Litiquette IV

[ElasticMermaid]

She could be humming Nickelback and I'd her.

You can't see the Crocs she is wearing.

 

[Lord Pmann]

Wow - that's saying something. Titties are magic!

Indeed. The Gandolph of body parts.

You can't see the Crocs she is wearing.

I'd let those things beat me in the back.

 

[ElasticMermaid]

Indeed. The Gandolph of body parts.



I'd let those things beat me in the back.

My crocs.

 

[Lord Pmann]

^^^
It's like Frankenstein on your feet.

 

[NorthRockJohnson]

My crocs.

You guys have done a good job of making me rethink Crocs.

 

[Trekka]

^^^
It's like Frankenstein on your feet.

Those were cute crocs, jackass.

So... Barefoot hippies might not be so bad then?

Two steps forward, two steps back...

Footwear snob! Sooo sexy! My reasonably sized tits are tingling and bouncing in excitement.

 

[ChainedUp]

Quick hitter this morning: Emotions are a tricky thing. They can help us by making us passionate and giving us the drive to succeed or they can be negative and foster jealousy and anger. How do you use your own emotions?

 

[Suz_anne]

Quick hitter this morning: Emotions are a tricky thing. They can help us by making us passionate and giving us the drive to succeed or they can be negative and foster jealousy and anger. How do you use your own emotions?

The timing of this question is oddly appropriate for me. I think the two sides that you presented aren't mutually exclusive. For example, sometimes expressing that you're feeling a little jealous is an okay thing - it is an indicator that you care. But it can be a fine line between "Awwwww, that's sweet" and boiling bunnies.

 

[Lord Pmann]

Quick hitter this morning: Emotions are a tricky thing. They can help us by making us passionate and giving us the drive to succeed or they can be negative and foster jealousy and anger. How do you use your own emotions?

I'm pretty reserved with my emotions, mostly. My happy face is not too dissimilar to my sad face. Both are adorable. But still. I normally don't show lots of emotion. Every once in a while, something will get me excited that will make me emotional. But it's pretty rare. I like to be in control of my emotions. Otherwise I'll act like you crazy fuckers.

Footwear snob! Sooo sexy! My reasonably sized tits are tingling and bouncing in excitement.

Reasonably sized bounces?

 

[RickTango]

Quick hitter this morning: Emotions are a tricky thing. They can help us by making us passionate and giving us the drive to succeed or they can be negative and foster jealousy and anger. How do you use your own emotions?

Interesting question. Just as people have IQs they also have EQs. I generally think of someone with a high EQ as a person who is sensitive to other's feelings. I like to think I am a good reader of other's emotions.
For myself I try to keep my own exterior emotions in check but in reality I would be an awful poker player, I'm not very good at hiding what I feel.

 

[GiggLeGasm]

Interesting question. Just as people have IQs they also have EQs. I generally think of someone with a high EQ as a person who is sensitive to other's feelings. I like to think I am a good reader of other's emotions.
For myself I try to keep my own exterior emotions in check but in reality I would be an awful poker player, I'm not very good at hiding what I feel.

Between EQ and IQ, which do you feel is easier to develop?

 

[RickTango]

Between EQ and IQ, which do you feel is easier to develop?

The age old question. Are you predisposed to have certain traits or are you shaped by your environment
I think both. Have you ever tried to give someone feedback who has a low EQ, their very nature blocks the reception. But if they are open to feedback it is possible for them to learn how to compensate,

 

[Lord Pmann]

Between EQ and IQ, which do you feel is easier to develop?

IQ. Both are hard. But I think IQ is tougher. Maybe I just care far less about EQ.

 

[dutchrain]

I don't 'use' my emotions, they come and go and some I have to reign in a bit.

I think both IQ and EQ are equally difficult/easy to develop, it simply depends on the disposition one has.

 

[LWulf]

I don't 'use' my emotions, they come and go and some I have to reign in a bit.

I think both IQ and EQ are equally difficult/easy to develop, it simply depends on the disposition one has.

Gosh, that sounds exactly like what I was going to say (it's eerie that you use exactly the same words I was going to), but I was getting rantish and after writing out three or four paragraphs, just clicked the little "X"

 

[ElasticMermaid]

I've been described as a fembot and an ice queen. But I think it's just because my emotions are slow to surface. By the right person and circumstance, I can be moved to fire.

 

[Azuldrgon]

How do you use your own emotions?

Ouch!!!

Before my dad passed almost five years ago, I was good at keeping my emotions in check.

Nowadays, they're a little sporadic at best.

I want to say I try to use them constructively. I try to use them to get ahead. It's more difficult now than it used to be, but I try.

 

[ElasticMermaid]

Also, I don't know what you people are talking about. IQ can't be developed, can it? I thought it was a measure (temporarily dismissing cultural and other biases) of potential intelligence. That can be refined, and definitely coached towards better test results, but those aren't real measures of IQ.

Or have I been misled?

 

[Paul_Chance]

I don't use my emotions in that I don't see them as some sort of tool that can be used. They are a touchstone into our inner lives. When they are out of whack, that's a good indicator you need to do some inner work. When they are proportional to the event that triggers them, they're just part of the experience. Trouble arises when a person is over-emotional (i.e. not getting a pretty picture on your latte sends you into a rage) or under-emotional (i.e. feeling nothing in significant life events) those are a good sign you need to do some inner work. (Full Disclosure: Californian)

As for IQ and EQ both can be manipulated fairly easily by someone who understands the measurement instruments being used. Like, uh, a sociopath with a high EQ. As Machiavelli said. "It is not necessary for the Prince to be good, only to appear good."
(Full Disclosure: Proud Alumni of Machiavelli State University)

 

[LWulf]

Also, I don't know what you people are talking about. IQ can't be developed, can it? I thought it was a measure (temporarily dismissing cultural and other biases) of potential intelligence. That can be refined, and definitely coached towards better test results, but those aren't real measures of IQ.

Or have I been misled?

Difficult to answer because there hasn't been enough interest in that exact subject.

IQ tests were, at their inception, first given to a group of children in England. about 60 years later, those same children were given the same IQ test and most of them scored higher. Since IQ is math and science related, I think it is fair to say you can develop math and science skills.

EQ is a little more tricky a subject (not something you asked about but I feel like I'm on a roll (but, I thought I was on my bed? ba-dum-bum)).
As IQ is to Einstein, EQ is to Rembrandt and Shakespeare. At least that's what I thought it was about. Supposedly all it is nowadays is to express how emotionally stable you are.

edit: My understanding of it all was, that people who possess an exceptional mastery in the arts, seldom score high on IQ tests, whereby the EQ test was developed. It seems that rationale has been supplanted.

 

[Lord Pmann]

Also, I don't know what you people are talking about. IQ can't be developed, can it? I thought it was a measure (temporarily dismissing cultural and other biases) of potential intelligence. That can be refined, and definitely coached towards better test results, but those aren't real measures of IQ.

Or have I been misled?

I've actually always thought the same.

 

[ElasticMermaid]

Difficult to answer because there hasn't been enough interest in that exact subject.

IQ tests were, at their inception, first given to a group of children in England. about 60 years later, those same children were given the same IQ test and most of them scored higher. Since IQ is math and science related, I think it is fair to say you can develop math and science skills.

EQ is a little more tricky a subject (not something you asked about but I feel like I'm on a roll (but, I thought I was on my bed? ba-dum-bum)).
As IQ is to Einstein, EQ is to Rembrandt and Shakespeare. At least that's what I thought it was about. Supposedly all it is nowadays is to express how emotionally stable you are.

How is IQ math and science related? I guess pattern recognition...but I wouldn't say it was specifically related to those subjects. There are lots of broad based questions on IQ tests I've taken.

 

[Paul_Chance]

A full suite IQ test (such as the Stanford-Binet) measure five sub-categories of intelligence.

-Fluid Reasoning (verbal skills - both speaking and hearing)
-Knowledge (vocabulary, process, images)
-Quantitative reasoning (non-verbal and verbal math and statistics)
-Visual-spatial processing (forms and patterns, position & direction)
-Working memory (delayed response, block span, vocabulary, word or letter placement)

It's a pretty impressive test and usually takes three to four hours to be administered. Answers are measured on a linear time scale (how long it takes to answer) with the speed relevant to the final score. And you get to play with blocks and toys.

 

[GiggLeGasm]

emotional intelligence is something that is greatly studied, especially as to how it impacts human relationships in the professional setting. Outside variables, such as awareness or exposure, can impact either quotient.

 

[LWulf]

How is IQ math and science related? I guess pattern recognition...but I wouldn't say it was specifically related to those subjects. There are lots of broad based questions on IQ tests I've taken.

Yes, pattern recognition is part of it. Spacial relationships, relatively speaking, can be expressed mathematically. It can be a progression of 2+2=?. It has to do with logic and logic is usually the principle of sciences.

Music has been defined as mathematical, yet if you gave a person with a high IQ test a musical instrument, they would likely master the scales and do little else. They look for progressions in steps, whereas a person with a high EQ (as it was defined to me) would make leaps that don't correlate to logic. They think in terms of concordant harmonies and contrasts.

Art uses pattern recognition too, to a degree, but, as it was defined to me, someone with an art background goes outside the lines of convention and look for alternative correlations. This is why people with high EQ scores wouldn't do well on an IQ test, yet they make masterful artworks, which defies IQ tests.

Did that answer your question well enough?