evident from a review of the differences between popular and clinical/professional discourse of IQ and EQ. To see how this works, it may be useful to look briefly at a similar case, that of the effect of evolutionary theory dating from the appearance of Darwin's Origin of Species. Lowenberg says that from the time Darwin's work was published, "evolution germinated ideas wherever it penetrated, and it penetrated everywhere" (Lowenberg 339). Indeed, what Wells describes as a "crude misunderstanding of Darwinism," emerged, on one hand rejecting Darwin's theory of natural selection as a property of biophysical evolution but on the other readily adopting the grand design of what came to be called Social Darwinism, holding that "it is necessary to bully and subdue the younger and weaker for the general good" (Wells 821).
Social Darwinism's imperfectly realized and speciously normative and moral interpretation of evolution can be set beside--and partly intersect with--the discourse of IQ and EQ. EQ is a designation derived from the concept of emotional intelligence, which comes from the discourse of cognitive behavioral theory. Cognitive theory emphasizes interpersonal aspects of human development and functioning associated with strategies that the individual may employ as coping or survival mechanisms, conscious or unconscious, or basic beliefs about the external world on one hand and the ability to cope on the other (Beck passim). The term emotional intelligence was used by Salovey and Mayer in 1989-90 (187ff), in the literature of cognitive research, to describe in theoretical terms the possibility of identifying embedded human skill sets that could make emotion regulation, including the deferral of psychological and physical gratification, the instrument or foundation of practical achievement and planning. The notion of strategic deployment of the human cognition perforce implicates both emotion and intelligence, each being core human ...