When reading the articles on the internet that were against Goleman's Emotional intelligence, I found that they all were kind of centered around the argument that Goleman doesn't explain what to do and Goleman mainly mentions happiness and other aspects that are related the brain. I feel that these other sholars aren't looking at this book as a tool we could all use. They are expecting this book to tell them what we should do and how we should do it. If that is what this book was designed for then yes they would have a good reason to be asking these questions. Goleman i feel designed this book as a tool for us to use and base some of our thinking off of. I feel that the book for the most part was written very well. Another main argument which relates to the two above is...Scholars are complaining that there is no instruction on how we should change people or how we change the ghosts, the controler the yes person and so on in the group.. These people fail to recognize the simple fact that we ourselves can't change people it is up to them to change themselves and for us to change ourselves. I feel that Goleman was very sensitive towards this idea and he wrote the book for knowledge and not as an instruction manual for changing people..
When reflecting on the five dysfunctional roles..the Controler, Blamer, Pleaser, Distractor and the Ghost, I thought about which one i am most concerned with or cautious about falling into. Okay so after some deep thought here is my partial conclusion or answer to this question..I feel as human beings we are all controlling or we all have the urge to control others. Its a natural fault which we all share. I also feel that we all take the roll of the blamer in the fact that we always look at others and judge their flaws or take their inventory, when we should be taking our own. so that leave the Pleaser, the Distractor and the Ghost. These are rolls or words which label people with problems that probably go much deeper than being a distractor, ghost or pleaser. okay jason so finally getting to the point. We all have flaws in our persona, one of our biggest flaws is to judge other peoples flaws, or take their inventory for them in order to make us feel better or worse..my famous quote "ignorance of oneself is defeat for oneself" yeah so i don't know if that makes any sense, i just had to throw it in their. so basically I feel that all of us fall under these categories and have to realize this and once we do we can work better with others. However getting back to the point, we shouldn't judge others and try to fix them.."controlling aspect of us" and judge them in order to better understand them...we all need to do our own inventory and better understand ourselves...
Personal mission statement: Be True to Yourself
This is a mission statement that was told to me about three years ago and i have followed it ever since, it is simple and very detailed. It has a broad meaning when relating to a team experience. It has a lot to do with emotional intelligence in how you have to like oneself before you can like others or accept others in a group. it also has to do with confidence and be strong and stand your ground. This statement in regards to my career would basically tell me to don't cut yourself short, do somethiing you like, stay honest, stay focused and be yourself.