Our expert says:
Its not so much that I'm not a fan of the concept that there are important human dimemsions including emotiopnal sensitivity ( in terms of skills in recognizing and working with one's own emotions and those of others ), but that I am very unimpressed by those who take something that has been widely recognized for ages, give it a cute name like "EMotional Intelligence", over-simplify it hugely, and write simplistic books, which may be financially profitable, but rarely produce any genuine befits for the readers. Some make an industry out of such conceits, selling expensive videos, DVDs and workshops, all of no genuine proven value.
In the example you quote, yes it was indeed astonishing that so many people were daft enough to suppose that cheating is EVER beneficial to anyone ( I wonder how many of them were cheaters ? ) --- by the criterion that what you propose ought at least to be reliably beneficial, the suggestion failed. But then there is the Moral dimension you raise ( sad how moral issues are not seen as so important any more ) --- apart from being effective, a proposed intervention ought to be morally Right and good, and realistic. ( Beheading probably cures a headache, but on all other dimensions is a truly lousy idea ).
I like the distinction between shame and guilt, that Shame is what you feel when someone else notices you doing something generalyl considered to be wrong, and Guilt is what you feel when YOU notice that you're doing something you consider to be wrong, even if nobody else ever notices or knows about it ). And modern society does indeed seem to be increasingly shameless and guilt-free. We do not seem to be teaching children a moral code to guide theselves by
Are we maybe born with an inherent tendency to see some things as good or bad, but vary according to personality and learning / upbringing as to the criteria we use for deciding what's good or bad ? A psychopath has such criteria, but for him Good is anything that makes him feel happy, whatever the impact on others.
aNNa raises what I think used to be called the Golden Rule. The Cheating debate earlier seems to vary from the old principle of Do As You Would BE Done BY ( treat others as you would like to be treated ) and returned to a more primitive rule of Do Unto Others as They Have already Done Unto YOU, which is surely a recipe for chaos ?
and why is concern about such issues seen as ranting and raving, rather than good moral exercise ?
The information provided does not constitute a diagnosis of your condition. You should consult a medical practitioner or other appropriate health care professional for a physical exmanication, diagnosis and formal
advice. Health24 and the expert accept no responsibility or liability for any damage or personal harm you may suffer resulting from making use of this content.