Emotional Intelligence: 10th Anniversary Edition; Why It Can Matter More Than IQ (Paperback)

One of the more controversial and overlooked types of intelligence is Emotional Intelligence. I do not agree with the idea that one's EQ is in some way opposite from the IQ, the standard intelligence quotient idea (which in and of itself is calculated and reliant on different criteria depending upon the test). I don't believe that Goleman ever makes such a dramatic claim as to show a precise inverse relationship between the EQ and IQ. He does show that there are different kinds of difficulties that can arise, and that a high IQ does not necessarily (or even often) translate into a high EQ.

After a brief introduction exploring the general issues of intelligence and the power of emotions, Goleman
looks at new discoveries in brain anatomy and architecture, particularly as it pertains to what happens when emotions `take over'. The second, and longest, section of the book looks at the nature of Emotional Intelligence. This is being able to understand oneself as well as others, being able to control emotions (or not), and drawing on Aristotle's phrase from the Nicomachean Ethics, being able to have the right degree of emotion at the right time for the right reason for the right duration. Goleman's third section incorporates the general ideas of Emotional Intelligence into the broader context of living, stating that one's emotional intelligence is in fact a more critical factor than pure computational intelligence at being `successful' in many important parts of life - from personal relationships to professional relationships, self-satisfaction and self-growth, emotions often hold sway over traditional `intelligence'. The fourth section examines developmental issues, leading to the final section exploring what happens when such development goes wrong.

Goleman's observation that children seem to be increasingly depressed, despondent, violent and unruly than in the past may or may not be accurate - unfortunately, such comparisons with the past often rely on shaky anecdotal evidence or studies whose parameters are different, and thus whose conclusions cannot be accurately compared. However, it certainly seems that these are true observations. Goleman warns of a coming crisis as unprepared children face an adulthood full of emotional stress and crises for which they have not developed coping skills. Goleman calls for more emphasis on emotional intelligence issues - anger management, conflict resolution, sense of self, etc. for school children to reduce violence and potential for crime.

Overall, this book presents interesting ideas. The idea of Emotional Intelligence is fairly new, and will no doubt be adapted and revised in the coming years. Goleman's task here may be less of a comprehensive overview rather than an introductory shout to the community that needs to address the issue.

For me the book started well with references to Aristotle's "Nicomachean Ethics," making a connection between the wisdom that Aristotle exalted and emotional intelligence. The book went on to explain how the physical components of the brain affect emotional behavior; here the amygdala is explained, which is the control center for emotional behavior, and is referred to throughout the book. This biology and neuroscience clarified how rudimentary emotional behavior is in the human brain.

In part three, the author showed progressive thinking in his belief that the medical profession must consider emotional factors. Since the book's publication, medical schools have agreed with him. On June 10, 2004, the Wall Street Journal reported that graduates from all 126 medical schools in the U.S. will take a standardized test that will rate "bedside manner." According to the article, this test will "gauge what multiple-choice questions cannot: a graduate's ability to communicate with patients..."

In parts Four and Five my interest waned as the author discussed how emotional training can save society. Although the author suggests key improvements to pedagogy, the case studies and extreme examples of what can go wrong with the emotional brain belabored the topic for me. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder is closely analyzed, as is trauma, abuse, and bullies - all valid areas for discussion but beyond what is needed for demonstrating what emotional intelligence is and why it is important. Violence, social aggression, and certain neuroses resulting from emotional problems could have been explained in a shorter section. But the author deserves credit for offering solutions, and has an interesting theory that modernity is the cause for a worldwide trend of melancholy.

I would have liked more of the book devoted to the challenge of defining emotions. Of interest to me was Appendix A because it revealed the classification attempts made for emotions. The section considers a handful of "core" emotions with all other emotions being a blend of these; there also might be families of emotions with many nuances affecting moods and temperament.

This book reveals a big-picture outlook of the human brain and the emotional activity that is an intrinsic part of it. The thesis that emotional intelligence can be more important than IQ is well supported, but the author is not saying that it is necessarily better! (Previous reviewers of the book have created an EQ-versus-IQ contest.) Both are critical facets of intelligence that must work together and neither can be dismissed.

That being said, I think Mr. Goleman has some good, long-overdue ideas. I have indeed felt my own life to be much more satisfying when I implemented some of his suggestions. It gives me a real sense of clarity when I attempt to tune in to other people's agendas... makes me feel as if I have much more personal power and control over my own choices, instead of working myself up into a tizzy over others' behavior towards me. Empathy--really giving of yourself emotionally-- enables me to have insight into others' lives and my own, as well as a quality of connection and sharing that I had never thought possible. I am a veterinary student, and just as with human patients, the most precious gift you really can give is your time and your listening ears... and it feels phenomenal to the listener as well as the speaker.

Those who decry the "clueless", I think, are closer to the mark than Goleman himself is. Because it really is all about having a clue... knowing what to do, knowing what is going on, knowing how to act and what to be.

I used to think I was one of maybe five people in the country who did not like this book, because everybody else seemed to treat it as gospel. Truly, not until recently did I find ANY kind of real criticism of it. From the beginning, though, it left a bad taste in my mouth. Yes, it did speak to me, at least partially... but the aforementioned smugness I felt from it, as well as other previously unvoiced doubts, told me it wasn't quite right.

Too bad, also, that many of this book's critics tend to fall into arguments that only seem to bolster Goleman's cause. After all, those who disagree with the book must all be racist, immature, or just jealous of other's emotional and social ease, and therefore their opinions are less valid, right?

Now for my other doubts: Quite simply, I have a problem with *how* people attempt to implement his ideas. How many of you have a friend who works for a corporation that regularly puts its employees through ridiculous, even humiliating, "team-building" and "morale-building" seminars? Such activities are unspokenly (sometimes spokenly) enforced under the threat of being deemed not a team player or having a bad attitude. I suppose bosses can now tell dissenters that they lack EQ and won't amount to much at work. Or, for that matter, in life; since EQ carries over to personal life and the very satisfaction with and enjoyment of it.

"The right attitude" in real life means agreement more often than most may think... agreeing with the boss, the crowd, or the prevailing opinion. Social competence seems to be defined primarily in terms of being agreeable, approachable and nonthreatening... primarily, of course, intended to be aimed at women, who, after all, are supposed to be more inherently nurturing and relationship-seeking.

Persistence, determination, tenacity, boldness, passion, vivacity, vigor... nowhere does Goleman have a fraction of the praise for these qualities that he has for "social competence". Because these qualities just might put one into disagreement with others, and apparently if you are truly competent socially, you just don't disagree. Or if you do, it's in a "nonthreatening" way...

We point to study after study showing how married people are healthier, wealthier and happier than single people, and that social isolation increases the risk of early illness and death. We make women in particular feel inadequate for not being "nurturing" enough, and people in general for not "getting along" well enough. And as for children displaying the aforementioned qualities in too high levels... we put them on Ritalin or Paxil.
I did not feel personally more competent emotionally OR socially when I held back, trying to be "nonthreatening"... no, it was when I found my voice and agreed to disagree, when I decided to risk some negative perceptions from others. Call me funny, but I don't think that REAL emotional intelligence would stand for suffocating people under a mantle of "going along to get along". I wonder how many people hurt others simply by tarring them with a "does not get along" brush, and verbally or secretly invoking EQ?

For advice I could really use on improving my social and emotional competence, I found Phil McGraw's books much more useful, especially "Life Strategies" and "Self Matters." To glean some spiritual insight, I could turn to Deepak Chopra. And from fanfiction writers, I learned some valuable lessons about creating realistic characters, painting emotionally rich and complex scenarios, respectful critiquing, and getting a proper critical distance on my personal needs, desires, fantasies and insecurities... lessons that, in applying to other dimensions of my life, have been unbelievably helpful.

These sources were much more healing and useful than Goleman's advice ever was. And not once did I come away with a feeling of having my nose rubbed in it.