Ong Yong Peng wrote thus at 08:53 PM 04-03-09:
>IMHO, a being with an overall better-developed faculties is more intelligent than a being with less developed faculties.
You mean the 5 faculties, right? I think they do relate to IQ, EQ and SQ, particularly wisdom. To be more precise, I'd say they are related as follows:
IQ - paññaa (wisdom)
EQ - paññaa (wisdom), samaadhi (stability), and sati (presence of mind)
SQ - paññaa (wisdom), samaadhi (stability), sati (presence of mind), viriya (energy) and saddhaa (faith),
For SQ, I refer to a holistic spiritual kind, and not the orthodox religious kind.
Gee I wonder if this is the first time someone look at these this way.
> So, intelligence is a measure of how well our senses work, and how well the brain comprehend, process, retain and apply the information acquired through the senses. Modern research is slowly revealing how the brain works as an organ, and how its functions are as tangible as we understand how our eyes see and how our ears hear.
Even more modern research shows that the cranial brain is not as important as previously thought:
The HeartMath researchers conclude
that recent work in neurocardiology [suggests
that] the heart is a sensory organ and
an information encoding and processing
center with an extensive intrinsic nervous
system, enabling it to learn, remember,
and make functional decisions independent
of the cranial brain.38(pp133-143)
(Extracted from "Transplants, Cellular Memory,
and Reincarnation" by Larry Dossey, MD.
EXPLORE, September/October 2008,
Vol. 4, No. 5, p.289.)
If you are interested in this, I can send you this article off-list. You can also look up further on researches on "presentiment" by Rollin McCraty and his colleagues at the HeartMath Research Center, and Dean Radin of the University of Nevada. (FYI, Dean Radin was featured in the Quantum Edition of "Down the Rabbit Hole: What the Bleep Do You Know?!" A very smart guy who can talk science in normal English.)
FYI, the note 38 refers to McCraty R, Atkinson M, Bradley RT. Electrophysiological evidence of intuition: part 1. The surprising role of the heart. J Altern Complement Med. 2004;10:133-143.
The Chinese would have no problem accepting this since "xin" can mean both mind and heart. :-)
I personally do not agree with their conclusion though. It's still based on a Newtonian assumption that the consciousness somehow is produced by a physical thing, such as the heart and brain.
>As for EQ and SQ, I think it is a psychological play of our brain, and reflect to an extend how we relate ourselves to the world, the universe, and the "unknown". These are just my thoughts.
Perhaps you'd be interested to explore further understanding with these:
www.danielgoleman.info/blog/2007/11/28/building-emotional-intelligence/
http://integral-options.blogspot.com/2009/01/brain-science-podcast-44-meditation-and.html
You may also be interested to look into these relatively new fields
* Mindfulness-based Education
* Mindfulness-based Psychotherapy / Cognitive Therapy
metta,
kb
The intellect has little to do on the road to discovery. There comes a leap in consciousness, call it intuition or what you will, the solution comes to you and you don't know how or why. Albert Einstein
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]