special ability to empathize. All that is learned. So yes, it is more than possible to have both, you just have to learn them.

Of course, different people tend to like different things. An intellectual person who is less into socializing, will naturally gravitate more towards things that concern intellectual intelligence and less to those that concern emotional intelligence. That’s how different people end up having strengths in one area and not so much in another, or equally in both; by chance.

However, once you identify and purposefully pursuit improving either, there’s no longer a difference. After all, learning in general implies use of thought. Marketing is a good example, where it’s all about understanding people and moving them to do what you want. But it’s not about feeling how to market, it’s about learning specific rules that enable you to do that. An even better example is NLP (neuro-linguistic programming) where things like charm are reduced to simple rules and processes of the use of language.

Actually, now that I’ve gone through this line of thought, I wouldn’t say there’s even such a thing as intellectual or emotional, or any other kind of intelligence, there’s just one intelligence. And you either have learned how to do certain things or haven’t yet.

5

You think that IQ is learnt? According to studies, your IQ remains more or less the same since you’re 16 years old. At that time, you’re still learning lots of things and yet IQ doesn’t change.

I guess that you can learn certain abilities and be successful… I would say that it is easier to learn how to be nice than how to be intelligent.

6

intelligence

–noun

capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc.

Yes, you can learn to learn, to reason, to understand, to grasp truths, relationships, facts and meanings, etc. That is unless you have some sort of medical condition preventing you from doing that.

Whether it’s easier to learn how to be nice, well it depends on the person. You’re saying it’s easier for you to learn how to be nice, I’d say for me it’s vice versa.

IQ means nothing, it’s somewhat like Alexa rank for websites - it tells something if compared between two similar individuals, but not much, and it’s useless on its own. Just because IQ doesn’t change (which is typically age adjusted) doesn’t mean we’re stuck at the intelligence of a 16-year old. If that were the case, we’d all be drinking every night till blackout, live off our parents, be skipping work every other day, and all in all be irresponsible slobs. Well, I guess some people do, indeed, get stuck at 16. :smiley:

7

IQ is a funny test because some are done against stop clock I’ve had official IQ tests before though it doesn’t really account for actual use of intelligence. With Raven’s I am basically at the top of the scale, well within the top one percent, which is basically a test of visual reasoning.

8

I believe it does exist yes! I’m in agreement with Saul with regard to learning these skills. If you have the capacity to say, going by your example above, to program like no one else, then you definitely have the capacity to learn to sell. For some people these skills come naturally, they are comfortable within crowds, easy going and never run out of anything to say! But I do believe this can be learned also - nothing can hold us back except ourselves and if you believe you can’t do something then it’s not going to happen. There is a difference between brains and charm but that doesn’t necessarily mean that you either have to be one or the other. There are many smart people, even here on the Forums for example, that are experts in their field and still manage to be charming and friendly. :cool:

I’d go for brains any day of the week. Brains = having the ability to be charming :cool:

9

I don’t agree with you. I don’t think that it is a test of visual reasoning. You have lots of questions which include visual reasoning (I hate when someone asks me “How many triangles do you see here?”. I always miss! I’ve always been crap with visuals and even more now)

I would say for a test that it is supposed to be culturally independent it is not so much. Questions related to language are culturally related. Most of the IQ test I’ve seen are in English, and I found once or twice I word that I didn’t know the meaning (not often though)

I have to disagree with you. Most of the time learning to be nice means learning how to bite your tongue. It is a question if someone has to go through that effort (and pain).

I do confess that I don’t know if I could learn how to be truly charming. I guess anyone can learn how to be polite and don’t say nasty things. But convince someone who doesn’t want to buy your product? Well, that’s something else.

Do you mean that you have it?

Not so sure of that. You see intelligent people that are so rude! and then some stupid but extremely nice people that live quite well, only because people like them and help them.

10

Biting your tongue hardly makes you nice. Though, we have to agree on the definition of “nice” if we want to discuss it.

It’s not a question of having to go through it, it’s a question of wanting to go through it. You don’t have to do anything but you may want to do it if achieving something requires it.

I strongly recommend you to look up NLP, and especially its application in marketing.

I really can’t say I know any stupid people that live quite well. But I know many intelligent people who do. If you’re saying that intelligence is not necessary for one’s livelihood then I have to disagree. Maybe those stupid people who live well aren’t that stupid after all.

And on the other hand, I agree with Hazel. You can learn how to be charming if you’re intelligent, but you won’t learn how to be intelligent if all you have is your charm which you’ve acquired by chance. The choice is a no-brainer, really.

11

Every single method of measuring intelligence I know of is quite seriously flawed. If you stop and think about it, the whole idea is akin to using a yardstick to measure itself.
Human brains are (IMO) much more perfect and exquisitely sensitive feedback mechanisms than has, or will ever be generally recognized.

People have been participating, knowingly and unknowingly, in feedback experiments for thousands of years under various names (mantras, chanting, NLP, affirmations, violent discipline, scarification rituals, meditation; even zoning out to the TV could easily be seen as a variation of white noise therapy. All of these things tap the exact same essence).

I process this question in a different way I guess, and my fave observation is from old Einstein - “Science without religion is blind, religion without science is lame”

edit - EI is good for Canucks anywho.

12

I’m smart enough to know I would much rather be stupid and happy.

I’m sure if I drink enough, I can achieve that.

IQ tests are garbage. I’ve had two. One said I was in the 70’s (which would mean I would need assistance with daily life). The other said 98. Those numbers are quite different. Accurate test? My butt.

You think that IQ is learnt? According to studies, your IQ remains more or less the same since you’re 16 years old.

Your score goes up after they teach you how to take the test. There’s also [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect]the Flynn effect.

EQ tests… are another one of those hippy inventions, like self-esteem, which were created to make losers think they mean anything to the uncaring universe. You know, we’re all unique snowflakes and all.

Charm, or ease with people, you are born with. Possible some people sweat and work at being charming, but the ones I know don’t lift a finger, and never did. Denying the existence of inborn talent is like denying people are born with different hair colours or the ability to fold their tongue into six parts (my colleague can do this. You can’t. But have fun wasting 20 years practicing).

13

That’s just simply not true and a very bad analogy - comparing behaviour with physical traits. I was not born knowing how to program! It is a result of years of study and practice. Although some people would like to believe I have been born with it as an excuse why they can’t do it.

If someone is charming how do you know he didn’t learn through sweat how to do it? Sure they don’t lift a finger now, but maybe they were working their rear off to learn it in the past.

The “naturally” charming people I know happen to like to be around people and have been doing so since they were little, thus learning to understand and communicate with people all the while. Does that mean they were born with it? No! People who learn to play piano as little kids and continue to play for the rest of their lives can play effortlessly - does that mean they were born knowing how to play? No! You learn to ride a bike and you do it effortlessly for the rest of your life even with years of breaks. Does that mean you are born knowing how to ride a bike? No!

Have you seen babies? They’re stupid! :stuck_out_tongue: They can’t talk, can’t walk, can’t even eat by themselves, and if one was thrown in a cave to grow by himself, he’d grow up stupid as a bat, provided he survived somehow.

Some people see the result of long years of hard work and seem to think it’s fallen from the sky. Especially when it comes to things people do since childhood, and especially when there’s jealousy in act. But if you tell me that something has come to me easy because I have a talent for it, I’ll tell you, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

I liked what Einstein had to say about this - he found it strange that people considered him a genius for work he’s done simply by putting more effort into it than others.

14

They can’t talk, can’t walk, can’t even eat by themselves, and if one was thrown in a cave to grow by himself, he’d grow up stupid as a bat, provided he survived somehow.

And yet it’s still clearly measurable that some have easy affinity with other people than other babies. They understand and recognise facial gestures easier than others, and they enjoy attempting to communicate and interact with others. This difference can be seen in fraternal twins (who have the same womb environment). I doubt the people-loving kid has to “work” to “get” people. It’s not work.

Einstein was the only guy in 300 years who worked hard enough to come up with the theory of relativity? O RLY? Many many ordinary people work their butts off, fingers to the bone, and get nowhere. Just because, that’s how life is. Similarly, many of those early industrialists who went around telling everyone how they believed in Social Darwinism and read Atlas Shrugged liked refusing to see how they were lucky and knew people and got away with things other would be punished for.

Oh and Mozart just worked harder than all the other 5 year olds, any 5 year old can write a minuet if they just get off their lazy butts and quit playing childish games. Right. If only they weren’t so lazy, those kids.

Not that I ever claimed people are born knowing how to do stuff like riding bikes. I’m saying some people don’t have to work (much) at it. I also agree that people born without any aptitude for something can teach themselves, but they’ll never be naturals. They’ll be Good Enough at best. People with high IQs aren’t people who worked harder at taking tests, or spent their childhoods in libraries. Intelligence isn’t something you work on— knowledge is.

15

well, in that case you don’t understand me either :smiley:

yes, some people are born gifted

just as some, sadly, are born desperately short-changed

funny, but both types usually end up living in institutions

16

If that’s so then I was born gifted with all possible gifts. Tough if you weren’t :smiley:

17

I choose charm, because by hard work you can improve you brains.

18

Your developmental intelligence and personality are mostly formed by the time your 2-3 years old. There are many factors that lead up to the development of interpersonal skills, starting (believe it or not) with crawling. When you make your baby crawl, you’re developing important synaptic pathways between the left and right halves of the brain (required for coordination of the left and right arms and legs). This coordination later leads to the ability to communicate, formulate words, and have healthy interaction with other kids.

Later in life, high intelligence hampers one’s ability to interact with others, and presents many pitfalls to developing proper empathy for good interpersonal skills. Some of these are high preference for reading or arithmetic to sports, recognition of others’ inability to comprehend much of your thoughts, early arrogance developed through success in school and lauds from parents and teachers, much of this often leading to narcissism.

Although it’s possible for a highly intelligent person to be a “smooth talker” it’s rarely “natural” (I’ve never seen it). It’s impossible to be an empathetic narcissist. :slight_smile: The people I know who are brilliant smooth-talkers are what you might call BS-artists. They achieve a high level of success, but are not healthy, happy people. The happiest people I know are not necessarily the most “successful” (course that would depend on your definition!). Happiness can come from many avenues. The first step (always) is loving who you are inside and out, and appreciating the gifts you’ve been given, whether that be IQ, EI, or just a pretty face. :slight_smile:

19

PS - On the topic of whether genetics are responsible for a part of one’s aptitude for learning… that’s not even a point of debate… it’s a widely accepted fact. Some people are born more naturally intellectual just as some people are more naturally athletic than others, and some are prettier than others.

20

All I know is that it’s good to see that the hunt for the 6 fingered man continues…