I recently wrote an article about the characteristics of a sociopath and what to be aware of when trying to figure out if someone is or isn't one, now I want to talk about the difference between being emotionally intelligent and actually being a sociopath. Now, it's a known fact that a sociopath won't ever admit to being one, nor will they stand to hear people accuse them of being one and will most likely respond with anger, so when I say I'm not a sociopath, you can take it or leave. Can I manipulate people? Yes, but not because I don't feel empathy for them and not because I want to use them for "tools" to achieve my own goals, but because I am emotionally intelligent. I have recently been doing small social experiments of my own; these experiments were to see how being emotionally intelligent affects other people. I will explain what I mean by that a bit later. I conducted my experiment using social networking sites, but specifically the discussion forums or discussion pages that were focused around a particular topic, such as the paranormal, single parents etc. I joined the discussion and shared my opinion about whatever specific topic was being discussed at the time; I have a rather strong opinion on a lot of things but I'm articulate and never use inappropriate words, i.e. swearing or offensive language. My goal, as stated previously, was to see how being "emotionally intelligent" affected others. So, for example, I joined a discussion about paranormal experiences. I looked over some images that people had posted and commented; I have a skeptical view about "evidence" of paranormal captures and I prefer to explore other possibilities that could have created what is seen, be it in a photo or video, so I look at the image and I share my opinion about what other factors could have possibly contributed to what is seen in the photo, such as lighting, bugs, colours, smudges on the camera etc. I always say I think instead of It is, because I know I am giving only my opinion and not fact. As you can imagine many people don't like their belief of a paranormal capture to be disputed, after all they went to the trouble of posting what they captured, so people were quickly to argue with me about the authenticity of the "evidence". Skip forwards and I quickly become a target for attack, people mention me or "tag" me in a comment and their comments start to become a bit more focused on my "qualification" to have such an opinion, rather than the actual image itself, so I respond. As I've said in another post I reiterate what I have already said in a polite and appropriate manner, an example of this is, "I respect everyone's belief that they may have captured something paranormal and I am simply commenting on the image that has been posted. I make no judgment about their personal experience or what qualifies them to have such an opinion. I have a right to share my opinion on a public page and so I have done so." Then the comments become about who I am, or who I must be in order to have such an opinion and what my motives must be when I decided to share my opinion. I would not enter the discussion were I not in a relaxed and calm state, public pages are no place to let of steam (if you aren't anonymous that is). So how do I maintain this relaxed demeanor and not allow myself to be emotionally affected by the utterly rude and inappropriate comments about me as a person?, which so many of us do. I use the same skills that I use when I interact with people in my day-to-day life.
1. Mantras
Mantras meaning the thing(s) you tell yourself repeatedly to help you focus or relax or feel better. First step, don't touch the keyboard, or (in real life) allow your hands to be empty and loose or relaxed. I like to repeat this in my head "These people do not affect my life as it is at this moment, they do not determine how I live my life or what I have in my life." This reminds me that others have power over my emotional state only if I allow them to. Why should you have empty hands? So you don't do anything with them, for the split second we react with out emotions we don't want to react physically.
2. Physical Demeanor/ Posture
Adjust your body into a position that makes you feel in control and comfortable (even if you're talking through a computer). By changing our body language to assert confidence we immediately change our cognitive (mind) response to the situation, making us think that we are in control and able to handle the situation.
3. Question Yourself
Before doing anything ask yourself a few questions, such as, "What do I want from this situation?" or "What was my goal when I took this action?", by asking these questions you can figure out if you have done/said what you wanted/needed to and if there is any reason to continue with the action. For me it was a question of continuing to participate in the discussion and respond to negative comments, a lot of the time the answer was "no" so I didn't respond.
4. Answer Yourself
If you answered "Is there any reason to continue?" (a real/productive reason) with the answer "no", and most of us will have that voice in our head say "no" straight away if we know that we would only be responding to argue with someone, then whatever you do, don't respond. If the situation is talking through a computer then don't make anymore comments on that topic. Don't respond to others negative remarks with the same anger that others have towards you, it doesn't get you anywhere. If you are talking to someone face to face then simply tell them that you have nothing more to say and when they say something else, which they are likely to do, ignore it. How much more of an impression does someone make if they refuse to participate in petty arguments or pointless taunting? Be the person others can respect.
5. Assess The Situation
If you can assess how you feel and you are relaxed and clear-minded, but feel that you have to say more, then do so, however remember to be direct, appropriate and never insult a person's being, or use offensive language, it's petty and it makes you as bad as the people who disgust you when you read their comments and think "What a stupid, horrible person." Don't be that person. For me, I respond to negative comments like this "You have a right to your opinion, if my opinion is so valued that you feel the need to respond to it so passionately then I will take it as a compliment." It's at this point that I get accused of having "narcissistic tendencies" and the "personality of a sociopath", but people were simply pissed off that I didn't react with ill-mannered, pointless and insulting comments.
We assume that others will respond the way we do, but if you are emotionally intelligent you can allow yourself to feel your emotions, which in this case were anger (of course) and disgust, at a different time. Being emotionally intelligent is about deciding on whether allowing yourself to "fully" feel your emotions at that particular moment is beneficial to you. As I said, this was an experiment to see how others reacted in order to determine the best way for me to react and learn how to control my emotions. I admit, I did write carefully calculated comments that would manipulate people into responding negatively so I could observe what did and didn't get the response I was after, I don't generally provoke people just to see how they react. So what is the difference between a sociopath and an emotionally intelligent person? An emotionally intelligent person has learned how to control their emotions, whereas a sociopath will fake their emotions to manipulate others. You will notice that a sociopath won't have a natural emotional reaction to situations that appeal to people's sympathy or concern, such as someone hurt or asking for help. People who aren't sociopaths won't be able to control this natural reaction and usually offer help or clearly feel empathy for someone's situation.
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
3Opinion
I don't quite follow how these conclusions were found. It would fundamentally faulty to play a skeptic in an area where people generally believe something (we actually call that "trolling", it is the proper definition of it where you say something adverse to illicit responses) would result in any form of sensible data to be used for... anything.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7m9eNoB3NUFor instance the argument of qualifications actually makes sense. To make this a lot clearer we can use religion; if a random person says "Christianity is violent!" for instance and cites random verses out of context in The Bible it's relatively clear that the fault lies with them and their ineptitude so then you question them and their motives and their qualifications versus their "evidence" or "opinion" particularly because a faulty opinion isn't worth much and if it's made on faulty grounds (I. E. poorly qualified observations) it's also faulty.
Furthermore emotional intelligence isn't simply emotional control (
) but actually a series of concepts relating to bother internal and external functions of emotional management ( www.sonoma.edu/.../goleman.htm ) which in turn means that instead of stating that mantras or posture would be fundamental you'd have questions relating to Value, Conviction, appropriate use of emotion, appropriate show of emotion (such as getting angry when someone is trolling your paranormal pictures), Dedication, and other qualities.
A sociopath can be very emotionally intelligent. Empathy is one part, not all, of it and not even the biggest part. The concept is really more about pragmatics than it is about psychology so there's a much greater picture than what you are painting and it's far more complex than the sociopathic comparison you decided to make.
My focus was not to argue with people and that's not what I did, it was about self-development and learning a skill I felt I needed to learn - doing what I did was a way to do that and it worked well for me. I didn't belittle anyone's point-of-view or use innappropriatelanguage or argue for the sake of arguing. I was genuine in my opinions that I shared and I taught myself to repsond with intellect rather than emotion even when I had an emotional response. Now I am able to tranfer my skill into real-life scenarios. I have learned to be emotionally intelligent, which is being aware of your emotions, allowing yourself to feel them but also being able to control your emotional response when it wouldn't be benefical for you to react with uncontrollable emotion.
I'll be blunt: You went and trolled a bunch of suckers to grow. That's... terrible.
I know I didn't do that so if you think that, that's your opinion. I merely shared my experience that was valuable and helpful to me.
It is unfortunate that you find yourself to be intelligent. :(
Well I get told that by people and I've been able to accomplish what I aspire too and I'm happy with my life, that's what matters to me. Your opinion of my intelligence doesn't matter.
No, but your opinion of your intelligence does, and that's where we have a problem.
I've helped a lot of people so a couple of negative responses don't hold too much value with me, but I'm always interested in a variety of views.
The problem here is that this is an outright lie, your "experiment" (if you could call it that) is literally trolling the internet, and your conclusions have no actual value in the face of the scholastic definition of Emotional Intelligence.
And you don't care because... fuck-all whatever.
You're talking of withholding emotion-- not emotional intelligence. Emotional intelligence is the awareness of your emotions, not the withholding of them. You can be utterly raging at people for not believing you, and still well aware of what your emotions are and how they're affecting your decision making, as well as the responses you'll get. In fact, someone emotionally intelligent would be aware that showing emotion-- not always distanced, pretending not to be affected-- can contribute well into a persuasive argument, especially among fanatics. Which, by the way, not resorting to insults in a debate is not the epitome of emotional control.. That's like suggesting your fit, because you did a push up.
You went into that site, and loss your argument, because you distanced yourself. You tried to achieve some type of moral highness, while those who slandered you, used other people's hostile emotions at the idea of being wrong, to win their argument over you. If you were emotionally intelligent, you'd of found a way to pacify their hostility towards being wrong.
Actually I have pointed out that I acknowledge and feel my emotions BUT I assess whether it is appropriate to fully feel them in the particular moment. It's not about withholding at all, it's about being aware of how you emotions can control you. You are obviously had a very strong response to what I wrote but I didn't go on sites, starts arguments and then play the sore loser, not at all. I did it to pushmy own limits and learn how to feel my emotions but control them and respond in a way that I felt was intellectual, not emotional. It was a way for me to learn that skill. It's unfortunate that you feel that way but that's not what the article is about at all, I encourage everyone to allow themselves to fully experience every emotion they have.
You obviously*
You might be confusing my response with the other man's. I gave you an insightful perspective.. if you're any type of intelligent, you'll learn from it. You don't choose whether to feel your emotions but rather to express them unless you're drugging yourself. And to reiterate, my point was that your experiment didn't demonstrate intelligence, but rather control. I then explained how emotional awareness could help a persuasive piece through empathy or lack there of.. but again that withholding emotions is not an experiment or indicator of emotional intelligence. If you had convinced them to secede their group and their hostility towards opposing views, that would be emotional intelligence. But not raging is emotional control: a trait that does not make you any more aware of what to say or how people will react to how you say it
P. S. google "double negatives" to see what's wrong with, "I didn't go" and "not at all" being in a sentence that intends to say simply "I didn't at all go"
You are both missing the point of why I did it and neither of you know what my actual process was. Anyway I learned what I wanted to and you're entitled to your opinions, as I said, I value a variety of views.
"Emotional intelligence is the ability to monitor one's own and other people's emotions, to discriminate between different emotions and label them appropriately, and to use emotional information to guide thinking and behaviour."
To use emotional information to guide thinking and behaviour, is actually about control of your own thinking and behaviour, so the OP is not wrong here.
@molan
The key phrase is "to guide" not to withhold. Her experiment by her own words, was to not display emotion. That's not using information to guide your response. That's having a preset plan to not use any type of awareness whatsoever. She simply withheld from raging regardless of the response. She's entirely wrong. That's not intelligence or awareness, that's simply an action.
If I decide to go in a cafe and not punch anyone in the face, does that mean I'm aware of their emotional state and my own? Of course not. My awareness might guide my decision making, but my inaction doesn't somehow demonstrate I'm more emotionally aware.
She's confusing action with awareness. If she had observed their emotional states, and made an emotional response using that information, that would be intelligence. Instead she had always planned to withhold emotions, no matter how they responded and no matter what outcome that would bring. That is not using information, therefore not intelligence.
The experiment was to allow me to learn and develop my skill of being emotionally intelligent. That's what none of you are understanding and you're just slamming me for "trolling" people when that's not what I did at all. So interpret it however you want, it helped me a great deal and your negative responses don't make you better than anyone nor do they hold value to me, it just shows that you are taking what you want from what I wrote instead of actually reading it without judgment and understanding the purpose of what I did. I have nothing to prove to any of you and I have diplayed a good understanding of emotional intelligence within my writing, which you would see if you read it properly and not with one judgment in mind.
You're born with emotional intelligence
/THREAD