are you sure i’m the one shifting the goalposts here?
my argument form the start was EQ is bullshit, a made up arbitrary metric that has no widespread acceptance. and that is true.
And like all bullshit things, people mostly use it to bully and posture each other.
I guess we will stay true to our beliefs. Being able to rationally understand emotions, reflect, feel empathy, etc. are not some foreign concepts, it’s real, categorizable human psychology (and neurology?) behaviour.
and they have no objective measure. you cannot measure a feeling of empathy and compare it across two people. empathy can’t be measured like a discus throw or how fast you can run mile.
they are not measurable things, they are contextualized by culture, language, and society. what is empathetic in one society is considered cruelty in another. and further, it will vary a lot depending on relationship, familiarity, and social dynamics.
You may think you are the sole arbiter of these things, and you’re welcome to do that in your personal life. but the arrogance it takes you can magically ID people’s ‘empathy’ based on internet posts is just insane ego-projection and and your judgement of how much they say shit you agree with.
Just because you can’t objectively measure amount of love between two people, doesn’t mean it’s invalid theory. You are overthinking this too much, using weird arguments and then try to push a narrative that says “anything that isn’t standardized is meaningless”. By the same logic, pretty much every psychological/personal trait is a buzzword that cannot be objectively measured, and so it’s meaningless. It’s intellectually lazy argument.
And no, empathy or ethics or emotions are not race-based (referring to your previous argument where it could be different between groups)
right, it can’t be EQ is a stupid theory with a flawed metric that is essentailly useless… apparently if that’s the case they ALL OF PYCHOLOGY IS NONSENSE.
are you serious with this crap? typical lemmy poster, can’t let the bone go and becomes a dog and starts making massive generalizations that society will collapse if their one pet peeve issue needs to be their into a hyperbolic one.
it’s fine, you can call me lazy, tell me i have low EQ, whatever makes you feel better about yourself man. The fact of the matter is EQ isn’t taken seriously by psychologists and it’s become yet another therapy-speak term, but hey, i’m clearly a gas-lighting narcissist, right?
I never said you have low EQ. You said it yourself - no objective way to measure it, and I myself have never thought about others EQ, I just recognize it as group/complex of psychological/personal traits that affect your neurological behaviour.
However, it is interesting to me how angry/personal you seem about this argument. I’m going to assume this isn’t your first time talking about this, and getting disagreed with.
I disagree with the entire pop psychology industries existence. It’s not personal, it’s a moral social issue.
It’s psychological junk food that destroys people’s psychological health and turns them into self-help junkies. It’s the equivalent of people believing that McDonald’s is healthy food and they will lose weight and lower their cholesterol by consuming it.
Your comparison is so wild… And your assumptions are not really matching my real world experience. I wish you the best, but there’s obviously no point to continue
this entire thread you’ve postured yourself as ‘above me’.
I love it. Do they have a test for delusions of social superiority? How do you think you’d score on it? [
i have this other radical idea… maybe your real world experience isn’t all that there is in the world… maybe other people experience the world differently?
and yeah there is no point to ‘continue’ when you can’t acknowledge that your experience is inherently limited and flawed and is likely only shared with a tiny percentage of other people who are very similar to you. which is what is called in-group bias!
i can’t disprove the existence of god either.
are you sure i’m the one shifting the goalposts here?
my argument form the start was EQ is bullshit, a made up arbitrary metric that has no widespread acceptance. and that is true. And like all bullshit things, people mostly use it to bully and posture each other.
I guess we will stay true to our beliefs. Being able to rationally understand emotions, reflect, feel empathy, etc. are not some foreign concepts, it’s real, categorizable human psychology (and neurology?) behaviour.
and they have no objective measure. you cannot measure a feeling of empathy and compare it across two people. empathy can’t be measured like a discus throw or how fast you can run mile.
they are not measurable things, they are contextualized by culture, language, and society. what is empathetic in one society is considered cruelty in another. and further, it will vary a lot depending on relationship, familiarity, and social dynamics.
You may think you are the sole arbiter of these things, and you’re welcome to do that in your personal life. but the arrogance it takes you can magically ID people’s ‘empathy’ based on internet posts is just insane ego-projection and and your judgement of how much they say shit you agree with.
Just because you can’t objectively measure amount of love between two people, doesn’t mean it’s invalid theory. You are overthinking this too much, using weird arguments and then try to push a narrative that says “anything that isn’t standardized is meaningless”. By the same logic, pretty much every psychological/personal trait is a buzzword that cannot be objectively measured, and so it’s meaningless. It’s intellectually lazy argument.
And no, empathy or ethics or emotions are not race-based (referring to your previous argument where it could be different between groups)
right, it can’t be EQ is a stupid theory with a flawed metric that is essentailly useless… apparently if that’s the case they ALL OF PYCHOLOGY IS NONSENSE.
are you serious with this crap? typical lemmy poster, can’t let the bone go and becomes a dog and starts making massive generalizations that society will collapse if their one pet peeve issue needs to be their into a hyperbolic one.
it’s fine, you can call me lazy, tell me i have low EQ, whatever makes you feel better about yourself man. The fact of the matter is EQ isn’t taken seriously by psychologists and it’s become yet another therapy-speak term, but hey, i’m clearly a gas-lighting narcissist, right?
I never said you have low EQ. You said it yourself - no objective way to measure it, and I myself have never thought about others EQ, I just recognize it as group/complex of psychological/personal traits that affect your neurological behaviour.
However, it is interesting to me how angry/personal you seem about this argument. I’m going to assume this isn’t your first time talking about this, and getting disagreed with.
I disagree with the entire pop psychology industries existence. It’s not personal, it’s a moral social issue.
It’s psychological junk food that destroys people’s psychological health and turns them into self-help junkies. It’s the equivalent of people believing that McDonald’s is healthy food and they will lose weight and lower their cholesterol by consuming it.
but hey, you like your McDs. Lots of people do.
Your comparison is so wild… And your assumptions are not really matching my real world experience. I wish you the best, but there’s obviously no point to continue
this entire thread you’ve postured yourself as ‘above me’.
I love it. Do they have a test for delusions of social superiority? How do you think you’d score on it? [
i have this other radical idea… maybe your real world experience isn’t all that there is in the world… maybe other people experience the world differently?
and yeah there is no point to ‘continue’ when you can’t acknowledge that your experience is inherently limited and flawed and is likely only shared with a tiny percentage of other people who are very similar to you. which is what is called in-group bias!