It’s wild to think that EQ—emotional quotient—only came roaring onto the academic scene in recent decades (1990, to be precise). When I was in college I didn’t take any psychology classes (weird, right?) but I did work in the Yale Psychology Department all four years, where I filed expense reports and whatnot for professors, including Peter Salovey, who, along with John Mayer, pioneered the concept. (Hi Judy and Renée!)
At the time—and you could argue to this day—IQ was the only factor that really rated, despite its flaws, so I was interested in Salovey’s work. But I didn’t think that much about it, in part because I’m a traditional “verbal” learner who does really well on standardized tests. (If you’re looking for a fascinating read on environmental impacts on IQ, I highly recommend Harriet Washington’s A Terrible Thing to Waste: Environmental Racism and Its Assault on the American Mind.)
A few years ago, I interviewed Temple Grandin about her wonderful book, Visual Thinking, where she asserts that our culture is almost exclusively engineered around “Verbal Thinkers”—and that we unintentionally weed out all of our “Visual” and “Visual-Spatial” thinkers, the types of brainiacs who understand how the built world works and can fix or make almost anything but invariably fail algebra (verbal math) and struggle in school, if not drop-out. As she writes, “It turns out that algebra is a barrier that keeps some students from completing high school or a community college technical degree. These are the visual thinkers who can invent machinery but can’t solve for x, and we are screening them out.”
You can listen to our full podcast conversation here, but in short, this is how Temple distinguishes between the two:
VERBAL THINKERS:
“Word-based thinking is sequential and linear. People who are primarily verbal thinkers tend to comprehend things in order, which is why they often do so well in school, where learning is mostly structured sequentially. They are good at understanding general concepts and have a good sense of time, though not necessarily a good sense of direction. Verbal thinkers are the kids with perfectly organized binders and the adults whose computer desktops have neat rows of folders for every project. Verbal thinkers are good at explaining the steps they take to arrive at an answer or to make a decision. Verbal thinkers talk to themselves silently, also known as self-talk, to organize their world. Verbal thinkers easily dash off emails, make presentations. They talk early and often. By default, verbal people tend to be the ones who dominate conversations, are hyper-organized and social.”
VISUAL THINKERS:
“Visual thinkers tend to be late talkers who struggle with school and traditional teaching methods. Algebra is often their undoing, because the concepts are too abstract, with little or nothing concrete to visualize. Visual thinkers tend to be good at arithmetic that is directly related to practical tasks, such as building and putting things together. Visual thinkers like me easily grasp how mechanical devices work or enjoy figuring them out. We tend to be problem solvers, and sometimes appear to be socially awkward.”
This book was an unlock for me in terms of giving me words for my husband’s intelligence (Visual and Visual/Spatial) as well as my kids (still unfolding, but a hybrid). And in recent years, I’ve started reading more about kinesthetic intelligence too (the forté of my friend Lauren Roxburgh, podcast here). As ideas like these gain more traction in culture, you can see the relief they bring to people who both “know” in a different way and sometimes have genius-level intelligence in untraditional and previously unrecognized ways.
In Ken Wilber’s latest book, Finding Radical Wholeness, he asserts that there are 12 known intelligences that psychologists and scientists tend to agree on—though this list will likely grow and become increasingly nuanced over time. (Types of Intelligence wasn’t the focus of my podcast conversation with Ken, but you can find the episode here.)
Here he is: “In addition to cognitive intelligence—which is still important—we also have emotional intelligence, moral intelligence, musical intelligence, aesthetic intelligence, intrapersonal intelligence, kinesthetic or bodily intelligence, mathematical intelligence, social or interpersonal intelligence, values intelligence, and spiritual intelligence, among others.”
How relieving would it be to have an education system and wider culture that could assess and cultivate these different types of intelligences? Going back to Zone of Genius, it feels like it would help us mightily to understand where we’re uniquely gifted. To the list above, I would spatial/structural intelligence, systems intelligence, as well as energetic intelligence, where I would put people who are uniquely gifted with animals. What else would you add?
THE LATEST FROM THE PODCAST:
7/8: The importance of deep connection and “boy” culture with Niobe Way
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
7/3: Working through relational conflict with Stan Tatkin
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
6/28: Understanding your energy with Prune Harris
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
6/21: Cracking mental illness with Karl Deisseroth, M.D., PhD
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
6/14: Growing ourselves up with Ken Wilber
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
6/7: Connecting with the divine with Nicole Avant
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
6/3: Getting back into our bodies with Prentis Hemphill
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
5/30: The myth of resilience with Soraya Chemaly
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
5/27: Metabolizing our traumatic inheritance with Resmaa Menakem
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
5/23: Taking back your brain with Kara Loewentheil
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
5/20: The creation of somatic experiencing with Peter Levine, Ph.D
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
5/16: Choosing wholeness over wokeness with Africa Brooke
Apple | Spotify | Transcript
THE LATEST POSTS:
The Codes of Anger: Using the Chakras in an Unexpected Way
A Community or a Club? How Do You Find Belonging?
What’s Your Zone of Genius? Hint: It Probably Doesn’t Feel Like Work
Do You Have an Upper Limit Problem? I Think I Do.
A Love Letter to Routine: May They Bring You the Space You Need
Making Decisions Right: There’s No Science, Just Gut
Who is “Manning” Your Basecamp: Some Thoughts on Last Week
We Need Privacy: Contemplating the Darkness of the Feminine with Helen Luke
What Are We “Really, Actually” Saying?: Carol Gilligan Offers Some Answers
Calling the Cassandras: What if We Stop Dismissing What We Don’t Want to Hear?
Accepting the Dregs: When You Want the Bigger Cookie
On Beauty: Do You Feel Invisible?
The Cosmic Egg: We are Missing THE Story
Intergenerational Anxiety: Understanding which Part is Ours
One Thing We Need to Learn: A Few Notes on Andrew Huberman
You Have to Start Where You Are
Synchronicity & Fate: Signs are Signs, But They Still Require Discernment
PART 4: The Achilles Heel of Women
PART 3: Who Gets to Be an Expert?
PART 2: The Perception (and Reality) of Scarcity
PART 1: Ending the “Manel”—Doing this Requires Understanding Ourselves
Full archive HERE
My New York Times bestselling book—On Our Best Behavior: The Seven Deadly Sins and the Price Women Pay to be Good—is out now.
Howard Gardiner is the source for multiple intelligences…
If only… sigh… When will we as a society be bold enough to push for these reforms in education and business? Those in the minority are still subject to exclusion, bullying and misunderstanding.