8 ms·

Can Emotional Intelligence Be Taught?

84 points by 001sky 13y ago

mathattack 13y ago
Intuitively it would seem that if the desire is there, it can be taught. If someone doesn't want to learn, they won't. But if someone has an open mind, they can learn. There are many socially awkward people who bloom in college, or in leadership roles.
- bayesianhorse 13y ago
  Open mind isn't enough. There are no clear unequivocal paths to improve social skills. I suspect that lack of situational awareness and lack of concentration power/endurance is at the heart of most of these problems. Knowing what to do isn't enough, you need to do it. But improving awareness and endurance of your awareness is only possible through months or years of training, especially meditation and trying to find more awareness in social situations.
pinion247 13y ago
Can emotional intelligence be proven to exist?
- MichaelGG 13y ago
  No. "Emotional intelligence" is a label applied to soft things so they can say "But normal intelligence isn't the only kind of intelligence! You can be smart in other things, too!" Or provide quips like "Well, you've got a high IQ, but your EQ has a long way to go." Arguing over definitions and labels is usually unproductive. I think in this case, it does dilute the idea of intelligence (being able to reason abstractly), while at the same time, increases the emphasis on high intelligence. We'd all be better off just defocusing on intelligence, as a: there's little control you have over your intelligence, and b: it matters far, far, less than what some of us programming types might think, and c: focusing on an innate skill tends to come at a cost of not focusing on perseverance and work ethic, which matter far more. Personally, I wish there'd been less emphasis on how smart I was as a kid; perhaps I'd have more discipline. But alas, thinking about algorithms causes far more short-term reward than, say, cold calling, yet the latter is far more likely to generate success for me.
- dxhdr 13y ago
  Probably. Personally I like to call it emotional maturity. I'd be surprised if emotional maturity and immaturity couldn't be proven to exist. Obviously the 'norms' of emotional (social) maturity differ depending on society. But clearly there are people who just don't "get it" and don't or aren't able to act in line with the norms.
- theorique 13y ago
  Can cognitive intelligence be proved to exist? The thing that we call IQ (or g) is a set of cognitive abilities in pattern recognition, problem solving, puzzles, symbol manipulation, and so forth. Insofar as "something" is measured by these kinds of tests, then IQ/g can be said to exist. Similarly, the set of traits and behaviors collected under the umbrella of "emotional intelligence" are a grab bag of self-regulation, resilience, emotional self-control, insight into one's own mind, ability to form a working model of the emotions of others, ability to "read" the emotions of others, and so forth. These are less well defined than the abilities grouped under IQ/g but insofar as they could be measured through well-designed tests, then emotional intelligence can be said to exist. Alternatively, there could be a functional or "effectiveness based" definition of emotional intelligence, even if it were less quantitative than IQ/g.
- MartinCron 13y ago
  I'm confused by this question. It seems plainly obvious that some people are better than others at understanding the emotional states of themselves and the people around them.
- kordless 13y ago
  Can business intelligence be proven to exist?
dnautics 13y ago
I can answer this question without reading the article: Yes. And it has to be, for most people. Except some people, who are incapable of it for physiological reasons. And there are some people who are so naturally charming and can read what others want that (but on a superficial level) that they become pyschopaths.
- hcarvalhoalves 13y ago
  > And there are some people who are so naturally charming and can read what others want that (but on a superficial level) that they become pyschopaths. That's not the definition of psychopathic trait (or disorder, or anti-social behavior) though. What characterizes it is diminished empathy and remorse, so in fact, it's a lack of emotional intelligence. The point is that if you're free from remorse but still have a working mental model of other's emotions (like most humans), you can better manipulate other's intentions without guilty or other thoughts influencing your decisions. We all fall somewhere inside an empathy spectrum, only the ones that fall at one extreme are characterized as bearer of psychopathic disorder, while the functional ones live normal (or almost normal) lives. There's a big chance you work for one actually, these people tend to be successful in leadership positions.
  - dnautics 13y ago
    well, if they're charming, they clearly have some level of emotional intelligence that far supercedes what most of us have. Saying that they lack emotional intelligence is like categorically saying that you "lack scientific intelligence" because even though you are smashing at physics - because you couldn't find your way a periodic table.
arcosdev 13y ago
How can you teach something that's total bullshit.
- warfangle 13y ago
  Hi there, where did you receive your advanced degree in psychology, education and/or psychiatry? Please leave your pedantic quips on reddit.
  - arcosdev 13y ago
    "[Goleman] exemplifies more clearly than most the fundamental absurdity of the tendency to class almost any type of behaviour as an 'intelligence'... If these five 'abilities' define 'emotional intelligence', we would expect some evidence that they are highly correlated; Goleman admits that they might be quite uncorrelated, and in any case if we cannot measure them, how do we know they are related? So the whole theory is built on quicksand: there is no sound scientific basis."[1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence#Cannot_be_recognized_as_form_of_intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence#Cannot_...
    - warfangle 13y ago
      So it's a pedantic argument over the usage of the word intelligence. Sort of like your original quip, no? Locke suggests the use of the word skill instead; however the definition of intelligence is the ability to apply knowledge and skills. Given that the NICHD is pushing for consensus, and that I am not (and neither are you, given your non-primary source) qualified to determine the status of EI, let's not dismiss it outright. How about contributing meaningfully to the discussion instead of alternating between trolling and non-authorative copypasta?
      - arcosdev 13y ago
        I'll dismiss anything outright that is being used by moronic business-school twits that are using EI as a way to bolster their non-skills and nonsense MBA programs.
robg 13y ago
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_self-regulation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_self-regulation Prefrontal cortex is still developing through our early twenties. Mitigating the effects of emotional responses takes work, just like any other discipline. That work grows synapses and it's the reason mental health therapies change connectivity patterns in the brain. Leaving the word 'emotion' out (which some here seem to have strong reactions to), self-regulation is well-understood.
- pinion247 13y ago
  That's different than Goleman's pseudoscience of Emotional Intelligence, but maybe that's what NYTimes meant?
  - robg 13y ago
    From the article here: It may also make children smarter. Davidson notes that because social-emotional training develops the prefrontal cortex, it can also enhance academically important skills like impulse control, abstract reasoning, long-term planning and working memory. Though it’s not clear how significant this effect is, a 2011 meta-analysis found that K-12 students who received social-emotional instruction scored an average of 11 percentile points higher on standardized achievement tests. A similar study found a nearly 20 percent decrease in violent or delinquent behavior. Goleman isn't mentioned.
    - fleitz 13y ago
      The big problem is that SATs are a good predictor of grades and not success in life.
- hosh 13y ago
  It's less about mitigating the effects of emotional responses and more that, people are habituated to react emotionally rather than responding. To respond, you have to be fully present and mindful of the emotions as they arise -- too really feel the emotion -- without becoming consumed by them. That may or may not have anything to do with the prefrontal cortex.
a3voices 13y ago
Belief systems matter more than emotional intelligence. For example, if you live in the Incan empire and everyone believes you're a god, it doesn't matter what your emotional intelligence is.
jerf 13y ago
(Despite pulling a quote from the beginning, I did read the whole thing.) I'm not intrinsically against the idea, but if you're going to teach children this sort of skill, the teachers themselves are going to have to be a bit more brutally honest with themselves about what the children actually deal with, or it really will just be one more feel-good exercise of no value. Recollecting himself, Reedhom sat up straight. “Mommy, I don’t like it when you scream at me,” he announced firmly. “Good,” Wade said. “And maybe your mommy will say: ‘I’m sorry, Reedhom. I had to go somewhere in a hurry, and I got a little mad. I’m sorry.’ ” Let me tell you what the kid is hearing here, or at least what a lot of the kids are hearing: "If I say 'Mommy, I don't like it when you scream at me' Mommy will just stop screaming and I can get away with whatever it is I may have done to trigger it." Or, Mommy might just as well scream back "DON'T YOU TALK BACK TO ME LIKE THAT." and keep on going; what then? If you're not going to address either of those issues, you're just adding another place to the curriculum where the children will learn to parrot back at you what you want to hear without actually changing anything about their lives. Honestly, we have enough of those. If this is going to work, the teachers are going to have to step out of the fuzzy-wuzzy bubble of school and address the real world interactions the children might actually experience, and not slant the coverage, so to speak.
- robg 13y ago
  Absolutely, but just consider that modern neuroscience is still new, and scary, to the vast majority of teachers. When you consider their sole job as brain training, emotions very much included, the profession is made much simpler in many ways. The problem is we are likely looking at another two decades before these brain science methods are more mainstream. IMHO growing brains is the exact and, dare I say, only purview of educational programs.
  - hosh 13y ago
    That's a misconception. "Growing brains" is the idealized intent of educational programs. The actual function of education is to indoctrinate future citizens and condition obedient workers. It is far, far easier to control a society when the people have very little emotional intelligence. Coincidentally, I was browsing through my copy of Robert Greene's 48 Laws of Power: Look at the part of a person that is most visible -- their greed, their lust, their intense fear. These are the emotions they cannot conceal, and over which they have the least control. And what people cannot control, you can control for them. In the same chapter, Greene advises one to find the "helpless child". Pretty much all emotional vulnerabilities come from childhood hangups. You find the conditions that will regress someone into a helpless child, and they will come to depend upon you. Those who understand power dynamics have no incentive to teach emotional intelligence. And for most people, actually working with emotions is very difficult and brings up a lot of ugly stuff. People generally don't want to.
baldfat 13y ago
Giving children a voice. Being a Heat Start teacher I can tell you that it is EXTREMELY important. Instead of just making sounds or cry when Billy kicked or pushed him the child says, "Stop I don't like that." Changes a person from being a victim to being an advocate for themselves. If everyone could learn how to express their emotions into words we would never have Jerry Springer Show. Words are better than fists.
- GrinningFool 13y ago
  This - and the article itself - doesn't seem to address the other half of that. "Stop I don't like that." "Too bad." Shove. "Stop I don't like it when you yell at me." "TOO BAD! NEXT TIME DON'T DO SOMETHING TO DESERVE IT!" A child can't control teh reaction to advocating for himself. And if he does so and the reaction is negative, he will quickly learn not to do so. I don't have a solution, but I know that simply teaching this more appropriate method of self-advocacy isn't enough. And depending on the circumstances, it can easily backfire.
  - misuba 13y ago
    Any half-decent emotional curriculum will teach that you can't control other people's emotions. (And that there's a lot you can't know for sure about those emotions - which kids are shown as picking up in the article.)
- LyndsySimon 13y ago
  > Words are better than fists. This is truth - but not an absolute. When someone is using their fists against you, no words are going to protect you. While I do believe our society resorts to violence too quickly, there is a time and a place for the use of force, and I fear that we're swinging too far in the other direction.
  - tesseractive 13y ago
    I'm not sure I understand how we can simultaneously be resorting to violence too quickly and also swinging too far in the other direction. I could be mistaken, but the former sure seems like the more pressing problem in practice. Are there advocates of taking it too far in the other direction? Of course, but there are advocates of just about everything. I would tend to save my worries regarding those advocates until the problem of resorting to violence too quickly recedes some, and the opposite problem becomes more prevalent outside of mere advocacy.
unoti 13y ago
Emotional control can, most certainly, be taught. But it rarely is in our society. When I was a kid, I learned from observing my father that being a "real man" means shaping the world according to your view of how it should be-- taking control, avenging wrongs, showing strength. In my 30's and 40's I've been totally reshaping my ideal of what a real man does, and it involves the opposite in many ways: making people feel safe, having excellent self control, and outstanding control of my emotions and attitude. The shocking thing to me is how often the behaviors I know as right according to my new ideals make me behave in ways that my father would see as pathetic and weak. But it's completely possible to re-train one's own emotional composition and approach to life. That's what Stoicism is all about. I wish someone had taught me about this when I was young. A few things I wish I'd known about when I was a kid: 1. The No Complaining bracelet challenge[1]. This was life changing to me, because through this exercise I learned that "letting it all out" doesn't really help much, and what really helps is reshaping your own mind. I'm still doing this challenge today, as a life habit, even after several years. 2. Stop worrying and stop living[2]. You can boil this book down to a few pages, with a lot of stories that help you understand why and how. I did this book on audio during a long car trip. Also life changing for me. 3. Stoicism. Reading Letters from a Stoic[3] taught me that there was an entirely different way to look at friendship that I'd never considered. And it taught me that there are people who constantly practice controlling their emotions in a positive way, the way a martial artist constantly practices how to move his body. [1] http://www.acomplaintfreeworld.org/ http://www.acomplaintfreeworld.org/ [2] http://www.amazon.com/How-Stop-Worrying-Start-Living/dp/0671733354 http://www.amazon.com/How-Stop-Worrying-Start-Living/dp/0671... [3] http://www.amazon.com/Letters-Penguin-Classics-Lucius-Annaeus/dp/0140442103/ http://www.amazon.com/Letters-Penguin-Classics-Lucius-Annaeu...
- rfnslyr 13y ago
  Whenever I'm faced with a decision, I just ask myself what my parents would do, then I do the opposite.
vicbrooker 13y ago
My startup is indirectly dealing with this - some schools are currently testing out app that helps children (and teachers for that matter) identify and manage emotions. Early signs are that children can be 'prompted' to apply empathetic reasoning with the right interfaces, and this can be more effective than average teacher-guided instruction. It's really tricky stuff to get right but there's definitely potential for improvement in this area. There has been (in Australia at least) a focus for the last few decades on teaching the definition of emotions - this is what sadness is, this is what anger is - and hoping that students get enough out of that to learn how to apply it in day to day like. Focusing on context and leaving it open enough for children to work it out for themselves seems to be more effective. Really tricky to actually pull that off in a classroom though.
makerops 13y ago
"In the years since, a number of studies have supported this view. So-called noncognitive skills — attributes like self-restraint, persistence and self-awareness — might actually be better predictors of a person’s life trajectory than standard academic measures." Only after practicing did I achieved some success in the above abilities, late in my 20s, and it has a huge impact on general well being, career trajectory etc.
kordless 13y ago
My daughter goes to middle school in Moraga, CA. In the last 6 years since my son was in a nearby school, they've introduced a concept for making it easier for the children to tap into school counseling resources. Kids can visit the school's psychologist by pulling out a "Felt" card and giving it to the teacher. It serves as an emotional opt-out for whatever happens to be causing stress at the time and allowing the child to go talk about it to someone who has the skills and time to listen. I asked her, "I wonder how many of those get used during dodgeball tournaments?".
3838 13y ago
an interesting bbc post here by director adam curtis: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/the_curse_of_tina_part_two http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/the_curse_of_tin... all about how a lot of the need for emotional expression was invented at the esalean institute in the 60's and is also a type of conformity.
nwzpaperman 13y ago
Sure. Nature beats it into people all the time. Some people just need more time for nature to act on them than others.
JonnyRoger 13y ago
A complicated answer to a not focused enough question about a TL;DR Article. The social skills like how to say you dissatisfied by someone's action or reaction is. But is that intelligence ? Affect regulation is closer in my view to emotional intelligence and can be acquiered to some extent but is more akin to language - the earlier the better. And the traits are very dependent on attachment patterns - relationship with caregiver.
Kudzu_Bob 13y ago
If emotional intelligence can be taught (which it can't, because the concept is as bogus as those Baby Einstein videos that used to be so popular, but never mind), then smart people will be the ones to master it. Why? Because smart people are good at learning stuff.
- auctiontheory 13y ago
  Do you have any data that people who are smart (at learning math and computers - I assume that's what you mean) are also good at learning to deal with people, particularly non-math people? If anything, I have observed a negative correlation. And I know some pretty f*ing smart people.
  - Kudzu_Bob 13y ago
    You shouldn't reply to comments that you haven't read.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
goggles99 13y ago
Another example of the government trying to be the parent here. How sad that the "nanny" feels that it must get it's hands on kids so early by nurturing them against those evil parents. The government has largely supported things that have torn the family apart, now as the "nanny" it is trying to pick up all the pieces and completely replace (little by little) what is left of it. Why? well two reasons... 1. To maintain and gain ever larger amounts of power and control (which requires taking more and more freedom, privacy and choices away from the people). 2. To rid the world of God and religion (which is necessary for number one to even be a possibility). The government must weaken the people and make them dependent on it. Best way to accomplish this is to destroy what creates strong communities. Family and faith.
boothead 13y ago
I went through the book "The whole brain child" with my five yr old daughter recently. She absolutely lapped it up. I highly recommend it and the authors other books if you want to explore your children's (or your own) emotional landscape.

84 points by 001sky 13y ago

Intuitively it would seem that if the desire is there, it can be taught. If someone doesn't want to learn, they won't. But if someone has an open mind, they can learn. There are many socially awkward people who bloom in college, or in leadership roles.

bayesianhorse 13y ago
Open mind isn't enough. There are no clear unequivocal paths to improve social skills. I suspect that lack of situational awareness and lack of concentration power/endurance is at the heart of most of these problems. Knowing what to do isn't enough, you need to do it. But improving awareness and endurance of your awareness is only possible through months or years of training, especially meditation and trying to find more awareness in social situations.

pinion247 13y ago

Can emotional intelligence be proven to exist?

MichaelGG 13y ago
No. "Emotional intelligence" is a label applied to soft things so they can say "But normal intelligence isn't the only kind of intelligence! You can be smart in other things, too!" Or provide quips like "Well, you've got a high IQ, but your EQ has a long way to go." Arguing over definitions and labels is usually unproductive. I think in this case, it does dilute the idea of intelligence (being able to reason abstractly), while at the same time, increases the emphasis on high intelligence. We'd all be better off just defocusing on intelligence, as a: there's little control you have over your intelligence, and b: it matters far, far, less than what some of us programming types might think, and c: focusing on an innate skill tends to come at a cost of not focusing on perseverance and work ethic, which matter far more. Personally, I wish there'd been less emphasis on how smart I was as a kid; perhaps I'd have more discipline. But alas, thinking about algorithms causes far more short-term reward than, say, cold calling, yet the latter is far more likely to generate success for me.
dxhdr 13y ago
Probably. Personally I like to call it emotional maturity. I'd be surprised if emotional maturity and immaturity couldn't be proven to exist. Obviously the 'norms' of emotional (social) maturity differ depending on society. But clearly there are people who just don't "get it" and don't or aren't able to act in line with the norms.
theorique 13y ago
Can cognitive intelligence be proved to exist? The thing that we call IQ (or g) is a set of cognitive abilities in pattern recognition, problem solving, puzzles, symbol manipulation, and so forth. Insofar as "something" is measured by these kinds of tests, then IQ/g can be said to exist. Similarly, the set of traits and behaviors collected under the umbrella of "emotional intelligence" are a grab bag of self-regulation, resilience, emotional self-control, insight into one's own mind, ability to form a working model of the emotions of others, ability to "read" the emotions of others, and so forth. These are less well defined than the abilities grouped under IQ/g but insofar as they could be measured through well-designed tests, then emotional intelligence can be said to exist. Alternatively, there could be a functional or "effectiveness based" definition of emotional intelligence, even if it were less quantitative than IQ/g.
MartinCron 13y ago
I'm confused by this question. It seems plainly obvious that some people are better than others at understanding the emotional states of themselves and the people around them.
kordless 13y ago
Can business intelligence be proven to exist?

dnautics 13y ago

I can answer this question without reading the article: Yes. And it has to be, for most people. Except some people, who are incapable of it for physiological reasons. And there are some people who are so naturally charming and can read what others want that (but on a superficial level) that they become pyschopaths.

hcarvalhoalves 13y ago
> And there are some people who are so naturally charming and can read what others want that (but on a superficial level) that they become pyschopaths. That's not the definition of psychopathic trait (or disorder, or anti-social behavior) though. What characterizes it is diminished empathy and remorse, so in fact, it's a lack of emotional intelligence. The point is that if you're free from remorse but still have a working mental model of other's emotions (like most humans), you can better manipulate other's intentions without guilty or other thoughts influencing your decisions. We all fall somewhere inside an empathy spectrum, only the ones that fall at one extreme are characterized as bearer of psychopathic disorder, while the functional ones live normal (or almost normal) lives. There's a big chance you work for one actually, these people tend to be successful in leadership positions.
- dnautics 13y ago
  well, if they're charming, they clearly have some level of emotional intelligence that far supercedes what most of us have. Saying that they lack emotional intelligence is like categorically saying that you "lack scientific intelligence" because even though you are smashing at physics - because you couldn't find your way a periodic table.

arcosdev 13y ago

How can you teach something that's total bullshit.

warfangle 13y ago
Hi there, where did you receive your advanced degree in psychology, education and/or psychiatry? Please leave your pedantic quips on reddit.
- arcosdev 13y ago
  "[Goleman] exemplifies more clearly than most the fundamental absurdity of the tendency to class almost any type of behaviour as an 'intelligence'... If these five 'abilities' define 'emotional intelligence', we would expect some evidence that they are highly correlated; Goleman admits that they might be quite uncorrelated, and in any case if we cannot measure them, how do we know they are related? So the whole theory is built on quicksand: there is no sound scientific basis."[1] 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence#Cannot_be_recognized_as_form_of_intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_intelligence#Cannot_...
  - warfangle 13y ago
    So it's a pedantic argument over the usage of the word intelligence. Sort of like your original quip, no? Locke suggests the use of the word skill instead; however the definition of intelligence is the ability to apply knowledge and skills. Given that the NICHD is pushing for consensus, and that I am not (and neither are you, given your non-primary source) qualified to determine the status of EI, let's not dismiss it outright. How about contributing meaningfully to the discussion instead of alternating between trolling and non-authorative copypasta?
    - arcosdev 13y ago
      I'll dismiss anything outright that is being used by moronic business-school twits that are using EI as a way to bolster their non-skills and nonsense MBA programs.

robg 13y ago

See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_self-regulation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_self-regulation Prefrontal cortex is still developing through our early twenties. Mitigating the effects of emotional responses takes work, just like any other discipline. That work grows synapses and it's the reason mental health therapies change connectivity patterns in the brain. Leaving the word 'emotion' out (which some here seem to have strong reactions to), self-regulation is well-understood.

pinion247 13y ago
That's different than Goleman's pseudoscience of Emotional Intelligence, but maybe that's what NYTimes meant?
- robg 13y ago
  From the article here: It may also make children smarter. Davidson notes that because social-emotional training develops the prefrontal cortex, it can also enhance academically important skills like impulse control, abstract reasoning, long-term planning and working memory. Though it’s not clear how significant this effect is, a 2011 meta-analysis found that K-12 students who received social-emotional instruction scored an average of 11 percentile points higher on standardized achievement tests. A similar study found a nearly 20 percent decrease in violent or delinquent behavior. Goleman isn't mentioned.
  - fleitz 13y ago
    The big problem is that SATs are a good predictor of grades and not success in life.
hosh 13y ago
It's less about mitigating the effects of emotional responses and more that, people are habituated to react emotionally rather than responding. To respond, you have to be fully present and mindful of the emotions as they arise -- too really feel the emotion -- without becoming consumed by them. That may or may not have anything to do with the prefrontal cortex.

a3voices 13y ago

Belief systems matter more than emotional intelligence. For example, if you live in the Incan empire and everyone believes you're a god, it doesn't matter what your emotional intelligence is.

jerf 13y ago

(Despite pulling a quote from the beginning, I did read the whole thing.) I'm not intrinsically against the idea, but if you're going to teach children this sort of skill, the teachers themselves are going to have to be a bit more brutally honest with themselves about what the children actually deal with, or it really will just be one more feel-good exercise of no value. Recollecting himself, Reedhom sat up straight. “Mommy, I don’t like it when you scream at me,” he announced firmly. “Good,” Wade said. “And maybe your mommy will say: ‘I’m sorry, Reedhom. I had to go somewhere in a hurry, and I got a little mad. I’m sorry.’ ” Let me tell you what the kid is hearing here, or at least what a lot of the kids are hearing: "If I say 'Mommy, I don't like it when you scream at me' Mommy will just stop screaming and I can get away with whatever it is I may have done to trigger it." Or, Mommy might just as well scream back "DON'T YOU TALK BACK TO ME LIKE THAT." and keep on going; what then? If you're not going to address either of those issues, you're just adding another place to the curriculum where the children will learn to parrot back at you what you want to hear without actually changing anything about their lives. Honestly, we have enough of those. If this is going to work, the teachers are going to have to step out of the fuzzy-wuzzy bubble of school and address the real world interactions the children might actually experience, and not slant the coverage, so to speak.

robg 13y ago
Absolutely, but just consider that modern neuroscience is still new, and scary, to the vast majority of teachers. When you consider their sole job as brain training, emotions very much included, the profession is made much simpler in many ways. The problem is we are likely looking at another two decades before these brain science methods are more mainstream. IMHO growing brains is the exact and, dare I say, only purview of educational programs.
- hosh 13y ago
  That's a misconception. "Growing brains" is the idealized intent of educational programs. The actual function of education is to indoctrinate future citizens and condition obedient workers. It is far, far easier to control a society when the people have very little emotional intelligence. Coincidentally, I was browsing through my copy of Robert Greene's 48 Laws of Power: Look at the part of a person that is most visible -- their greed, their lust, their intense fear. These are the emotions they cannot conceal, and over which they have the least control. And what people cannot control, you can control for them. In the same chapter, Greene advises one to find the "helpless child". Pretty much all emotional vulnerabilities come from childhood hangups. You find the conditions that will regress someone into a helpless child, and they will come to depend upon you. Those who understand power dynamics have no incentive to teach emotional intelligence. And for most people, actually working with emotions is very difficult and brings up a lot of ugly stuff. People generally don't want to.

baldfat 13y ago

Giving children a voice. Being a Heat Start teacher I can tell you that it is EXTREMELY important. Instead of just making sounds or cry when Billy kicked or pushed him the child says, "Stop I don't like that." Changes a person from being a victim to being an advocate for themselves. If everyone could learn how to express their emotions into words we would never have Jerry Springer Show. Words are better than fists.

GrinningFool 13y ago
This - and the article itself - doesn't seem to address the other half of that. "Stop I don't like that." "Too bad." Shove. "Stop I don't like it when you yell at me." "TOO BAD! NEXT TIME DON'T DO SOMETHING TO DESERVE IT!" A child can't control teh reaction to advocating for himself. And if he does so and the reaction is negative, he will quickly learn not to do so. I don't have a solution, but I know that simply teaching this more appropriate method of self-advocacy isn't enough. And depending on the circumstances, it can easily backfire.
- misuba 13y ago
  Any half-decent emotional curriculum will teach that you can't control other people's emotions. (And that there's a lot you can't know for sure about those emotions - which kids are shown as picking up in the article.)
LyndsySimon 13y ago
> Words are better than fists. This is truth - but not an absolute. When someone is using their fists against you, no words are going to protect you. While I do believe our society resorts to violence too quickly, there is a time and a place for the use of force, and I fear that we're swinging too far in the other direction.
- tesseractive 13y ago
  I'm not sure I understand how we can simultaneously be resorting to violence too quickly and also swinging too far in the other direction. I could be mistaken, but the former sure seems like the more pressing problem in practice. Are there advocates of taking it too far in the other direction? Of course, but there are advocates of just about everything. I would tend to save my worries regarding those advocates until the problem of resorting to violence too quickly recedes some, and the opposite problem becomes more prevalent outside of mere advocacy.

unoti 13y ago

Emotional control can, most certainly, be taught. But it rarely is in our society. When I was a kid, I learned from observing my father that being a "real man" means shaping the world according to your view of how it should be-- taking control, avenging wrongs, showing strength. In my 30's and 40's I've been totally reshaping my ideal of what a real man does, and it involves the opposite in many ways: making people feel safe, having excellent self control, and outstanding control of my emotions and attitude. The shocking thing to me is how often the behaviors I know as right according to my new ideals make me behave in ways that my father would see as pathetic and weak. But it's completely possible to re-train one's own emotional composition and approach to life. That's what Stoicism is all about. I wish someone had taught me about this when I was young. A few things I wish I'd known about when I was a kid: 1. The No Complaining bracelet challenge[1]. This was life changing to me, because through this exercise I learned that "letting it all out" doesn't really help much, and what really helps is reshaping your own mind. I'm still doing this challenge today, as a life habit, even after several years. 2. Stop worrying and stop living[2]. You can boil this book down to a few pages, with a lot of stories that help you understand why and how. I did this book on audio during a long car trip. Also life changing for me. 3. Stoicism. Reading Letters from a Stoic[3] taught me that there was an entirely different way to look at friendship that I'd never considered. And it taught me that there are people who constantly practice controlling their emotions in a positive way, the way a martial artist constantly practices how to move his body. [1] http://www.acomplaintfreeworld.org/ http://www.acomplaintfreeworld.org/ [2] http://www.amazon.com/How-Stop-Worrying-Start-Living/dp/0671733354 http://www.amazon.com/How-Stop-Worrying-Start-Living/dp/0671... [3] http://www.amazon.com/Letters-Penguin-Classics-Lucius-Annaeus/dp/0140442103/ http://www.amazon.com/Letters-Penguin-Classics-Lucius-Annaeu...

rfnslyr 13y ago
Whenever I'm faced with a decision, I just ask myself what my parents would do, then I do the opposite.

vicbrooker 13y ago

My startup is indirectly dealing with this - some schools are currently testing out app that helps children (and teachers for that matter) identify and manage emotions. Early signs are that children can be 'prompted' to apply empathetic reasoning with the right interfaces, and this can be more effective than average teacher-guided instruction. It's really tricky stuff to get right but there's definitely potential for improvement in this area. There has been (in Australia at least) a focus for the last few decades on teaching the definition of emotions - this is what sadness is, this is what anger is - and hoping that students get enough out of that to learn how to apply it in day to day like. Focusing on context and leaving it open enough for children to work it out for themselves seems to be more effective. Really tricky to actually pull that off in a classroom though.

makerops 13y ago

"In the years since, a number of studies have supported this view. So-called noncognitive skills — attributes like self-restraint, persistence and self-awareness — might actually be better predictors of a person’s life trajectory than standard academic measures." Only after practicing did I achieved some success in the above abilities, late in my 20s, and it has a huge impact on general well being, career trajectory etc.

kordless 13y ago

My daughter goes to middle school in Moraga, CA. In the last 6 years since my son was in a nearby school, they've introduced a concept for making it easier for the children to tap into school counseling resources. Kids can visit the school's psychologist by pulling out a "Felt" card and giving it to the teacher. It serves as an emotional opt-out for whatever happens to be causing stress at the time and allowing the child to go talk about it to someone who has the skills and time to listen. I asked her, "I wonder how many of those get used during dodgeball tournaments?".

3838 13y ago

an interesting bbc post here by director adam curtis: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/the_curse_of_tina_part_two http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/posts/the_curse_of_tin... all about how a lot of the need for emotional expression was invented at the esalean institute in the 60's and is also a type of conformity.

nwzpaperman 13y ago

Sure. Nature beats it into people all the time. Some people just need more time for nature to act on them than others.

JonnyRoger 13y ago

A complicated answer to a not focused enough question about a TL;DR Article. The social skills like how to say you dissatisfied by someone's action or reaction is. But is that intelligence ? Affect regulation is closer in my view to emotional intelligence and can be acquiered to some extent but is more akin to language - the earlier the better. And the traits are very dependent on attachment patterns - relationship with caregiver.

Kudzu_Bob 13y ago

If emotional intelligence can be taught (which it can't, because the concept is as bogus as those Baby Einstein videos that used to be so popular, but never mind), then smart people will be the ones to master it. Why? Because smart people are good at learning stuff.

auctiontheory 13y ago
Do you have any data that people who are smart (at learning math and computers - I assume that's what you mean) are also good at learning to deal with people, particularly non-math people? If anything, I have observed a negative correlation. And I know some pretty f*ing smart people.
- Kudzu_Bob 13y ago
  You shouldn't reply to comments that you haven't read.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

goggles99 13y ago

Another example of the government trying to be the parent here. How sad that the "nanny" feels that it must get it's hands on kids so early by nurturing them against those evil parents. The government has largely supported things that have torn the family apart, now as the "nanny" it is trying to pick up all the pieces and completely replace (little by little) what is left of it. Why? well two reasons... 1. To maintain and gain ever larger amounts of power and control (which requires taking more and more freedom, privacy and choices away from the people). 2. To rid the world of God and religion (which is necessary for number one to even be a possibility). The government must weaken the people and make them dependent on it. Best way to accomplish this is to destroy what creates strong communities. Family and faith.

boothead 13y ago

I went through the book "The whole brain child" with my five yr old daughter recently. She absolutely lapped it up. I highly recommend it and the authors other books if you want to explore your children's (or your own) emotional landscape.