Bullies have low Emotional Intelligence (EQ) as they cannot empathize and relate to others’ point of view. But they often do have high Social Intelligence which is not the same as EQ and relates to the ability to read other people and consequently manipulate them.
Empathizing is viewed as the “lens through which we perceive and process emotions” (Chakrabarti & Baron-Cohen, 2006). Most people feel empathy, enabling them to feel the same emotions as that being expressed by another (Kessler & Gazzola, 2006). One popular explanation for this is that the same neural systems are activated in the empathizer as are activated in the person experiencing the emotion first hand (Abbott, 2007). For example, someone watching a film depicting a distressed father holding the hand of his dying child would activate the same neural circuitry, cognitive and emotional, in the observer as the father and thus the observer can empathize with the father. Empathy is both a cognitive and an emotional process. (Keysers & Gazzola, 2006). People with low empathy, for example psychopaths, can calculate what another person is thinking or feeling, but they do not have the affective reaction to the other person’s emotion (Chakrabarti & Baron-Cohen, 2006). One of the key determinants of psychopathy is this strong lack of empathy (Keysers & Gazzola, 2006) raising the question are the brains of psychopaths wired differently to normal healthy individuals. Neuro Imaging techniques have been used in a variety of studies to try to answer such questions.
“Is this because they fail to simulate (mirror) the emotions of others or do they detach the emotional component when the mirroring process happens?” (Keysers & Gazzola, 2006).
Research is remains yet the evidence to date strongly suggests emotional detachment.
While experiences can never be right or wrong, opinions arising from incorrectly interpreted experiences can be. When dealing with fiction, in which opinions and interpretation come from the experience of reading, this “fine point” is more than splitting hairs. Without encroaching too much on Peg Robinson’s, “Mannerly Art of Critique,” being able to recognize that interpretation of fiction is opinion, not fact, is as essential to productive feedback as to productive debate.
Refrain absolutely from ad hominem attack. What is ad hominem attack? To criticize or belittle the one who holds a certain position rather than the position itself. Example: “How stupid can you be?” or “That just goes to show you don’t know anything.” Attacking your opponent rather than your opponent’s ideas merely indicates a weakness in your position. It wins no brownie points by observers, whatsoever. Follow the rules of engagement when in an encounter(s) previously mentioned.