Read on Twitter
Men who show off how little they care about emotions reveal what an ineffective leader they are, because managing people is, by definition, managing their emotions - and thus you can't be an effective leader if you don't know how to or simply don't care to mange people.
I get it, I remember being an intellectually curious teenage boy, who reasoned everything to its natural conclusion, basically never cried, and found other people's drama and emotions over the top and annoying. I get it.
But I didn't have to lead shit as a teenager either.
But I didn't have to lead shit as a teenager either.
Facts don't care about your feelings, but feelings don't care about your facts either.
If you want to manage and persuade people, you're going to need to give a shit about how they feel in order to change how they feel to get them to cooperate with you.
Women especially.
If you want to manage and persuade people, you're going to need to give a shit about how they feel in order to change how they feel to get them to cooperate with you.
Women especially.
If you stay stuck in autistic high IQ logic boy land, you will never be an effective leader of people.
Ever.
But you get to be smug and proud in believing your argument is superior. And that you're right and others are inferior.
But you're certainly not winning at life.
Ever.
But you get to be smug and proud in believing your argument is superior. And that you're right and others are inferior.
But you're certainly not winning at life.
So right or wrong doesn't really matter, in so much as being practical and effective does.
Being effective is winning.
And you're effective when you know both how to reason properly, and how to manage people's feelings so they don't combust into flames with misunderstanding.
Being effective is winning.
And you're effective when you know both how to reason properly, and how to manage people's feelings so they don't combust into flames with misunderstanding.
When you're dealing with a highly emotional person, you have to anticipate why they feel the way they feel, and address their misconceptions.
Usually they think something meant something that it didn't, made an unpalatable inference, and begun feeling shitty.
Usually they think something meant something that it didn't, made an unpalatable inference, and begun feeling shitty.
So with emotional people you're always steering them back onto the main road because their neuroticism/insecurity leads them to incorrect negative conclusions. They require additional politeness and comfort to know no hostility is intended, and then they will calm down.
With low emotion high logic people on the other hand, you should never even say "I feel like" - always *I think* and you can get away with "I believe" if you can substantiate the argument.
High logic people want to understand your chain of reasoning, nothing else matters to them
High logic people want to understand your chain of reasoning, nothing else matters to them
Essentially, logic and emotion are two separate cultures.
Emotional people are prone to destabilisation and oft need restabilisation via clarification.
Reasonable people need to be shown the casual relationships of variables based on their whys and hows to feel satisified.
Emotional people are prone to destabilisation and oft need restabilisation via clarification.
Reasonable people need to be shown the casual relationships of variables based on their whys and hows to feel satisified.
And yes, I said feel satisfied, because reasonable people have emotions too, they're just not dominated by them, and consumed with them to the point said emotions dominate their thought process. If anything, these emotions simply give them a reason to debate to begin with.
