NationStates Jolt Archive

In AP Psychology yesterday, we added up our scores on an emotional intelligence test survey thing (not sure of the name) to find our emotional intelligence scores. I added up my score and got about 107; I assumed that it would be like I.Q. where the average is 100, so I thought that my score was pretty decent.

I was apparently very wrong. After we had added up our scores, the teacher told us that 120 was the average for the prison population.:eek:

125 or something like that was average for males, and 135 was average for females, he said. I'm pretty sure that my score was the lowest in the class. Several people even had scores around 140 or 150.

I know I've always been shy and anxious around other people, but I've also always been nice to pretty much everyone, with very few exceptions. Or maybe I just don't understand people, or I was underestimating myself when I took the test. I don't know. I don't know if I even think that emotional intelligence is that important. In class they said that it was a better predictor of success than IQ, but I don't know about that. I consider myself pretty successful as far as my goals go.

What do you think about this? I'm probably thinking too much about it...

So now we're judging people on which emotions they feel. And I thought the IQ test was bad :(

people with Aspergers usually have pretty low EQ's and very high SQ's you should take both tests and print out the results and talk to your doctor.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/news/page/0,,937443,00.html

So now we're judging people on which emotions they feel. And I thought the IQ test was bad :(

That's why I consider all of these tests to be rough guidelines at best and totally useless at worst.

In AP Psychology yesterday, we added up our scores on an emotional intelligence test survey thing (not sure of the name) to find our emotional intelligence scores. I added up my score and got about 107; I assumed that it would be like I.Q. where the average is 100, so I thought that my score was pretty decent.

I was apparently very wrong. After we had added up our scores, the teacher told us that 120 was the average for the prison population.:eek:

125 or something like that was average for males, and 135 was average for females, he said. I'm pretty sure that my score was the lowest in the class. Several people even had scores around 140 or 150.

I know I've always been shy and anxious around other people, but I've also always been nice to pretty much everyone, with very few exceptions. Or maybe I just don't understand people, or I was underestimating myself when I took the test. I don't know. I don't know if I even think that emotional intelligence is that important. In class they said that it was a better predictor of success than IQ, but I don't know about that. I consider myself pretty successful as far as my goals go.

What do you think about this? I'm probably thinking too much about it...

No offense but it sounds like you have Asperger's syndrome like I do. :( Its a sucky disease but a good plus is most of the people who have it are more intelligent than the average person.

wait, since when did emotion have intelligence? i always thought intelligence was an emotion:(


how would i find out my EQ then? and this isn't another excuse for elitists to beat down on people is it?

In AP Psychology yesterday, we added up our scores on an emotional intelligence test survey thing (not sure of the name) to find our emotional intelligence scores. I added up my score and got about 107; I assumed that it would be like I.Q. where the average is 100, so I thought that my score was pretty decent.

I was apparently very wrong. After we had added up our scores, the teacher told us that 120 was the average for the prison population.:eek:

125 or something like that was average for males, and 135 was average for females, he said. I'm pretty sure that my score was the lowest in the class. Several people even had scores around 140 or 150.

I know I've always been shy and anxious around other people, but I've also always been nice to pretty much everyone, with very few exceptions. Or maybe I just don't understand people, or I was underestimating myself when I took the test. I don't know. I don't know if I even think that emotional intelligence is that important. In class they said that it was a better predictor of success than IQ, but I don't know about that. I consider myself pretty successful as far as my goals go.

What do you think about this? I'm probably thinking too much about it...

I went to college with people (American Indians) who were told. based on their IQ, that they could never make it college. Some of them were the brightest folks in the class. Don't make too much of this. Use it as a guide to improve upon the areas where you are weak.

people with Aspergers usually have pretty low EQ's and very high SQ's you should take both tests and print out the results and talk to your doctor.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/news/page/0,,937443,00.html

I took the EQ one and got 29. That's in the low range.

I got 33 or 32 on the SQ one, which is in the average range. I clicked on the part that tells you what type of brain you have, and I was in the range of scores for an S-type brain, which is apparently supposed to be a male brain.

Why is the average 120? I couldn't really find any proper sources, but I hear that the average is 100. Yeah, don't feel too bad, I did a couple of those tests and got about 20 points below average. Just the silly online ones, but still.

Why is the average 120? I couldn't really find any proper sources, but I hear that the average is 100. Yeah, don't feel too bad, I did a couple of those tests and got about 20 points below average. Just the silly online ones, but still.

It might just be that on that particular test a score of 120 was the equivalent of the average score (for people in prison). I don't know.

I took the EQ one and got 29. That's in the low range.

I got 33 or 32 on the SQ one, which is in the average range. I clicked on the part that tells you what type of brain you have, and I was in the range of scores for an S-type brain, which is apparently supposed to be a male brain.

last time I took it my EQ was much lower than yours, and my SQ was much higher.

I think you are probably okay. Don't read too much into the "male brain" thing either, it just means you think differently than some other people, it's fine, my husband and I get along great because I think like he does.

You are probably very intelligent, sometimes when you are highly intelligent you are too busy thinking about stuff to really read emotion in other people ;)

To the OP: Why care? Emotions are a waste of time in general. They hinder you from cold, rational self-interest maximisation. :)

So now we're judging people on which emotions they feel. And I thought the IQ test was bad :(
Big Brother is watching you, dissenter. <.< Seriously though, I went to an employability workshop the other day and got to hear some of the descriptions of people's roles in teams etc. I thought they were describing parts of a machine - for instance, an "implementer", a "plant", a "coordinator"... All sounds so silly. Then of course there are the terms psychologists use for various types of people depending on their emotionality. Also strange.

Big Brother is watching you, dissenter. <.< Seriously though, I went to an employability workshop the other day and got to hear some of the descriptions of people's roles in teams etc. I thought they were describing parts of a machine - for instance, an "implementer", a "plant", a "coordinator"... All sounds so silly. Then of course there are the terms psychologists use for various types of people depending on their emotionality. Also strange.

Yeah, I've always been wary of these tests in general. Human intelligence simply doesn't fall in to that kind of standardized distribution; the uniqueness of each individual's brain and cognition process make it difficult to really measure and compare people except in extreme or very general cases.

In all honesty, this "EQ" stuff sounds like a buzzword used by HR consultants to make more money.

Yeah, I've always been wary of these tests in general. Human intelligence simply doesn't fall in to that kind of standardized distribution; the uniqueness of each individual's brain and cognition process make it difficult to really measure and compare people except in extreme or very general cases.

In all honesty, this "EQ" stuff sounds like a buzzword used by HR consultants to make more money.
That's what I thought too. Allegedly it helps businesses anticipate what their staff's potential capabilities are, but in my opinion the only way for a business to really find this out is to hire the person or look up past history. These sort of tests, though some may be valuable, are not going to give a full image of a person.

That's what I thought too. Allegedly it helps businesses realise what their staff's potential capabilities are, but in my opinion the only way for a business to really find this out is to hire the person or look up past history. These sort of tests, though some may be valuable, are not going to give a full image of a person.

They're good for eliminating the extreme cases and giving a general idea of where a person stands. However, they're not going to tell you much more than that; they have their purpose, but they shouldn't be central to any kind of personnel decisionmaking.

I just took the test they offer. I have an EQ of 8, and I'm not insane. Don't worry about it. (My SQ was about 69, for contrast.)

I don't totally buy into the whole IQ/EQ online testing process either. However, I did have to take an EQ test (among a variety of other tests) as part of a job application process recently. The HR people haven't come out and told me what my score was, but they did ask me to apply for a shipping/receiving supervisor position afterwards. I'm guessing I did okay.

They're good for eliminating the extreme cases and giving a general idea of where a person stands. However, they're not going to tell you much more than that; they have their purpose, but they shouldn't be central to any kind of personnel decisionmaking.
I think the fact that leadership material usually falls into the extremes, and is likely not to be recorded through a test gives them a further incentive to do their own exploring. ;)

i always thought intelligence was an emotion:(Err...? Intelligence, an emotion? The processing capability of your brain is hardly an emotion. No more than that of the CPU in my computer. "Emotion" is no more than a relatively small subset of what you "feel". It is distinct from sensory information, desires, and many other experiences.

No offense but it sounds like you have Asperger's syndrome like I do. :( Its a sucky disease but a good plus is most of the people who have it are more intelligent than the average person.Repeat after me: "Asperger syndrome is not a disease". Stating that it is is factually incorrect, and I find it quite annoying when people imply that I would be diseased. It is large enough a misconception already; do yourself and others with this diagnosis slapped onto them a favor and do not spread it further. Nor do I - personally - find it sucky, as I do not suffer from it in any way.

Emotions are a waste of time.

To the OP: Why care? Emotions are a waste of time in general. They hinder you from cold, rational self-interest maximisation. :)

Emotions are a waste of time.

Yep, pretty much.

Err...? Intelligence, an emotion? The processing capability of your brain is hardly an emotion. No more than that of the CPU in my computer. "Emotion" is no more than a relatively small subset of what you "feel". It is distinct from sensory information, desires, and many other experiences.

First, processing ability is not the same as intelligence. My computer can process information many many times faster than I yet I'm the more intelligent. Second, desires are usually considered a kind of emotion. Third, I don't think emotions are distinct from sensory information, at least to the degree you do. Emotions have effects that we feel with our sensory organs, and sensory information can affect our emotions.

Yep, pretty much.

Emotions include our desires and motivations. Without emotions we would be have agency.

Emotions include our desires and motivations. Without emotions we would be have agency.
You should know by now that sometimes I just engage in casual shock-jockery. :) Given that human action is goal-oriented, sure, emotions do factor in.

You should know by now that sometimes I just engage in casual shock-jockery. :) Given that human action is goal-oriented, sure, emotions do factor in.

Well duh! Shock-jockery is a favorite activity of mine too. :p

Chandelier, you´ve missed a very important point. The thing is, you´re a 16 (or 17 if its past your birthday) in a class where the majority must be 19, 20 or even older people.

Just as all other inteligences, emotional inteligence also depends on age. If he is saying the average is 120, or 135, that must be related to the average age of the people in the room.

So, dont feel bad. First try to find what is the average of your age. And even if your score is reasonably smaller, you have to understand that, well, you have a lot of time to improve on that.

And, btw, Emotional inteligence is just as debated as IQ, so, who cares.

First, processing ability is not the same as intelligence. My computer can process information many many times faster than I yet I'm the more intelligent.It isn't? The reason you are (in many - not all - ways) the more intelligent is that while your computer is faster with (note the word) relatively simple (as can be expressed digitally and discretely) information, you can process certain things in ways it cannot, or at a larger scale than it can. The human brain does many funky things with the information it handles, that today's computers cannot simulate. Were one capable enough to be made and programmed, though...

It all boils down to processing of information. Human brains process a ridiculously large amount of input, keeps ridiculously complex immediate results in "memory", and can produce highly complex end-results and perform very advanced decision-making. Some things it is not very well suited for, however. It is rather strange; seemingly simple things take bloody ages (math, compared to a computer's performance, for example), while highly complex things take about the same time, or even go much faster (image handling and processing).

Heh. Done soooo many tests like this (I'm a lazy student, what else is there to do? ;) Flash wasn't working so had to score it manually. I think (my counting isn't very good) I got about 60 for empathising, about 15 for systemising. Yet when I was at school they thought for a while I had Aspergers! Mainly because I was too aware and worried about how people might potentially be upset by any given statement that I evaluated anything I was thinking of saying for so long that the opportunity to talk to the person passed:p.

Seriously, don't worry. IMHO These tests always have a slight whiff of bullshit to them.

I always thought intelligence was an emotionwtf ??!!

wtf ??!!

well, when you see "A=A" what makes you think it's right?

1. some weird way just knowing it's true

2. a feeling in the back of your head

i go for the feeling one cause i doubt intelligence is a way of accessing eternal truths like most people think it is

well, when you see "A=A" what makes you think it's right?
Knowledge of what the "=" symbol is taken by people to represent. That's all. It's not intuition or intelligence; it's convention.

Knowledge of what the "=" symbol is taken by people to represent. That's all. It's not intuition or intelligence; it's convention.

okay then the concept of A=A rather then the knowledge thats been put there already

well, when you see "A=A" what makes you think it's right?

1. some weird way just knowing it's true

2. a feeling in the back of your head

i go for the feeling one cause i doubt intelligence is a way of accessing eternal truths like most people think it isdouble wtf ??!!

okay then the concept of A=A rather then the knowledge thats been put there already
I guess the philosophy of identity is somewhat taken for granted. What we mean by equality of entities is that they have exactly the same set of properties; that is, given two entities A and B that are equal, a property is true for A if and only if it is true for B. The notion of a property, similarly, can be defined as a construct of one or more discrete truths concerning the entity, such as numerical value, physical structure or conceptual composition.

Again it seems mostly convention. We define equality to conveniently refer to mathematical constructs that are interchangeable to avoid having to resort to axiomatic reasoning every time we want to work out whether we can afford that meal out next Tuesday. It's still not intelligence or emotion, but a little trick that some thinkers long ago came up with to make things rather a lot easier on all of us and that we happen to adopt for ourselves.

Intelligence, now, is the manipulation of such concepts, such as in calculating that we can afford that meal but will need to live on pasta for the next week to replace the spent resources. Emotion is a personal response to this knowledge, like where we're pleased to eat out with friends, yet annoyed that food is going to be rather bland on Wednesday and wishing that you had more money with which to keep culinary habits interesting.

Chandelier, you´ve missed a very important point. The thing is, you´re a 16 (or 17 if its past your birthday) in a class where the majority must be 19, 20 or even older people.

Just as all other inteligences, emotional inteligence also depends on age. If he is saying the average is 120, or 135, that must be related to the average age of the people in the room.

So, dont feel bad. First try to find what is the average of your age. And even if your score is reasonably smaller, you have to understand that, well, you have a lot of time to improve on that.

And, btw, Emotional inteligence is just as debated as IQ, so, who cares.

Most of the people in there are 18, and I think what he gave was an average for adults in general, but I'm not sure.

last time I took it my EQ was much lower than yours, and my SQ was much higher.

I think you are probably okay. Don't read too much into the "male brain" thing either, it just means you think differently than some other people, it's fine, my husband and I get along great because I think like he does.

You are probably very intelligent, sometimes when you are highly intelligent you are too busy thinking about stuff to really read emotion in other people ;)

Ok. Yeah, I guess so.:)

To the OP: Why care? Emotions are a waste of time in general. They hinder you from cold, rational self-interest maximisation. :)


That's kind of what I've thought, but I'm actually really emotional. I don't like it because they're hard to control. However, some people on here have told me that I seem emotionless on here to them. I don't know.

However, some people on here have told me that I seem emotionless on here to them. I don't know.

Aheh..Yea... >_>"

Aheh..Yea... >_>"

It wasn't just you, either...:)

That's kind of what I've thought, but I'm actually really emotional. I don't like it because they're hard to control. However, some people on here have told me that I seem emotionless on here to them. I don't know.
you seem to have a normal amount of emotions to me......although you are rather anxious (but I can't really judge for that, seeing as I am even more anxious than you seem to be)

I know I've always been shy and anxious around other people, but I've also always been nice to pretty much everyone, with very few exceptions. Or maybe I just don't understand people, or I was underestimating myself when I took the test. I don't know. I don't know if I even think that emotional intelligence is that important. In class they said that it was a better predictor of success than IQ, but I don't know about that. I consider myself pretty successful as far as my goals go.

What do you think about this? I'm probably thinking too much about it...
Could you be autistic?

Could you be autistic?

I don't know. I don't think so.

you seem to have a normal amount of emotions to me......although you are rather anxious (but I can't really judge for that, seeing as I am even more anxious than you seem to be)

I am anxious quite a lot, yes.
:)

So you got a low score. And - ?

honest question, is autism fashionable (using the word very lightly there) now because people correlate it with intelligence or unusual abilities?

As for the EQ thing I find it very difficult to be in party situations with a whole bunch of strangers, just close up. I also walk straight past people I know because I dont see them, terrible with names as well, faces Im ok with but I always have an uncertainty as to whose face it is so I have to stare at them for about 7 seconds until Im absolutely sure Im not mistaking them for someone else. Social interaction does require effort, sometimes too much effort. I prefer buying train tickets from a machine than from a person.

Wow is there a test like this online?

I guess the philosophy of identity is somewhat taken for granted. What we mean by equality of entities is that they have exactly the same set of properties; that is, given two entities A and B that are equal, a property is true for A if and only if it is true for B. The notion of a property, similarly, can be defined as a construct of one or more discrete truths concerning the entity, such as numerical value, physical structure or conceptual composition.

Again it seems mostly convention. We define equality to conveniently refer to mathematical constructs that are interchangeable to avoid having to resort to axiomatic reasoning every time we want to work out whether we can afford that meal out next Tuesday. It's still not intelligence or emotion, but a little trick that some thinkers long ago came up with to make things rather a lot easier on all of us and that we happen to adopt for ourselves.

Intelligence, now, is the manipulation of such concepts, such as in calculating that we can afford that meal but will need to live on pasta for the next week to replace the spent resources. Emotion is a personal response to this knowledge, like where we're pleased to eat out with friends, yet annoyed that food is going to be rather bland on Wednesday and wishing that you had more money with which to keep culinary habits interesting.

well said, i mean most of what we think is intuition and just pops into our heads without any thought and i suppose thats instinct but when it comes down to the basics, the simplier you get such as A=A the more infinite and hard to understand things get

and that in my opinion is the flaw of all intelligence and rationality, if you can't explain what "truth" or something as commonly used as that is then all your doing is basing your "intelligence" and knowledge on random assumptions

In AP Psychology yesterday, we added up our scores on an emotional intelligence test survey thing (not sure of the name) to find our emotional intelligence scores. I added up my score and got about 107; I assumed that it would be like I.Q. where the average is 100, so I thought that my score was pretty decent.

I was apparently very wrong. After we had added up our scores, the teacher told us that 120 was the average for the prison population.:eek:

125 or something like that was average for males, and 135 was average for females, he said. I'm pretty sure that my score was the lowest in the class. Several people even had scores around 140 or 150.

I know I've always been shy and anxious around other people, but I've also always been nice to pretty much everyone, with very few exceptions. Or maybe I just don't understand people, or I was underestimating myself when I took the test. I don't know. I don't know if I even think that emotional intelligence is that important. In class they said that it was a better predictor of success than IQ, but I don't know about that. I consider myself pretty successful as far as my goals go.

What do you think about this? I'm probably thinking too much about it...

Heh. You'll live. Just because you aren't as emotional as some people is no reason to worry. It might be the way you talk though. I hear a sort of flat, icy, voice.

So now we're judging people on which emotions they feel. And I thought the IQ test was bad :(

I don't think it's a measure of the emotions you feel. I think emotional intelligence is a function of how you interpret the emotions you feel.

An example would be that episode of Sex and the City where the redhead thought that the lady at the Chinese Food place was laughing at her for being a pathetic spinster who ate the same thing home alone every night. And she kept ordering from the same place because they had the best (I think it was) broccolli and brown sauce in town.

It turned out that the girl who took the phone orders was just an airhead who laughed at the end of every sentence and the redhead only wanted to eat there was because she used to eat there with her boyfriend. But she took it all personally because she didn't realize that she simply missed her ex boyfriend terribly. Lack of emotional intelligence.

-snip-

Scientific evidence shows that emotion is intimately tied in with reasoning and consciousness. Most of our ability to reason, judge, and think comes from our ability to feel and understand fear, pleasure, pain and so on. In addition, those who have strokes that immobilise the amygdala (centre of emotional processing) are incapable of making decisions or processing memories, and thus cannot function on a day-to-day basis.

EQ, however, is not "emotional quotient". It's "empathetic quotient". Having a high EQ doesn't mean you're an emotional person; it just means you have high empathy. Having a low EQ doesn't mean you're unemotional, it just means you have low empathy. For instance, I experience the full spectrum of emotions on a daily basis, and I have an EQ of 8.

honest question, is autism fashionable (using the word very lightly there) now because people correlate it with intelligence or unusual abilities?
So it seems, yes. Which is a bit sad.

As for the EQ thing I find it very difficult to be in party situations with a whole bunch of strangers, just close up. I also walk straight past people I know because I dont see them, terrible with names as well, faces Im ok with but I always have an uncertainty as to whose face it is so I have to stare at them for about 7 seconds until Im absolutely sure Im not mistaking them for someone else. Social interaction does require effort, sometimes too much effort. I prefer buying train tickets from a machine than from a person.
I'm a bit like that. Rather than being terrible with names, names are usually the only thing I remember. As a result, the name actually becomes the person, so I can't even say most names aloud without feeling as though I'm doing something particularly disgusting. I can't really explain it either.

honest question, is autism fashionable (using the word very lightly there) now because people correlate it with intelligence or unusual abilities?
.

You see, autism is what people in the old days used to call "introversion".

And "asperger syndrome" is what people use when they think its better to get a labbel and start taking medication instead of trying to solve their social and personality problems.

I mean, its much easier to just label yourself and start taking drugs than trying to fix it yourself.

I swear, nowadays everyone has a mental condition and take drugs for them.

And Chandelier, sorry, but neither you, who is 16, nor your college coleagues are adults at 18. It takes more than that.

You see, autism is what people in the old days used to call "introversion".

And "asperger syndrome" is what people use when they think its better to get a labbel and start taking medication instead of trying to solve their social and personality problems.

I mean, its much easier to just label yourself and start taking drugs than trying to fix it yourself.

I swear, nowadays everyone has a mental condition and take drugs for them.Asperger syndrome is what people who happen to be odd in a certain way (introverted, and often - to a degree as part of so being - somewhat out of tune with the way a majority of people interact in real life. note that the communication issue goes both ways) are labeled with. The distinction between it and high-functioning autism is very, very fuzzy, and few agree on it. Many professionals see them as being different terms for the exact same thing. (including the one who diagnosed me)

As for those diagnosed with AS, granted, some fit your description. Most, though, do not, me included. I was diagnosed back when I was 9 years old, following an investigation promted by the school, as I was visibly rather odd, and - due to being a bullied outcast - had developed quite a depression. Also, there is no such thing as medication for AS. Never have been, never will be.

And as for personal problems - I solve whatever ones I get. I have many times had to do the job of putting together and reinforcing my psyche when it has been worn down. Psychiatrists and counselors are generally pretty useless, assuming much and doing very little of practical value, essentially sitting there and asking meaningless questions and giving vague, empty answers. Not to mention the (undeserved, and quite annoying) patronisation those diagnosed with something like AS can get from such people.

I have no issues from which I am escaping and trying to avoid responsibility for. Unless you think of being quirky and introverted as an illness; in that case, I am a very sick bastard, and proud of it.

There is however medication for some comorbids, which are separate issues often accompanying AS. I have Tourette syndrome (the mild symptoms of which do not bother or hinder me at all) as well, but need no medication for it.

And Chandelier, sorry, but neither you, who is 16, nor your college coleagues are adults at 18. It takes more than that.

What college colleagues?:confused: I'm in high school, and I'm 17.

Heh. You'll live. Just because you aren't as emotional as some people is no reason to worry. It might be the way you talk though. I hear a sort of flat, icy, voice.

I know. Maybe so.

You mean you´re taking psychology classes in high school? That is pretty fucked up.

And a few weeks, months ago you were 16.

You mean you´re taking psychology classes in high school? That is pretty fucked up.

And a few weeks, months ago you were 16.

Yes. If I get a high enough score on the AP test at the end of the year, I can get college credit for it.

That's true. My birthday was nearly two weeks ago.:)

In AP Psychology yesterday, we added up our scores on an emotional intelligence test survey thing (not sure of the name) to find our emotional intelligence scores. I added up my score and got about 107; I assumed that it would be like I.Q. where the average is 100, so I thought that my score was pretty decent.

I was apparently very wrong. After we had added up our scores, the teacher told us that 120 was the average for the prison population.:eek:

125 or something like that was average for males, and 135 was average for females, he said. I'm pretty sure that my score was the lowest in the class. Several people even had scores around 140 or 150.

I know I've always been shy and anxious around other people, but I've also always been nice to pretty much everyone, with very few exceptions. Or maybe I just don't understand people, or I was underestimating myself when I took the test. I don't know. I don't know if I even think that emotional intelligence is that important. In class they said that it was a better predictor of success than IQ, but I don't know about that. I consider myself pretty successful as far as my goals go.

What do you think about this? I'm probably thinking too much about it...

Tests like these are flawed. You can't judge something personal by scientific methods, and it's pretty silly to even try. It's like me trying to judge how much you love your Mother.

I was apparently very wrong. After we had added up our scores, the teacher told us that 120 was the average for the prison population.:eek: Well, to be fair, they don't have much else to do there than get in touch with their feelings.

and eachother..


Is there even a scientific basis for EQ these days? Because last time I heard there wasn't, but that's a few years back..

honest question, is autism fashionable (using the word very lightly there) now because people correlate it with intelligence or unusual abilities?
I am not an expert, but I think autism is a condition where people or normal or high intelligence happen to be of low emotional intelligence, or are unable to read body language.

You see, autism is what people in the old days used to call "introversion".
That's not quite true. I'm certainly somewhat introverted, but I am capable of reading people's emotions and dis/comfort in social situations. Autism links introversion with an inability to empathise. Perhaps the best way of looking at it is that there is only one "self" that an Autistic person can really understand.

You see, autism is what people in the old days used to call "introversion".

No it's not. A person can be introverted without being autistic; they're miles apart from each other.

No it's not. A person can be introverted without being autistic; they're miles apart from each other.

I understood him to be saying that people have a greater tendency to label other people who are introverted as being autistic as opposed to years ago.

I understood him to be saying that people have a greater tendency to label other people who are introverted as being autistic as opposed to years ago.

I reread his and that would make more sense.

I mean, I'm introverted but I don't have any problems relating to others or interacting socially.

I'm introverted and my parents label me as a recluse.

I took the EQ one and got 29. That's in the low range.

I got 33 or 32 on the SQ one, which is in the average range. I clicked on the part that tells you what type of brain you have, and I was in the range of scores for an S-type brain, which is apparently supposed to be a male brain.

How could have you taken the tests? There are no tests on that link. They go to a dead end.

How could have you taken the tests? There are no tests on that link. They go to a dead end.

The Flash ones wouldn't work for me, but I got to the ones that you could print out and they worked for me.

That's kind of what I've thought, but I'm actually really emotional. I don't like it because they're hard to control. However, some people on here have told me that I seem emotionless on here to them. I don't know.
Coldness essentially translates to controlling/suppressing emotions rather than not having them at all. Or perhaps simply not experiencing them as much as others do. I'm rather cold in that sense, hence I have little empathy when it comes to others.


and that in my opinion is the flaw of all intelligence and rationality, if you can't explain what "truth" or something as commonly used as that is then all your doing is basing your "intelligence" and knowledge on random assumptions
Except that the "assumptions" you refer to (more commonly known as axioms) can be dealt with via logic. For instance, A cannot be non-A. This may be intuitive - we cannot go further than this to explain why this is so. Hence it is an axiom. We then build on axioms (first principles) and work our way up to more significant truths (most importantly in mathematics). Science does the opposite - it sort of searches for the first principles, in a way. If perfection is what you seek in knowledge, you will be disappointed. But once understood, logic is a powerful tool.


I have no issues from which I am escaping and trying to avoid responsibility for. Unless you think of being quirky and introverted as an illness; in that case, I am a very sick bastard, and proud of it.
Hmm I pretty much am highly introverted. I can socialise with people, but dislike it. Very few people remain tolerable to me after spending some time with them.

I'm introverted and my parents label me as a recluse.
It gets worse if you stay introverted. I had the pleasure of being labeled, variously, antisocial, heartless, autistic, depressive-anxious, and a dozen other things by my parents. They threatened at every opportunity to send me to a hospital if I didn't interact with others. :rolleyes:

How could have you taken the tests? There are no tests on that link. They go to a dead end.

If your flash doesn't work, use the HTML links further down the page, and calculate your scores manually. Or upgrade your flash, or switch to Firefox.

You see, autism is what people in the old days used to call "introversion". And "Asperger's Syndrome" is what people use when they think its better to get a label and start taking medication instead of trying to solve their social and personality problems.

You're right! The same thing applies to those who suffer from epilepsy. In the old days, such people were called "attention whores," as it was a well-established fact that their "fits of fancy" were just irritating attempts to be acknowledged. Of course, in the modern world, such people take medication (something that is not given with Asperger's Syndrome, by the way) instead of attempting to resolve their issues. Instead of trying to fix their epilepsy themselves, by becoming more social and less self-centered, they simply take pills to help them with their "disease." :rolleyes:

It gets worse if you stay introverted. I had the pleasure of being labeled, variously, antisocial, heartless, autistic, depressive-anxious, and a dozen other things by my parents. They threatened at every opportunity to send me to a hospital if I didn't interact with others. :rolleyes:
Unfortunately, you have little choice but to interact with others in order to survive in society. I still get to shock people though with my lack of sociability and empathy. :)

The test doesn't make sense, not least of all because empathizing and systematizing are not mutually exclusive. And if the result of the test is in any way correlated with success, that simply shows a failure of the employers to pick those most suited to a particular job. If you're good at performing a task, it shouldn't matter if you compliment your co-worker's haircut each day or tell them what they really feel, or if you are seriously disturbed by watching animals suffer, or whatever else.

In AP Psychology yesterday, we added up our scores on an emotional intelligence test survey thing (not sure of the name) to find our emotional intelligence scores. I added up my score and got about 107; I assumed that it would be like I.Q. where the average is 100, so I thought that my score was pretty decent.

I was apparently very wrong. After we had added up our scores, the teacher told us that 120 was the average for the prison population.:eek:

125 or something like that was average for males, and 135 was average for females, he said. I'm pretty sure that my score was the lowest in the class. Several people even had scores around 140 or 150.

I know I've always been shy and anxious around other people, but I've also always been nice to pretty much everyone, with very few exceptions. Or maybe I just don't understand people, or I was underestimating myself when I took the test. I don't know. I don't know if I even think that emotional intelligence is that important. In class they said that it was a better predictor of success than IQ, but I don't know about that. I consider myself pretty successful as far as my goals go.

What do you think about this? I'm probably thinking too much about it...

Yeah you're thinking about it too much. If you had an IQ that was 107, well, that'd be a problem ;).

Yeah you're thinking about it too much. If you had an IQ that was 107, well, that'd be a problem ;).

No, my IQ is 132. :)

An important thing to remember is that prisoners wouldn't neccessarily have low EQs. It's basically a gauge of your ability to read people. I am a nerd. I'm about as nerdy as you can get short of never speaking to women. In fact, I spoke to my mother not two hours ago. (-Just joking, but there are definitely downsides to being a nerd.) One of the problems with nerds is that, despite having very high IQs, we tend to have rock bottom EQs. I actually have to ask people, in the middle of conversations, whether or not I'm boring them, because I really can't tell for myself. Whereas most prisoners, probably don't. (I have actually met a few convicts, and all of them seemed like fairly outgioing people (mostly drug charges).) They understood more about being social than I did.

I say: don't worry about it. An EQ is something you can acquire. Last year, I started taking a class called "Social Pragmatics" (no joke), and, since then, I have really learned alot and have, for that matter, become quite well liked by my peers. They like my sense of humor, which, formerly, I had been too proffessional to share with them. Though I'm still quite nerdy, I am no longer socially inept and, for that matter, greatly enjoy social interactions, and get along very well with people.

My advice: If you're worried about having a low EQ and being too isolated from people, spend a lot of time in social interactions (especially with people with whom you wouldn't normally interact (colleagues, peers, strangers, etc.). It can be hard at first but it's well worth it. After all, people- people who need people- are the luckiest people in the world. Or, as Terry Pratchett put it: "People who didn't need people needed people around to know they were the kind of people who didn't need people."

Incidentally, you seem to be a big fan of Phatom of the Opera. Have you ever read Maskerade, a parody by British satarist Terry Pratchett. I think you'd enjoy it.

An important thing to remember is that prisoners wouldn't neccessarily have low EQs. It's basically a gauge of your ability to read people. I am a nerd. I'm about as nerdy as you can get short of never speaking to women. In fact, I spoke to my mother not two hours ago. (-Just joking, but there are definitely downsides to being a nerd.) One of the problems with nerds is that, despite having very high IQs, we tend to have rock bottom EQs. I actually have to ask people, in the middle of conversations, whether or not I'm boring them, because I really can't tell for myself. Whereas most prisoners, probably don't. (I have actually met a few convicts, and all of them seemed like fairly outgioing people (mostly drug charges).) They understood more about being social than I did.

I say: don't worry about it. An EQ is something you can acquire. Last year, I started taking a class called "Social Pragmatics" (no joke), and, since then, I have really learned alot and have, for that matter, become quite well liked by my peers. They like my sense of humor, which, formerly, I had been too proffessional to share with them. Though I'm still quite nerdy, I am no longer socially inept and, for that matter, greatly enjoy social interactions, and get along very well with people.

My advice: If you're worried about having a low EQ and being too isolated from people, spend a lot of time in social interactions (especially with people with whom you wouldn't normally interact (colleagues, peers, strangers, etc.). It can be hard at first but it's well worth it. After all, people- people who need people- are the luckiest people in the world. Or, as Terry Pratchett put it: "People who didn't need people needed people around to know they were the kind of people who didn't need people."

Incidentally, you seem to be a big fan of Phatom of the Opera. Have you ever read Maskerade, a parody by British satarist Terry Pratchett. I think you'd enjoy it.

I occasionally have to ask people if I'm boring them, too. I feel I've made a lot of progress, though. Just last year I used to get nauseous whenever I was around anyone who wasn't a close friend or family member.

No, I haven't read it, although I've heard of it.

IQ and EQ are both overrated. So what if you're emotional intelligence is below standard according to a test? I mean, it makes for an interesting study, but in the end, you're still the person you are. A simple little quiz shouldn't change your own assessment of your social skills.

snip

The redhead is from my old high school. [/random stuff]



Oh, and on topic, Chandelier, your mad cool, don't worry 'bout some dumb test. :) And....um....yeah, your cool. For sure. :)
*is not focusing well* *blinks* yes...chandelier is....OOOhhhh shiny obj.....chips are go........ *drools*..... *yawns*.......... *stops typing*........ (almost) .....*ok, really stops typing*.....*fails at posting*..... *waits for jolt to reappear inorder to post*.... oh, yes, you're :cool:....or :)?.....or like a mix, like a smile with sunglasses.... or maybe you'd want a mask instead?..... *looks at time, eight minutes till I can post*.... *goes to brush teeth*... *feels slightly akward and dumb*.... *can't remember how to spell awkward? awkard? ackward*?.... *feels really dumb*.... awckward?.... *googles*.... awkward looks the best according to google.... thats a dumb word....OOOHHH its time to post...

*looks at my post* And you think you have problems?
:p :)


ARGH I CAN'T POST YET. *wants to post this and go to sleep*
*tries to post like five times in a row* this is gonna be a quintuple post, isn't it. *sigh*



Edit: I was REALLY tired last night. Just saying. *hides*

honest question, is autism fashionable (using the word very lightly there) now because people correlate it with intelligence or unusual abilities?


You see, autism is what people in the old days used to call "introversion".

And "asperger syndrome" is what people use when they think its better to get a labbel and start taking medication instead of trying to solve their social and personality problems.

I mean, its much easier to just label yourself and start taking drugs than trying to fix it yourself.

I swear, nowadays everyone has a mental condition and take drugs for them.

And Chandelier, sorry, but neither you, who is 16, nor your college coleagues are adults at 18. It takes more than that.


Autism is the "new and improved" homosexuality. The media always likes to promote the lifestyle of a segment of society that doesn't fit into what most Americans view as synchronous with their own. The media now implies that any man that has a high EQ or that knows how to cook is gay, whereas 15 years ago, he was just enlightened and equal opportunity.

The new agenda is to assert that everybody who isn't gay is either autistic or descended from a neanderthal. In do doing, the severely autistic people are no longer stereotyped as ghoulish idiots, but rather a normal segment of society. This is movement is particularly popular amongst theAutistic Power movement, who oppose Parental Rights in the ability for parents to choose whether or not to undergo elective abortion surgery in the event that their fetus is afflicted with undesirable genetic mutations.

I understood him to be saying that people have a greater tendency to label other people who are introverted as being autistic as opposed to years ago.


Bingo, you have a winner.

What I´m trying to say is that people use the word autist to any random series of characteristics.

An autist has a lot of problem adjusting to his enviroment. Its not just because the guy is shy or has poor social skills.

I occasionally have to ask people if I'm boring them, too. I feel I've made a lot of progress, though. Just last year I used to get nauseous whenever I was around anyone who wasn't a close friend or family member.

No, I haven't read it, although I've heard of it.

Not to mention you dislike anything related to sex. Just that tells how much you´re dumb emotionaly :p

We want a picture of you wearing a blouse.

people with Aspergers usually have pretty low EQ's and very high SQ's you should take both tests and print out the results and talk to your doctor.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/news/page/0,,937443,00.html

the tests don't seem to be there any more :(


edit: oh, HTML tests are there

the tests don't seem to be there any more :(

HTML versions:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/table/0,,937442,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/table/0,,937441,00.html

Not to mention you dislike anything related to sex. Just that tells how much you´re dumb emotionaly :p

We want a picture of you wearing a blouse.

:mad:

I don't know how to send the pictures from my camera to the computer. :(

Interesting. Apparently I'm normal, if closer to male average, on the EQ, but in the Asperger's range on the SQ.

Of course, these tests aren't very well normalized to account for the fact that a person may not see themselves in the most favorable light or that very recent experiences might change an answer. I, for one, am unlikely to pick "strongly agree" or "strongly disagree" on any "I am good at...." questions, because I always figure that there are definitely people who are better or worse at it. Other people might feel very strongly that they are good at something, even if they aren't.

And then there are the recent experiences. I have a friend who has recently been coming to me to talk about his personal life, so the questions dealing with that, in my head, were closer to the strongly agree side. But, just two days ago, I somehow completely missed the fact that one of my friends had said something that made another angry - even though I normally pick up on such things, so I wasn't going to say I "strongly agreed" with the statement about picking up on someone feeling uncomfortable.

Maybe I'm just too fond of psychoanalyzing myself, but I think these tests suffer from some pretty serious flaws.

:mad:

I don't know how to send the pictures from my camera to the computer. :(

Most digital cameras come with a USB or USB 2.0 cord. Just plug the larger end of the cord into the appropriately shaped slot in the computer and begin downloading the pictures. If the pictures were taken on a disposable or other nondigital medium, they'll have to be scanned into the computer, which of course requires a scanner, etc.

:mad:

I don't know how to send the pictures from my camera to the computer. :(

Geez, and you suck at technology too. :rolleyes:

You´re the 17 year old genius who does college grade classes, not me. Figure it out.

And Chandelier, start a pic post because I want to show my pictures and yours.

Except that the "assumptions" you refer to (more commonly known as axioms) can be dealt with via logic. For instance, A cannot be non-A. This may be intuitive - we cannot go further than this to explain why this is so. Hence it is an axiom. We then build on axioms (first principles) and work our way up to more significant truths (most importantly in mathematics). Science does the opposite - it sort of searches for the first principles, in a way. If perfection is what you seek in knowledge, you will be disappointed. But once understood, logic is a powerful tool.


everything you just said is an "axiom" as you call it then, thus you have assumed that that is true, so once again you can't even be vaguely sure you are close to "truth" you can only have faith

axioms are not assumptions :rolleyes:

Geez, and you suck at technology too. :rolleyes:

You´re the 17 year old genius who does college grade classes, not me. Figure it out.

And Chandelier, start a pic post because I want to show my pictures and yours.

Why the sudden demand for a picture?

axioms are not assumptions :rolleyes:

well the way that guy put them they damn well are assumptions. i'm yet to find anything that's not an assumption

Dunno, use your emotional inteligence to figure it out.

Dunno, use your emotional inteligence to figure it out.

I don't really have time to take a picture of myself and post it at the moment, and I don't particularly want to, either. Sorry.

Eh, these quotient tests and personality sorters are highly subjective to their own design and fundamentally flawed for several reasons, not the least of which is the shear diversity and unpredictability of human individuality.

Frankly, they're only slightly above astrological signs and below your tax returns as an indication of personality and ability.

In AP Psychology yesterday, we added up our scores on an emotional intelligence test survey thing (not sure of the name) to find our emotional intelligence scores. I added up my score and got about 107; I assumed that it would be like I.Q. where the average is 100, so I thought that my score was pretty decent.

I was apparently very wrong. After we had added up our scores, the teacher told us that 120 was the average for the prison population.:eek:

125 or something like that was average for males, and 135 was average for females, he said. I'm pretty sure that my score was the lowest in the class. Several people even had scores around 140 or 150.

I know I've always been shy and anxious around other people, but I've also always been nice to pretty much everyone, with very few exceptions. Or maybe I just don't understand people, or I was underestimating myself when I took the test. I don't know. I don't know if I even think that emotional intelligence is that important. In class they said that it was a better predictor of success than IQ, but I don't know about that. I consider myself pretty successful as far as my goals go.

What do you think about this? I'm probably thinking too much about it...I thought the average for IQ's was 130...

people with Aspergers usually have pretty low EQ's and very high SQ's you should take both tests and print out the results and talk to your doctor.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/news/page/0,,937443,00.html
According to those tests, my EQ is 12 and my SQ is 70.

My EQ is likely suppressed by my logical training. I'm well aware that people are unpredictable and irrational, so any attempt to understand them is pointless.

My SQ could well be that high.

I thought the average for IQ's was 130...
Nope. Average IQ = 100. 130 is well over one standard deviation above average.

I thought the average for IQ's was 130...

Your IQ is calculated with the equation 100 x (mental age/chronological age).

If you are 20 years old and performing at the level of an average 20 year old, then you have an IQ of 100. If you are 15 and on the level of a 20 year old, you have an IQ of 133.

It is extremely subjective, but the average is always 100.

Your IQ is calculated with the equation 100 x (mental age/chronological age).

If you are 20 years old and performing at the level of an average 20 year old, then you have an IQ of 100. If you are 15 and on the level of a 20 year old, you have an IQ of 133.

It is extremely subjective, but the average is always 100.
As such, it is MUCH easier to score well on those tests when you're quite young. I scored 157 when I was 8, but that just means I was as smart as a typical 12-13 year old. Big deal.

Your IQ is calculated with the equation 100 x (mental age/chronological age).

If you are 20 years old and performing at the level of an average 20 year old, then you have an IQ of 100. If you are 15 and on the level of a 20 year old, you have an IQ of 133.

It is extremely subjective, but the average is always 100.

The intelligence scores over the years have been increasing, too. It's called the Flynn effect, I think. We talked about that in psychology. Someone with an IQ measured as 100 in the 1920's would have an IQ around 80 if measured by today's standards.

I thought that that formula isn't currently used with intelligence tests, though since it worked well with children but not really well with adults.

The intelligence scores over the years have been increasing, too. It's called the Flynn effect, I think. We talked about that in psychology. Someone with an IQ measured as 100 in the 1920's would have an IQ around 80 if measured by today's standards.

I thought that that formula isn't currently used with intelligence tests, though since it worked well with children but not really well with adults.

The sad thing is that despite the shear number of theories, no one can adequately explain the Flynn effect. Not even the people who make the tests these days. Very curious.

Anyway, they still use the same equation to the best of my knowledge. They just rescale it every couple of years to account for the increase in average. The only problem is that old scores are invalid by today's standards, and as you age the scores become less meaningful.

Of course, "less meaningful" does sort of assume they were meaningful to begin with. *shrugs*

everything you just said is an "axiom" as you call it then, thus you have assumed that that is true, so once again you can't even be vaguely sure you are close to "truth" you can only have faith
1+1 = 2 is axiomatic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom). If you are illogical enough to question that, nothing more can be said on the matter. You would be alongside the worst of the Pyrrhonean skeptics.

axioms are not assumptions :rolleyes:

Read the article I provided. That they are assumptions does nothing to undermine their validity. If one rejects 1+1 = 2, there is no point in even arguing it with them. Knowledge becomes impossible.

people with Aspergers usually have pretty low EQ's and very high SQ's you should take both tests and print out the results and talk to your doctor.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/news/page/0,,937443,00.html

i got 19 on the EQ score

and 37 on the SQ score

For other individuals, systemising is stronger than empathising. This is called the male brain, or a brain of type S.
The extreme male brain (bottom right of the graph) may be a manifestation of autism.

0-32 = You have a lower than average ability for understanding how other people
feel and responding appropriately.

20-39 = You have an average ability for analysing and exploring a system.

bit of a surprise there...



http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/9.12/aqtest.html

Agree: 4,5,6,12,13,16,18,20,21,22,23,26,33,35,45,46: 1 point
Disagree: 1,10,11,15,17,24,25,27,28,30,32,37,38,44,47,50: 1 point
Score: 32

Psychologist Simon Baron-Cohen and his colleagues at Cambridge's Autism Research Centre have created the Autism-Spectrum Quotient, or AQ, as a measure of the extent of autistic traits in adults. In the first major trial using the test, the average score in the control group was 16.4.

i know my brain works very visually, and i guess that might make potential mild autism (which i've often thought i might have in the past) easier in dealing with people and reading faces etc

i got 19 on the EQ score

and 37 on the SQ score



bit of a surprise there...

Not really. That's consistent with clinical depression. I suspect my EQ was even lower before I started working to rid myself of depression, although I never bothered to take any tests to confirm that.

[Yay! 200th post!]

Not really. That's consistent with clinical depression. I suspect my EQ was even lower before I started working to rid myself of depression, although I never bothered to take any tests to confirm that.

[Yay! 200th post!]

true, i used to be a lot better at dealing with social situations and making friends before the depression.


yay! *hugs*

I don't really have time to take a picture of myself and post it at the moment, and I don't particularly want to, either. Sorry.

Ouch.

No offense but it sounds like you have Asperger's syndrome like I do. Its a sucky disease but a good plus is most of the people who have it are more intelligent than the average person.

But those who aren't more intelligent than average and have it, like me, are fucked...

Ouch.

Sorry.:)