Notes on Emotional Intelligence

Home Forums Model 1 Discussions Notes on Emotional Intelligence

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #18185
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @Cedar
    Personally I find Calypso to be less emotionally intelligent than Auburn. =)  She just knows how to market herself prematurely while Auburn is a perfectionist who honors his craft.  However, Auburn has no problem getting people to like him. He is quite likable and extremely admirable; his approach is extremely respectable.  He just isn't quick to put unfinished, half-assed and plagiarized work on the market. He is a genuine visionary.
    But I do agree that he could use a good Fe marketer, for sure. =D
    I find his descriptions extremely human, soulful and poetic; not just 'dry' like your post insinuates.  My main argument lately has been that some types are lumped into "liking new things" while others are "artists" etc. Someone's personal preferences don't seem related to their type in such a clear cut way. You can be a Pe explorer, or hunter-gatherer mindset, and just use that skill to collect what you need toward a singular cause - without having a hankering for new things. You could be a Fi lead, and not much for artistry or humanity. And so forth. I know a lot of these nuances have already been discussed at length and are always in the process of refinement. But basically, the more we shed the MBTI stereotypes (like this type 'does' this, that type 'likes' that)... and focus on attributes that really show up (like Se "flow" or Fe "hero tendencies" ) - then the closer we will be to honing in on the deeper meaning of each type. I think a lot of the descriptions are excellent toward this end, but there are still some leaps and assumptions leftover from MBTI mythology.  But I will say that Auburn is doing a better job than ANY other description - by FAR - at getting the central themes in a way that seems organic and clear, and also read in an enticing and poetic way.  Just my 2 cents.

    #18200
    Cedar
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @animal What are your intentions when you post? How are you hoping the information will be received?

    #18202
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @cedar
    My intention is to contribute to an exploration of a phenomenon, typology. I believe CT is in the best place to find 'truth' and learn to identify and discuss it, compared to any other typology effort out there today. This is why I direct energy toward its development. Because the phenomenon itself is one that I am deeply interested in.
    However, I don't have much investment in "people" on the whole. I don't try to control how other people receive my thoughts, I just try to articulate what I'm seeing and what I think - and it's up to others to receive it however they will.  I am not a thought dictator nor very manipulative in the sense of trying to be received in a particular way. Rather, I aim to communicate my sense of things, for whatever it may be worth.  But don't worry, my posting spree is winding down.  My current thoughts have been stated enough and if they aren't clear, then I need to think about a better way to say them; and if they are, then I trust the community will decide if my points are valid or not and take them into consideration.
    It is obvious that my thoughts are unwelcome on this thread in particular, so this will be the last you hear from me. I was under the impression you had written this on my thread originally and then it got moved, which is why I responded.  Insult Auburn's emotional intelligence all you like; my point has been made that I disagree. "Receive" that how you will - it is of no consequence to me.

    #18234
    Cedar
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @animal You are right, initially, I did ask what constitutes evidence onto your post. I communicated that I didn't know how to create a new forum conversation, so I tagged others since it was not directly related to what you had written.
    Your motivations for why you are interested in typology are clear. It isn't true that you don't care what others think, as you have a tendency to become emotional to what is perceived as an attack. You have communicated that you value conflict and pushing boundaries. From your writings, you seem to also value being a part of a group and will fiercely defend those in that group. I value critical thinking, refuse to see people as ideal/god-like, attempt to keep an open mind, and be mindful in my interactions. I do not seek conflict with you. Our desires from this experience are not in alignment, and that is okay.
    I was raised with typology and have had many positive and negative experiences with it. Last summer, before I waded into CT, my aunt said that she felt typology was an excuse for people to not have to show up in their lives and do the work necessary for growth. I saw her position but saw that it could be used for growth if the person desired it. I see that she and I are both right. Nothing in the world is a silver bullet for understanding or self-actualization.
    I didn't say anything bad about Auburn. I should hope Auburn doesn't think he is phenomenal at understanding the emotional condition of others. I hope his ego is okay with this being the other side of the coin of being capable of huge mental feats. He sees the world from his perspective, you from yours, me from mine, etc... We cannot will into existence the use of cognitive functions for the sake of a model.
    Information does not exist in a vacuum. Jung could have said that Auburn was plagiarizing him. You've even mentioned that you, your husband and friends noticed patterns in facial movements before finding CT. This means that much of this is intuitive and exists outside of Auburn. He does and should have rights to the information that he has gathered (this is a robust site!), though not to the rights of people's individual videos. I don't know Calypso. She is what brought me to CT as she sited use of these concepts. She has added Te aspects that add value to the idea...such as voice modulation. This can be actually measured, which can move these theories towards further acceptance.
    If we look at CT as Auburn's baby, it can be seen from different angles. One angle could be that it is his baby and hands off (scarcity). The other could be that he is the parent, but he has a community that is adding value to the baby (abundance). This is the angle that will enrich any endeavor.
    All any of us can do is show up with positive intentions, open minds, an assumption that others mean well, and patience. No one has this mastered, but it is something that would only improve the human condition if striven for, individually and as a whole.

    #18235
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @Cedar
    Everything you said about my motives is wrong. You are writing a story about me in your head - but your assessment of my deeper motives, my interest in typology, why I am here, how I see people or groups, or "idealizing" people, is not one that I relate to.  I hope you enjoy writing stories about me.  But I'm writing this to let you know that I don't agree or relate to anything you said about this person who is supposedly me.  I would suggest reflecting on the things you've said, to see if they may be true for you and if you are projecting your own motives onto me.  You may think, "If I had done what she did, it would be for these reasons." But I am very different from you.
    I find your assessments of other people in general to be lacking in substance, so it is no surprise that you have perceived a fictional character in place of me.  Here are three examples of how you overlook what I consider 'reality.' "Auburn's baby" - not how I view this.  Auburn is channeling and exploring a phenomenon that is much greater than himself, and he has written threads indicating his awareness of this, but his work in that vein is still his.  "You want to be part of a group" - interesting, considering I'm not even in the CT discord - I went there and learned what info I needed, then left when it became too interpersonal.  "Idealizing" - why, when I'm so critical of his ideas on so many threads, including the one you just responded to?
    In my view, you are not looking at reality, but rather, a projection of your personal subjective truth. Your description of me (which is contrary to my real actions and also contrary to what I said about my own motives when you asked), says more about you than it does me.  I viewed your description of Calypso's and Auburn's character as equally unrealistic and off base.  Perhaps others see substance in your observations about other humans, but it is clear that my depths elude you, just as yours elude me.  Therefore, I will refrain from writing a post about how I view your motives, because it's an exercise in futility, and also quite rude.
    There is no reason for me to defend or explain my inner motives to someone who prefers to write stories about what's going on inside my head and ignore real dialogue and events right in front of them. So, have fun enlightening the world with your supposed insights.  I have nothing more to say.

    #18252
    Cedar
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @animal It is not manipulation to be responsible for what you write and how it could be received by a reasonable person. If you offend, it isn't manipulation to apologize without making it sound like a miscommunication. If you impulsively respond, it is not the other person's responsibility to give you the benefit of the doubt.
    The only thing I wrote about you was: "It isn’t true that you don’t care what others think, as you have a tendency to become emotional to what is perceived as an attack. You have communicated that you value conflict and pushing boundaries. From your writings, you seem to also value being a part of a group and will fiercely defend those in that group." and "You’ve even mentioned that you, your husband and friends noticed patterns in facial movements before finding CT." The only thing I deduced (not sensed) was that you value being a part of a group and will fiercely defend those in that group. That is happening now.
    I'm not sure what you are looking for from me, but I have nothing to give you. I find conflict tiresome and it does nothing for connecting to others. I value healthy connections where both parties benefit from the interactions. I am not projecting anything onto you. I am holding my punch and you may be picking up on that.

    #18254
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @Cedar
    I don't see you apologizing for your miscommunication. Instead you are defending your offbase assumptions about me and repeating them again in a new post. Your deductions and summaries are false.  This has nothing to do with being part of a group, period.  Also, you have no idea when I am emotional and when I am simply articulating a point of view. I may do this with passion, because I am passionate about ideas - but this is not the same as "getting emotional" or making it personal.  YOU might be emotional in the same scenario since you find conflict "tiresome," but for me, conflict is not tiresome - and where you may perceive conflict, I perceive debate, discussion and resolution. You misunderstand my character completely.
    You insult Auburn for being emotionally incapable... yet he has always understood my character very well. He understands me better than I understand myself sometimes, which is why he is able to shut down some of my arguments about not relating to descriptions in just a few sentences. 😀  He actually listens to what I say, observes my patterns realistically, and remains observant. This gives me confidence that he is equally observant when picking up trends about other people and types - so it gives me confidence in his work, in addition to respect for his character. However, I obviously do not idealize him considering how much I argue and push him, in the interest of discovery and truth.
    So are you apologizing or not?  Or you want me to apologize for pointing out that you're wrong about me? Please choose a course of action and be clear.

    #18259
    Cedar
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @animal I am not apologizing. I was bringing up behaviors I've witnessed with others, myself and you.
    We are clearly grating on each other and it would be wise to discontinue this.

    #18261
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    If you're not apologizing then why would you bring up "it isn't manipulation to apologize?" I am always apologizing when I do misunderstand someone, so again, I am not sure who it is that you think you're talking to.  You have yet to address anything I actually said in my posts - in fact, from the first post, you answered by saying "What are your motives?" and when I responded you proceeded to tell me what my motives were.  Then when I told you that your assessment was wrong and why, you did not address my points again, and instead brought up some apology that you were unwilling to make.  This is nonsensical.  I definitely don't wish to continue this either.  I hope your other discussions here are more fruitful - mine certainly are.
    Edit:
    As a final note, I will say that my interest is not criticizing anyone's character. I am critical of ideas, concepts, even worldviews - but this is not a critique of someone personally. They may take it personally, as their ideas and world views are part of who they are - and I also respond with passion because indeed I am passionate about my views. Perhaps it would be ideal for me to have more equanimity and less passion. However, attachment to groups or people is not where I'm coming from. I don't go around telling people what their inner motives are, or writing in public that someone lacks emotional intelligence.  Their EQ or IQ is not my concern - my concern is to discuss a particular idea.  Therefore it's easy to see that for me, it's not about 'people' but rather about 'ideas.'  I am arguing that from my POV, your ideas about others are unfounded. I am not arguing that your inner motives or your character are X, Y or Z. This is way too much personal involvement for me.  I do enjoy assessing people's motives through a system like enneagram, but that allows me to keep personal distance and simply channel my knowledge of typology to address an issue.  The interpersonal overload is why I left discord and why I don't see myself as part of any group - aside from the one where I am a leader, and which encompasses my direct vision. I see my friends as equals, whose visions may overlap and conjoin as we take on a project together, but I don't see us as a 'collective unit.'  Throughout my life, my most major projects have been completely alone, and I like it that way.
    In general, I defend what is right, not who is right. This is why your assessment of me seems to be more about you than it is about me. Because you are describing a person that gets over-involved with people and identifies with their place among people.  My involvement is not with the person but the idea.  That is my interest in the forum.  This is why you won't see me going around telling people my assessment of their interior motives - because I have no interest in being too personally entangled with anyone except my few close friends. Defending others from insults because I feel it's morally sound to do so (either in the moment or in the grand scheme, such as defending the overall vision of CT), is not the same as being 'one of them.'
    So why am I writing this out?  My post was initially shorter but I came back to clarify.  Why?  It was tempting to blow you off, but I decided it's more important to be very clear about why you are wrong. Even though I expect this will be meaningless to you, and will be misinterpreted by you, I want others who may happen upon this argument to understand why I don't believe I am the person you say I am. Of course, they can assess me for themselves if they so choose. But this is important if we are talking about typology and motives, and regarding the people on the forum as real 'data.' So I want to be clear about myself as a 'data point,' and also because I prefer examining issues deeply and getting to a conclusion.  I already invested this much time in the argument; I might as well make my point clear. Obviously, this post is about my view on me, so there's no need for you to respond.

    #18266
    Cedar
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @auburn I want to clarify that I was referring to the concept in the book, Emotional Intelligence by Daniel Goleman. It is a bit different that what people use in their everyday vernacular. They are skills that anyone can learn. You have devoted that time to CT, which has a different kind of value. Having Fe is your last function is different from the ease of use that someone leading with it would have. I hope you didn't take it as a put down. If you did, it wasn't my intention and I am sorry.

    #18284
    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    No offense taken, Cedar! 🙂

    I didn’t say anything bad about Auburn. I should hope Auburn doesn’t think he is phenomenal at understanding the emotional condition of others. I hope his ego is okay with this being the other side of the coin of being capable of huge mental feats. He sees the world from his perspective, you from yours, me from mine, etc… We cannot will into existence the use of cognitive functions for the sake of a model.

    Yeah, I'm certainly not phenomenal at understanding human emotions, and have a long way to go in that department. It is something that I actively aim to work at. And it's not something I could judge on my own, since part of the equation of emotional intelligence is personal and the other is interpersonal-- so it's up to others to decide whether my presentation in their life is empathic, ethical and sensible/insightful.
    However, I do try to be aware of the human heart in all my endeavors, and some of who I am may be hidden from view in these forum posts. I come across more technical here because of the intent being technical communication. So if I can indulge just a little, I'd like to "introduce" myself more.
    My journey into emotional intelligence started, roughly, when I was 15 and went to a Christian boarding school. It was at this point that I realized how bizarre and irregular it was that, unlike other people around me, I seemed to have a chasm between heart and mind. In the context of that theology (which I've long since left) I "prayed for God to transform my heart of stone". If you're familiar with Christian theology, you might know the phrase. As I don't believe God ever had anything to do with it, it amounted to a personal effort to "sensitize" myself to people.
    I became sensitively attuned to my heart/bodily state, and made it my life purpose to be a beacon of love in the world. By around age 16 I was dipping my feet into giving bible studies, and by age 17 I was standing up in front of crowds giving sermons, on occasion. I had a strong level of ethical weight on my shoulders, and that motivated the development of my Fe. I was stuttering often, was not good at public speaking, but channeled that forward anyhow.
    At the age of 18 I started to see the holes in the theology clearly enough to defect from it, but what I had gained in terms of self-growth stayed with me. At age 18 I lead out a video gaming community and website, talking and managing social relations daily in chat. I considered this the "second" group I lead, with the bible studies group being the first.
    Since then, I've also stepped into leadership roles in other communities. I'm currently an admin of INTPforum.com, which I admittedly don't visit as much anymore but which was a very precious community to me. When the phenomenon of type began to crystallize into awareness in the minds of myself and a few other investigators, I decided to create a new community. This forum here is perhaps the second or third iteration of that community, as the forum has been redesigned in the past seven years and a few generations of people have come and gone.
    But this community is different than the rest. Maybe it's due to the internet's own evolution, but around 80% of the community traffic happens in the Discord server. ( https://cognitivetype.com/discord-chat/ ) And it's there that I channel my more interpersonal aspects, while I use the forum primarily to write long-form content that can be refined into articles, experiments, theoretical progress and so forth.
    Anyhow, what I mean to say is that, on any given day, I am managing half a dozen private message conversations, and/or Discord discussions, and I care very much for these people. Modship roles have been central to my life for over ten years now, and I learn volumes from needing to mediate between people and hearts in tricky ethical situations. I don't always succeed, but everything I learn gets looped back into my ever-broadening understanding of human nature.
    I don't know Calypso personally too much, but I'm also not void of connections to many people and I do have a certain toolset that I've developed for myself-- whether it's seen as effective or not to others. I'd actually love to have you drop by the chat, to get a sense of what I mean. You may also see a lot more of the members-- they're a great bunch.
     

    #18290
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    I became sensitively attuned to my heart/bodily state, and made it my life purpose to be a beacon of love in the world.

    If I may say so, I believe you are doing a beautiful job of fulfilling that purpose.

    #18291
    Cedar
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @auburn I was also raised in Christianity. I love that bumper sticker, "Lord, please save me from your followers." ;P
    Over the months, I have attempted to be on the Discord chat, but it is not for me. I don't look for community on the internet, I look for it in my daily interactions. Sometimes I have a connection to someone I meet online, but I like to take it to a more serious/intentional level if I am to invest in it. Discord, by its nature, is a time suck. Funneling my energies into changing the culture in my town and protecting those without voices has value to me.
    I know you are only one person, with limited resources, and that never leaves my mind. Many good people are probably coming to and leaving your site for many reasons. If you want CT to become more well-rounded and fleshed out, retaining those people will be important. Hearing their feedback is a must. It's clear you have the best of intentions, but do they come across? That's what I'm talking about, though cryptically. Unfortunately, sometimes leading is like parenting. Sometimes we have to be the firm parent for the good of the family. When there is a squabble culture in a family, you know people aren't feeling safe, heard and respected. I'd be happy to speak more via private message.
     

    #18301
    Auburn
    Keymaster
    • Type: TiNe
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    I've split this tangent into its own thread.
    It appears this exchange went on longer than both of you would have liked, and feels less fruitful than it could have been. Cedar, if I can just direct a comment you said back around:

    All any of us can do is show up with positive intentions, open minds, an assumption that others mean well, and patience.

    I very much agree with this, and it appears you do too. And it seems that you tried to put this into practice initially when you intuited certain intentions to Animal, but rather than assuming right away you began by asking:

    What are your intentions when you post? How are you hoping the information will be received?

    However, after Animal explained her intentions, your response appeared to be in opposition to your own principle.

    Your motivations for why you are interested in typology are clear. It isn’t true that you don’t care what others think, as you have a tendency to become emotional to what is perceived as an attack.

    When she communicated to you her intentions, as a response to your direct inquiry, you disbelieved her and superimposed your own interpretations of her, onto her. You told her what her motivations are, why she was doing it and what she did and didn't care about. I find this to be in bad faith and also not conducive to the sort of open-mindedness towards others that you appear to be in full support of.
    So I wonder if you can "assume other people (Animal) mean well", assume "positive intentions" here, have an "open mind" and "patience" in this situation too?
    I'd like to try to explain a little about Animal, the way I see her.
    Animal has a lot of feelings, and is a person who feels a lot. Which mean that her self-expression style can be genuinely overjoyed about something, affectionate and mushy without it being an indication of "idolization." Because the opposite can also happen, and she'll turn back around and jab at things she feels are wrong, unfair or unjust. And she's done so to me several times ( ) and certainly does not think me infallible. Quite far from it, she is quick to remind me of where mistakes are and I intake feedback from her just like anyone else-- rather constantly.
    She shares your same desire to see CT flourish into the potential that awaits it. But she disagrees with the notion that the investigative process needs to be sterile or stoic, as if emotional displays were the enemy to truth. The fallacy here is to assume that passion is prejudice. In reality, truth-seeking is not mutually exclusive with having passions (about the topic). Actually, a truly skeptical and rational approach would simply --factor out-- the emotional component when making a critical calculation.
    So to assume that her passion for the CT project would lead to fallacies in her ability to think critically about its structure and theoretical formulation, is an assumption and bias, unless there are tangible examples present that show this interference happening. Now, to be fair there might be, but even so those things would be addressed on the merits of the argument in question. A mathematician can be as enthusiastic or negative about their work as they'd like, but when it comes to the numbers, they still have to crunch them like a calculator. They don't have to be as dry as a calculator, in their personal lives, to do the math.

    From your writings, you seem to also value being a part of a group and will fiercely defend those in that group. I value critical thinking, refuse to see people as ideal/god-like, attempt to keep an open mind

    And it's in statements like this that we see a conflation happening, where there is a dichotomy put in place between defending those ones cares about instead of thinking critically. People can defend those they care about, while disagreeing with them, when it comes to their ideas. They're not mutually exclusive.
    Animal has a lot of love for this project, as do I, but the correct application of "positive intention" and "good will" here would be to not assume that this would interfere with the investigative process. So I think technical questions about the model are to be addressed on theoretical grounds only, without recourse to ad hominems pertaining to people's emotional investment.
    That being said...

    If I may say so, I believe you are doing a beautiful job of fulfilling that purpose.

    Animal, it does make me uncomfortable to have this sort of public admiration!
    As far as help with the social aspect of CT, I think it would actually help me make headway with other members like Cedar if I could address their theoretical points on a neutral basis first, and let them decide for themselves how they feel about the model, or myself/etc. I understand that's already the case (of the universe by default) that we all must make our own decisions, but I think Cedar (and she won't be the only one) may view the interjection of praise for CT in a technical thread as a sort of implicit "argument" to be substituted in place of a technical point, even if that is not the intention. I wonder if that makes sense?
    I think that is what can come across as favoritism and groupthink, and so it would help me if, in technical threads, I could wrestle with members one on one through theory. I'd really appreciate that!
    So... no defending me!

    #18328
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    Haha!  @Auburn I will try to answer this without praising?  =D
    Ok, I'll just say that you make perfect sense and this is what I meant when I said you get me. (I don't take it entirely personally - you are good at reading people, by my estimation.) I am going to end up showing this to others when they start accusing me of being a certain way (wrong, incapable of thought, etc) because of my passion. Admittedly, like you said, sometimes passion can get in the way of a conclusion!  But this happens just as often with seemingly dry, technical people - it's just a different type of passion, methinks.
    And, point understood! I won't come in to defend you. If there's an argument about your character in another discord then I will save it for that location. 😀
    If it makes you feel less uncomfortable, I'll just say that I praise all my friends, who inevitably are people who I respect and admire, even while being critical or real with them. "It's not you, it's me"... hehe. Though the part that is "you" is that owing to certain aspects of your character and work, I view you as one of those people. Due to the constant attacks on your character that I perceive, I feel driven to jump in, but I would do (and have done) the same thing for anyone who I cared about and felt was being unfairly judged. That said, I understand that you put yourself in this position, meaning you put yourself out there even knowing you would be critiqued heavily. And you are handling it really well, so I can relax. 😛

    #18365
    Cedar
    Participant
    • Type: FiNe
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @auburn, you are making assumptions as to why I wrote what I did. You cannot know my mind; therefore, it is inappropriate to say I was operating in bad faith. Additionally, that is a very loaded term that implies deceit. I have standards for myself and to my knowledge each person is not held to their individual standard on CT. When someone is subjected for months by impulsive reactions and passive-aggressive feedback, I believe it is a job well done to not snap sooner (and honestly, it wasn’t a snap). I have held my standard to the best of my ability.
    I did begin with the stance that she meant well, as I do believe it is best to believe everyone means well until proven otherwise. I stand by my observations of Animal. If you knew my mind you would know that I was restrained and generous in my communications with her. My opinion of Animal was not created in a vacuum, but as a pattern of behavior throughout the site and interactions with many people.
    As for ad hominin, where was the genuine discussion of the topic in her response to my question of "what counts as evidence"? Did I redirect to attack her instead of answering her argument? From my vantage point, there wasn’t substance to the argument as there wasn’t one. Her argument was that she thinks your ideas are “truth”.
    I do not understand why you are explaining her to me. Her actions are loud on CT and speak for themselves. She repeatedly communicates a lot about herself and explains who she is with both actions and words. Once strung together, these observations are not assumptions I've created, but a consolidation of previous statements she has made.
    On the topic of passion, it isn’t a knee-jerk reaction to the smallest perceived slight. Healthy passion has purpose and is driven by a goal. What she is doing is not passion, but reaction. When someone replies in less than 5 minutes to a lengthy post, they haven’t digested the information and allowed it to settle. They are reacting out of their limbic system. To defend her is to enable her. She has already spoken for herself.
    A better way of approaching this would have been to ask questions and clarify, rather than make assumptions about me and my intentions. When I brought up EI, this is what I was referring to (I was not referencing a Wikipedia page, but a book by Daniel Goleman. He also wrote Social Intelligence which is directly related). These soft skills help us see how having a dysfunctional culture causes unnecessary conflict, filters out new thoughts, and detracts from your point. I was not implying you not having emotions.
    All of this effort and time is wasted. This all could have gone to something nurturing to ourselves or the site. You are the captain of this ship. Will you lead by example or hide away allowing the crew to in-fight? Name moderators so it isn't all on you, have that info clearly communicated to new people, have the site expectations clearly communicated and easy to find, hold existing members to the same standard as new ones, define what is conflict and what is meaningful discussion, make sure that if someone is being pecked a moderator reaches out, etc. You bit off a lot with this and it needs social structure to be put in place if it is to be stable and long-lived.

    #18367
    Animal
    Participant
    • Type: SeFi
    • Development: lll-
    • Attitude: Seelie

    @cedar
    This is quite a vicious and hateful attack coming from someone I've never even spoken to before. In fact I never knew you existed before this thread, so I find it fascinating that you harbored such strong sentiment toward me. My impression is that you despise me and created a narrative about who I am based on a combination of gossip and your personal reactions to my posts. I am not sure where to go with that, so all I can say is, I am sorry if I offended you. I am going to bow out of this conversation because there is nothing productive or kind that I could say in return. Feel free to hash this out with Auburn but I am not interested. Hope you flourish here at CT 🙂

    #18374
    EpicEntity
    Participant
    • Type: SeTi
    • Development: l--l
    • Attitude: Directive

    @Ceder

    These soft skills help us see how having a dysfunctional culture causes unnecessary conflict, filters out new thoughts, and detracts from your point.

    Do you have an example of a functional culture that you're apart of?
    If so can you link directly to moments were some functionality is existing?
     

    #18376
    Rua
    Moderator
    • Type: NeTi
    • Development: ll-l
    • Attitude: Adaptive

    I will be closing this topic, primarily for the reason that this line of discourse is not appropriate; matters clearly feel personal and uncomfortable for those involved, and so it would be best to end this.
    I am always willing to listen to genuine criticisms of how the forum is moderated, and must again ask that if someone feels uncomfortable speaking publicly about such things, that they send myself or Auburn a PM about it instead. What I'm certain will not improve our culture is this: open and pointed statements directed at personalities, instead of respectful disagreements about the topics themselves. The focus should be on the body of work produced, and not on the bodies producing it.
    Before closing here, I'd like to make a statement for the forum more generally. This community is small, and isn't designed around strict professionalism or absolute adherence to scientific metrics or prior psychological concepts. The forums are here for people with an interest in CT to get together and socialize/ start projects/ advance an idea, offer their feedback on the work, etc. Consider this a gentle reminder that we could always do better in terms of typos, editing, making our ideas easier to follow and better organized and such. But those concerns must also be weighed against the value of having a space where people aren't required to take a course in copy editing before they feel it's valid to share their thoughts.
    So, that's all for now. If anyone has something further to add relating to the above, my PMs are of course always open, but this thread will now be closed.

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • The topic ‘Notes on Emotional Intelligence’ is closed to new replies.
A forum exploring the connection between Jungian typology and body mannerisms.

Social Media

© Copyright 2012-2021 Juan E. Sandoval - Use Policy
searchhomecommentsenvelopegraduation-hatbookearth linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram