what actaully transpires as people interact

[keannu]

What does the last sentence mean? I can't get it!

is29
ex)Way back in 1920, psychologist Edward Thorndike created the original formulation of "social intelligence". He defined it as "the ability to understand and manage men and women," skills we all need to live well in the world. However, that definition also allows pure manipulation to be considered a mark of interpersonal talent. Even now some descriptions of social intelligence offer no distinctions between the callow aptitudes of a con man and the genuinely caring acts that enrich...In my view, simply being manipulative should not be seen as socially intelligent. Instead, we might think of "social intelligence" as a shorthand term for being intelligent not just about our relationships but also in them. This concept lets us look beyond the individual to understand what actually transpires as people interact.

 

[keannu]

Seems really hard, and I miss Soothingdave's help...

 

[keannu]

I can understand "being intelligent about our relationships" means "to be good at manipulating others(negative aspect)", but what does "being intelligent in relationships" mean? It seems a positive aspect, but I can't get it.

ex)...as a shorthand term for being intelligent not just about our relationships but also in them(relationships).

 

[charliedeut]

I can understand "being intelligent about our relationships" means "to be good at manipulating others(negative aspect)", but what does "being intelligent in relationships" mean? It seems a positive aspect, but I can't get it.

ex)...as a shorthand term for being intelligent not just about our relationships but also in them(relationships).

Hi keannu,

IMO, "being intelligent about our relationships" means just being able to discern which ones are convenient for us, and thus avoid those which might, for instance hurt us.

As for "being intelligent in relationships", my guess is that it means that you have to act in an appropriate way regarding those relationships established. I can think of two reasons for this:

1) Help maintain/improve the ones which may have become dear to you.
2) Avoid being hurt in those which, however hard you tried, you couldn't help finding yourself involved in.

And I'm a bit lost, too, about the last sentence of the paragraph. Hope you find my contribution of any help, though.

Greetings,

charliedeut

 

[keannu]

Thanks a lot for your devotion. It seems to make a lot of sense.

 

[keannu]

The last sentence is really hard to understand. Did the writer mean nothing?

 

[Tdol]

I think the writer means we should not just look at the individual, but them in action, as it were, when dealing with other people.

 

[keannu]

Thanks a lot! Okay, you are giving me a clue to understanding the whole thing. So it seems to mean we shouldn't judge a person by his label but his interaction with others like if he treats others fairly or in manipulative way.
So does the following also mean "being intelligent in relationships(interactions) with others" not just the relationship itself(like I'm the teacher to be respected, but I might be a bad interacter with students)?

ex)..."social intelligence" as a shorthand term for being intelligent not just about our relationships but also in them.

 

[Tdol]

It's something along those lines. The writing is fairly loose and doesn't give a very exact definition.