Thursday, 8 May 2014

Emotions: Intelligence Quotient vs. Emotional Quotient


Intelligence Quotient vs. Emotional Quotient

The intelligence quotient, more widely known as “IQ”, is a measure of a person’s ability to solve problems using logic, and reasoning. This is widely acclaimed as one of the top ways of measuring a person’s true intelligence, and our society favours people who are able to solve problems by using logic, rather than by intuition, or blind faith. On a daily basis, and in the core of all our human interactions, reason is one of the largest factors, which enable us to make weighed, and wise, decisions.

Although very rarely thought of, emotions are another very large factor in our daily lives. They are the basis on which humans interact with each other. Emotions are an amalgamation of all of our internal feelings, moods, and passions. Emotions, in most people, are intuitive, and often expressed impulsively. This is because humans are instinctively built to have, and express emotions. Without emotions, humans would not be able to forge the complex relationships, and maintain the interactions between each other, that they do on a daily basis.  Although largely irrelevant to measuring someone’s intelligence, emotions may be more important in terms of their use in society.


The emotional quotient, or “EQ”, a measurement developed by psychologist Daniel Goleman, measures the ability to manage one’s emotions effectively, and not let emotions take control. Many argue that “EQ” is “better” than “IQ”, but in terms of what exactly? The “IQ” is said to measure one’s ability to reason, and therefore one’s intelligence. The “EQ” is a measure of one’s ability to harness emotions, and to control them intelligently. These two measures take into account very different factors, but the question is, which one is more valuable to society? For a society to function properly, there must be critical thinkers. These are the people who reflect on important issues and current problems, and try to find solutions using reason. An example of a critical thinker would be an engineer, or an inventor, who uses logic, and processes all of the issues, to work out a possible solution. Many would say that these people are, or require intelligence, which is an ability to use reason, which ultimately, translates into a higher “IQ”. Without these great thinkers, society would not have been able to come up with all of these technological advances, and all of the responses to our changing environment. On the other hand, a society also needs person-to-person interactions in order to function. During many of our interactions with others relationships are built, no matter how large or small, and emotions are involved. Emotions can be any type of feeling such as anger, jealousy, envy, happiness, intrigue, surprise, and curiosity - to name a few. Whenever we interact with others, consciously or subconsciously, we are exhibiting one or more of many emotions. When working in a team, people have to strengthen, and put forward their compassion, and kindness.  At the same time, they will have to harness any feelings of envy, jealousy, or anger. The ability to do so, gives people the necessary skills required in order to live in society. If one cannot control one's sentiments, and reacts impulsively as soon as one feels a strong emotion, one will not be able to function properly in a society. For example, a person who does not have the ability to control feelings of anger will not be able to build long-term relationships, as people  tend to prefer more stable characters, who exhibit less emotions. So to answer the question of whether “IQ” or “EQ” is more valuable in society, it is evident that “EQ” is the answer. A society can exist with people of low “IQ”. The only disadvantage to this would be that advances would most probably be slow, and ineffective. A society with people unable to control their emotions could not exist, as a society is an aggregation of many people living in an ordered community. Without proper emotional restraint, a society would not exist, and there would be total anarchy.




1 comment:

  1. I agree with your assessment of this question, though I think we should not think in terms of having a society that is either clever or emotionally intelligent… Nor should we think of EQ as being all about controlling emotions and postponing gratification of desire (like the marshmallow test kids). Perhaps we should rather think in terms of individuals and how we educate them. Do we want to create super-smart, innovative thinkers or people who lead more fulfilled, and more empathetic lives…? Does it have to be either/or? Why not both?

    ReplyDelete