Have you ever been told, “You have high emotional intelligence”? Did you take it as a compliment or as sarcasm? Well, both reactions make sense. We recently conducted an open survey asking, “What do you think high emotional intelligence means in the modern era?” Out of the 4,337 responses we received, the answers varied widely. Apart from the traditional interpretation of “being tactful,” many agreed with sentiments like “not afraid to admit one’s mistakes,” “being gentle yet firm,” and “minding one’s own business without making awkward small talk.”
Before diving into why there are so many interpretations of emotional intelligence and why it can sometimes feel complicated, let’s trace back its origin. The term ’emotional intelligence’ or ‘Emotional Quotient (EQ)’ was initially close to the concept of “understanding oneself, others, and the world through emotions.” It first appeared in a psychology paper in 1966 but gained significant attention in 1995 when Daniel Goleman, a columnist for the New York Times, wrote the popular book “Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ.” When introduced to a broader audience, it was translated as “EQ: Emotional Quotient,” and the term soon became a buzzword, thanks to subsequent writings echoing the same theme.
From its emergence into mainstream consciousness, emotional intelligence was marketed as a quantifiable and trainable trait. It encapsulated various non-technical factors like personality, hobbies, and social skills that didn’t fit neatly into the “IQ” box. It became synonymous with the worldly notion of “success.” Its appeal was undeniable, especially in a society valuing interpersonal skills. The timing was just right. However, it’s essential to note that many bestsellers later were criticized for exaggerating or even distorting the academic term’s original definition and purpose.
Why Today’s Youth Aren’t So Keen on “Emotional Intelligence”
It seems the buzz around “emotional intelligence” or EQ hasn’t lasted very long, especially among the younger generation. One reason might be its early appearance and its alignment with some traditional values. Think about where you commonly hear the term: in offices, at dinner tables, while making friends, or during arranged meet-ups. These scenarios aim to achieve specific goals, like “leaving a good impression on an interviewer,” “dating with marriage in mind,” or adhering to certain unwritten rules, such as “men should pay on dates” or “letting the boss speak first.” In these contexts, EQ often means “quickly recognizing and mastering rules to one’s advantage.” Actions like refusing to drink at social events or splitting bills on dates (going Dutch) could be seen as signs of low EQ because they defy established norms.
Defining EQ in this way is undeniably straightforward, but it’s also restrictive. It reduces EQ to older sayings like “being savvy” or “knowing how to deal with people.” While EQ sounds trendier due to its theoretical backing, to many young individuals who prioritize genuine human connections over achieving specific objectives, this understanding of EQ feels a bit too calculating and smarmy. This might explain why when older generations or popular articles mention EQ, it doesn’t quite resonate with the younger crowd.
But that’s not the only reason. Some say, “While I don’t think EQ is a bad term, constantly trying to achieve it is exhausting.” Since its inception, EQ aimed at making someone more likable because interpersonal skills were highly sought after. Today, with the rise of superficial online connections, many youths are less interested in maintaining deep, effort-demanding relationships. They prefer things to be organic and not forced. EQ, with its emphasis on pleasing everyone, seems outdated and unnecessary in this era where genuine human interactions are rare luxuries. For someone who can comfortably work and enjoy life from home, where’s the need for high EQ?
The very definition of EQ is also ambiguous. What’s considered high EQ in one context can be seen as low in another. A key aspect of EQ is making everyone around you feel comfortable, but the definitions of “everyone” and “comfort” vary widely based on personal perspectives.
Considering these points, we can conclude that while EQ is still worth discussing, we first need to give it a clearer definition: it’s a way to understand the world by empathizing and communicating with others, including oneself, aiming to better grasp human nature. Despite its limitations, EQ does have merits like genuine concern for others’ feelings and a deep understanding of interpersonal dynamics.
In this context, the modern interpretation of EQ accepted by today’s youth might be:
It’s More Than Just Reading Faces; It’s About “Feeling the Atmosphere”
From our previous surveys, some behaviors often praised (in a positive light) as demonstrating high emotional intelligence (EQ) include:
- Understanding the implied meaning behind words. For instance, “I’ll need it as soon as possible” often means “I need it now,” “I’ll take just two minutes of your time” might mean “This will take a while,” and “We don’t have much budget this time” is a polite way to say “We have no budget.”
- Maintaining a comfortable distance in relationships. This means not being overly formal or overly casual. Whether accepting or declining offers, it’s essential to avoid putting undue pressure on the other person.
- Skillfully starting, steering, shifting, and ending a conversation. This ensures that important topics get the attention they deserve, and less pleasant ones don’t linger for too long.
- Showing empathy and being objective. It’s about not jumping to conclusions too quickly and refraining from imposing one’s logic onto others.
- On occasion, a white lie, said with good intentions, can be acceptable. The fundamental premise, of course, is that it should not genuinely harm others.
- While caring for others, it’s also essential to retain one’s principles and self-worth.
In short, it echoes what the Curiosity Research Institute summarized in their “Growth” report: it’s about striking a balance, being “worldly without becoming cynical.” Awkwardness can arise when both parties have different expectations of the same event. One of the roles of EQ is to anticipate and eliminate such discrepancies. This approach to EQ is similar to, but not quite the same as, “reading facial expressions” because the latter focuses on “others” while the former emphasizes “oneself.” Drawing inspiration from the Japanese term “KY (unable to read the mood)” and the English word “articulate,” high EQ can be defined as the ability to “sense the atmosphere and connect perspectives.” You can use it to observe others, but whether to act on these observations is up to you. While understanding others’ intentions and needs, it’s crucial not to allow misinterpretations of your own intentions and needs.
As for winning over, pleasing, persuading, attracting, or intimidating others, these outcomes aren’t your primary goal. Instead, you aim to understand with pure sincerity. By moving away from the traditional values of “utility,” we can embrace and appreciate the more valuable aspects of emotional intelligence.
It’s About “Controlling Oneself,” Not Others
Emotional intelligence (EQ), much like the other topics we’ve discussed such as “material intelligence” and “dignity,” fundamentally touches on three relationships: our connection with objects, with others, and with our inner selves. You can think of EQ as a form of “self-control,” where the primary aim is not to control others but oneself.
Take conversations, for instance. If we solely see EQ as a tool for “handling people,” then we might feel like those TV shopping hosts who can’t endure a moment of silence beyond ten seconds. No matter how well they perform, there’s always this underlying pressure of meeting a certain “target” or KPI, leading to fatigue and reluctance. If the purpose of social interactions isn’t purely to be liked or to fill an hour with forced chatter, then what we should be doing is recognizing our feelings at every moment, and curbing those emotions that might negatively affect others. For example:
- Everyone has the right to express their opinions, but commenting on someone’s selfie without sounding critical is EQ.
- Encountering trolls on social media is common, but controlling the urge to engage in a heated argument with them demonstrates EQ.
- Making mistakes is natural, but admitting them and apologizing right away rather than protecting one’s ego showcases EQ.
- Complimenting someone is a kind gesture, but doing so in a way that doesn’t leave them suspicious of ulterior motives is EQ.
- Rejections and disagreements are a part of life, but doing so without being impatient or coming off as superior is EQ.
- Anger is a human emotion, but not allowing provocative comments to trigger you into lashing out at someone else is EQ.
- Using your phone is a personal choice, but putting it away when someone is trying to talk to you reflects EQ.
You’ll find that the underlying principle for all these is consistent: continuously monitor your emotions while also considering, “How might my actions affect others?” and then controlling them to a level where they’re present but not overwhelming.
It’s not about thinking, “How would I feel in their shoes?” but rather, “Why might they feel this way?” When we talk about EQ, empathy is crucial. Empathy theory suggests that understanding isn’t about placing yourself in someone else’s situation but trying to truly comprehend their thoughts. In essence, empathy requires us to focus on others rather than on ourselves. Interpreting others purely for manipulation might be clever to some extent, but it’s not genuine empathy or a form of EQ we’d want to endorse.
Another insightful perspective is to “reduce societal labeling.” Labels and stereotypes brought on by society can be limiting. Viewing someone solely from societal roles, like a mother, middle-aged person, trendy youth, or teacher, only complicates our understanding, especially when interacting with someone very different from us. Making assumptions like “Real men don’t act cute” or “Once you’re a mother, you should prioritize your family and children” only lead to unreasonable or even incorrect expectations. As previously mentioned, differing expectations can cause discomfort and friction, which runs counter to the essence of empathetic EQ.
What More Can We Ponder About Emotional Intelligence (EQ)?
Discussing topics like femininity, politeness, and moral values can be likened to classic themes, and if you’re considering the concept of EQ in today’s context, perhaps you might want to reflect on these five common misconceptions (though, of course, there are no definitive answers):
1. Is EQ in opposition to “having emotions”?
Joy, sadness, anger, fear, and shyness are intrinsically linked to EQ, yet they aren’t wholly encompassed by its evaluative criteria. These emotions are spontaneous and genuine reactions, and hiding them isn’t practical. However, how we deal with them, whether by avoiding or confronting, denying or acknowledging, seems to be an indicator of our EQ.
2. Does EQ come at the cost of authenticity?
If we simplify EQ as “empathy towards others’ emotions and restraint over our own,” then, high EQ might sometimes compromise genuine expression. Authenticity often implies freedom from restraint. On the flip side, being candid and indifferent to others’ opinions also holds value; it requires more courage, making it perhaps another form of EQ.
3. Can EQ be biased?
Since EQ operates within human societies, it can’t be entirely detached from societal norms. However, these norms and templates aren’t always just. Before labeling someone as having “low EQ,” it might be worth reflecting: Are you judging their ability as a lover, a friend, or even as a human being? This evaluation might carry inherent biases that deserve consideration.
4. Is EQ essential in modern life?
One perspective suggests that EQ is just one of many ways to perceive the world. It might be a virtue, but it’s not necessarily a shortcut to success or the solution to all problems. Sometimes, issues attributed to “low EQ” might not even be related to EQ. Instead of labeling it as essential, perhaps it’s more accurate to see it as a seasoning in the grand dish of life.
5. Can EQ serve as a behavioral benchmark?
Much like aesthetics, striving to be a person with high EQ can have its guidelines when applied to oneself. However, using it to guide or constrain others often falls short. Titles like “EQ Guru” or “EQ Expert” might sound as unreliable as contemporary emotional guides. After all, we can’t fully understand another individual, and sometimes, our self-assessment can be contradictory. But on the bright side, if we wish to keep the term EQ relevant today, it’s essential to allow flexibility in its interpretation. Granting everyone a bit of personal space to interpret it isn’t a bad thing at all.
