In Daniel Goleman’s selection, “The Rudiments of Social Intelligence”, he explains how children at a very young age can display many traits of social intelligence and/or deficiency. He begins his dissection of basal social smarts by explaining the four components of interpersonal intelligence. The first, organizing groups, is an “essential skill of a leader”. Negotiating solutions is crucial to conflict prevention. Establishing a personal connection smooths over entrances and exits from encounters. Lastly, social analysis allows us to empathize with others and have perspective when dealing with a social situation. In a few limited case studies that were done in Goleman’s selection, he examines children interacting and illustrates how they display these components. Two children are playing, one asks the other if he’d like to be in a plan or a helicopter, and the other replies, “Are you in a helicopter?” The child who responds clearly displays a concern for the other child’s preference, and also demonstrates a desire to keep the connection between playmate and playing going. This information is worth considering because it can provide perspective for a situation and make you more apt to deal with it tactfully and appropriately. If you’re aware that a person is by nature socially awkward after observing a number of his encounters, you will be less likely to act in an extreme fashion if a social encounter with that person goes awry. To flip the coin, it might help you understand so of your own tendencies to disrupt a smoothly sailing social encounter, and to channel your emotions and thoughts more effectively.
In Navita Cummings James’ reading, “When Miss America Was Always White”, she illustrates through recollection of a number of stories from her childhood how family stories pass on values. They give children a working history that is directly relevant to their life. James grew up in the 50’s in Ohio, and recalls tales of racism and prejudice that here grandparents and parents told her. She provides examples from both sides of her family to contrast each other. She deliberately cautions after recounting numerous tales of violence and discrimination that these stories do not necessarily define who we are or who we become. She corrects that from the stories, “…emerged a set of beliefs and stereotypes that provided a backdrop for my own lived experience. The values you have instilled in you blend with your own individual perception of the world and from it your interpretation is born. This is worth considering for many of the same reasons Goleman’s article is worth considering. If you can understand someone’s system of values, you can address it accordingly, and if you try to comprehend what someone’s life experience has to do with their behavior or feelings, you can be more prepared to counter or sympathize with it.
