Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

There is no such thing as EQ (2016)

quora.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 129 posts

Re: There is no such thing as EQ (2016)

#71

Post by Snackchez »

cdavid wrote: post #53
nmca wrote: post #27

He quotes an interesting sounding stat - "In fact, if you could choose to be born at the 95th percentile for wealth, or the 95th percentile for IQ, you would be more successful at age 40 as a consequence of the latter choice." Does anyone know the source?

I was curious as well, as it smells made up and rather unlikely to be true given current wealth distribution. Where you are born (e.g. developed vs developing country) is a very strong causal factor in how much wealth you get during your life, much higher than IQ.

The quote is mentioning success, rather in the sense of accomplishments not of financial worth. For example, I could be a billionaire and just hand my fortune to my children and someone with a high IQ might never reach that level of economic status. But comparing success in the sense of accomplishments, a high IQ person might have reached certain milestones, for example getting a PhD, maintaining a successful business, moving up to a higher socioeconomic status, etc.

Re: There is no such thing as EQ (2016)

#72

Post by kwhitefoot »

nmca wrote: post #27

He quotes an interesting sounding stat - "In fact, if you could choose to be born at the 95th percentile for wealth, or the 95th percentile for IQ, you would be more successful at age 40 as a consequence of the latter choice." Does anyone know the source?

What does 'successful' mean?

Re: There is no such thing as EQ (2016)

#74

Post by coldtea »

ralfn wrote: post #62
js8 wrote: post #42

I always had trouble with the term EQ or emotional intelligence, because it in my opinion confuses (at least) two things. One is empathy, our ability to read and perceive emotions of other people. The other is actual social intelligence, that is understanding of how other people are motivated, what to do in social situations, and so on. There are plenty good people who have lot of 1st one but little of the 2nd one, a…

You didnt have trouble with the term EQ because it tries to suggest it is like IQ? Eventhough one of them is science and the other is less scientific than a gossip magazine?

There's nothing much or more scientific about IQ than EQ.

IQ is on the gossip magazine level itself.

Re: There is no such thing as EQ (2016)

#75

Post by katzgrau »

skywhopper wrote: post #68

While I'm certainly willing to accept that "EQ" is unscientific claptrap, coming at this from outside the apparent controversy, this answer is off-putting to me partially because I don't have the context this author assumes (a context which includes enough technical jargon and name drops to make me wonder who exactly this response is written _for_, as presumably academic psychologists are not pursuing professional di…

I read through the comments knowing someone would have already said what wanted to, and better than I would have.

Fully agreed. Sometimes what could have been an intelligent answer is diminished by overconfidence and well, what I might even suggest is small mindedness.

Re: There is no such thing as EQ (2016)

#76

Post by Bar_Code »

EQ is definitely something that can help one in life, particularly leadership. He is certainly correct that EQ is not scientifically valid. Goleman took the valid work of others and "interpreted" it to create/support EI. It probably should be called a theory, a process, a framework, whatever. After learning about EQ, and practicing it, my leadership abilities took off. I've taught it to dozens of engineers who say they are now much more influential, better team players, and better communicators. Some have said it's changed their careers. EQ is most certainly a thing, just not a trait. It's sort of like saying being a good listener (active listening, listening with intent) is not a thing because you can't measure it.

Re: There is no such thing as EQ (2016)

#79

Post by ac2u »

jgh wrote: post #69

Jordan Peterson is a bit of a white nationalist, isn't he?

That's a cheap, intellectually-bankrupt addition to the conversation if you don't add anything to back it up. It's hard to believe you wrote it in any sort of good faith.

Re: There is no such thing as EQ (2016)

#80

Post by jgh »

ac2u wrote: post #79
jgh wrote: post #69

Jordan Peterson is a bit of a white nationalist, isn't he?

That's a cheap, intellectually-bankrupt addition to the conversation if you don't add anything to back it up. It's hard to believe you wrote it in any sort of good faith.

Oh please, these guys go on parroting IQ and "race-realism" as if it weren't intellectually bankrupt itself. The guy's apparent obsession with IQ is suspicious enough, not to mention any time I hear about Jordan Peterson it's in the context of alt-right nonsense.

Edit: to make this relevant to the conversation - a white nationalist has a dog in the race when it comes to the idea that "IQ is above all else". IQ has long been used as a reason for, e.g., why there is more poverty in the black community. Why is there more poverty? Simple! Their IQ is low and therefore they're not able to succeed!

Post reply on HN