- #1
asdf1
- 734
- 0
if scientists are good at analyzing situtations, why aren't their EQ neccesary all that great?
Scientists' EQ: Analyzing Situations & Necessary EQ Levels
Click For Summary
Discussion Overview
The discussion centers on the relationship between scientists' analytical abilities and their emotional intelligence (EQ), exploring whether high analytical skills correlate with lower EQ levels. The scope includes conceptual considerations of emotional factors in scientific work.
Discussion Character
- Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested
Main Points Raised
- One participant questions why scientists, despite being good at analyzing situations, may not have high emotional intelligence.
- Another participant introduces the distinction between emotional quotient (EQ) and intelligence quotient (IQ), suggesting that IQ tests are flawed and therefore not a reliable measure.
- A different viewpoint suggests that the objective nature of science minimizes the need for emotional considerations, implying that scientists can be effective even with low emotional engagement.
- There is a humorous acknowledgment of the idea that scientists could be overly logical to the point of lacking emotional connections, which raises questions about personal relationships.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express differing views on the relevance of emotional intelligence in scientific fields, indicating that the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives.
Contextual Notes
Some assumptions about the nature of emotional intelligence and its relevance to scientific work are not fully explored, and the discussion does not resolve the implications of emotional engagement in scientific practice.
- #2
Poop-Loops
- 732
- 1
EQ?
IQ?
If you mean IQ, then it's because IQ is worthless and the tests are flawed.
PL
IQ?
If you mean IQ, then it's because IQ is worthless and the tests are flawed.
PL
- #3
motai
- 364
- 2
The reference to EQ is probably referring to an "Emotional Quotient."
Science isn't really a subjective field like the humanities, so it doesn't really need to consider the emotional factor as much as objective rationalization is needed in scientific endeavours. One can be a chemist/physicist/mathematician and careless about emotions, as it isn't pertinent to their work in general; that coupled with (generally) the scientific nature to be overtly logical and practical.
Adding to that... theoretically scientists could then function in their pursuit of science if they were overly Spockish and had no emotion whatsoever, but then the scientists wouldn't have wives/husbands.
Science isn't really a subjective field like the humanities, so it doesn't really need to consider the emotional factor as much as objective rationalization is needed in scientific endeavours. One can be a chemist/physicist/mathematician and careless about emotions, as it isn't pertinent to their work in general; that coupled with (generally) the scientific nature to be overtly logical and practical.
Adding to that... theoretically scientists could then function in their pursuit of science if they were overly Spockish and had no emotion whatsoever, but then the scientists wouldn't have wives/husbands.
- #4
asdf1
- 734
- 0
haha... that's true~
Similar threads
- · Replies 33 ·
- · Replies 7 ·
- · Replies 23 ·
- · Replies 4 ·
- · Replies 12 ·
- · Replies 2 ·
- · Replies 10 ·
- · Replies 11 ·
- · Replies 1 ·