Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[anonymous66]

I just finished the book. Now that I've read the whole thing, I might recommend it to people who are interested in becoming more successful in the work-place. It's geared towards people who acknowledge that emotions play a significant role in the work-place - to people who deny that outright, this book would probably be a waste of time.

I saw that you have felt like this book does not contain any new facts, but only the facts that we already know, when you have finished reading around 60 pages of the book. Seemingly after that you have found interesting facts or learnt new things. Could you please share some of these valuable thoughts with the community. Thank you.

What I said was "The book doesn't contain any never-before-realized facts about reality. There is nothing in it that is shocking or even controversial." Now that I've read the entire book... I still I stand by that statement. I see no reason to change it.

I see. So the only thing that the author has done is taking a bunch of facts which are already known by many of us, and presented them in a way which will produce a way for us to use them to achieve a final goal. The author has done the analytical part which most of us do not try, although we already know all the facts.

If someone were to ask me what Sushan thinks of this book, I'd say something like "Sushan thinks the author has taken a bunch of facts which are already known by many of us, and presented them in a way which will produce a way for us to use them to achieve a final goal. The author has done the analytical part which most of us do not try, although we already know all the facts." How do I know this? Because that is what you posted.

In addition to what I've already said... This is a self-help book designed to help those who want to master their emotion specifically in the workplace. The author points out that our emotions can cause us problems. He tells us about those problems with the help of stories - and he also suggests solutions.

I also came across this review - https://bookviralreviews.com/book-revie ... er-success

The BookViral Review:

If you thought success was simply down to hard work and fortuitous opportunities. Emotional Intelligence At Work – A Personal Operating System For Career Success by Richard M. Contino and Penelope J. Holt provides a genuine opportunity to readjust your thinking.

Clearly differentiating itself from a deluge of lacklustre offerings in the personal Development and Self Help genres, Contino and Holt leave us with no doubt that Emotional Intelligence plays a huge role in helping us understand and manage emotions.

The applications of Emotional Intelligence range from organizational situations to home life, parenting, romantic relationships, and more but in writing from an organizational perspective Contino and Holt explore how developing Emotional Intelligence can help individuals better deal with career pitfalls like confrontation, impulse control, negativity and poor self-motivation, among others, to build a framework for career advancement.

“When our personal psychology or lack of BEQ distorts or blocks us from witnessing what’s actually happening in business, we become factually blind,” state Contino and Holt and they certainly succeed in focusing the reader’s attention with their thoughts delivered in easily digestible morsels.

Sharing insightful case studies they understand that change comes from within and have judiciously chosen and developed tools that provide the reader with genuine insight without wading through an extraneous level of detail.

Each chapter pulls its weight. But Contino and Holt’s chapters on Uncovering Emotional Baggage, Honing Business EQ by Spotting Tell-Tale Behaviors, Business Battlefield Survival and Building a Personal Emotional Brand For Success are potentially transformational for the reader who actively engages with their perspective.

It’s clear from the start that Contino and Holt understand the psychology of achievement and in Emotional Intelligence At Work – A Personal Operating System For Career Success they have delivered an invaluable read for handbook for emotional transformation and career success./quote]

[Sushan]

I checked in the internet and various dictionaries the definition of 'Knowledge'. Even there it seems no single definition. I would like to know the definition that you accept. Thank you

What isn't a traditional discipline isn't knowledge.

Are all traditional disciplines are scientifically proven? Various societies have various traditional disciplines. Are all of these can be taken as knowledge? Is it impossible for a traditional discipline to be a myth or a superstition?

The sciences being disciplines themselves "scientifically proven" does not apply as a measure. "traditional discipline" covers all kinds of knowledge, regardless of whether "Various societies have various traditional disciplines" or not.

Let's keep the 'scientifically proven' marker aside. But knowledge should be something that can be practically applied. If these traditional disciplines cover all kinds of knowledge, and if they contain obvious myths, should we accept them? Isn't it good to have some sort of a filter to filter actual knowledge from myths and beliefs?

[stevie]

What isn't a traditional discipline isn't knowledge.

Are all traditional disciplines are scientifically proven? Various societies have various traditional disciplines. Are all of these can be taken as knowledge? Is it impossible for a traditional discipline to be a myth or a superstition?

The sciences being disciplines themselves "scientifically proven" does not apply as a measure. "traditional discipline" covers all kinds of knowledge, regardless of whether "Various societies have various traditional disciplines" or not.

Let's keep the 'scientifically proven' marker aside. But knowledge should be something that can be practically applied. If these traditional disciplines cover all kinds of knowledge, and if they contain obvious myths, should we accept them? Isn't it good to have some sort of a filter to filter actual knowledge from myths and beliefs?

Knowledge is knowledge. What one accepts as useful for oneself depends on individual factors.

[Sushan]

Are all traditional disciplines are scientifically proven? Various societies have various traditional disciplines. Are all of these can be taken as knowledge? Is it impossible for a traditional discipline to be a myth or a superstition?

The sciences being disciplines themselves "scientifically proven" does not apply as a measure. "traditional discipline" covers all kinds of knowledge, regardless of whether "Various societies have various traditional disciplines" or not.

Let's keep the 'scientifically proven' marker aside. But knowledge should be something that can be practically applied. If these traditional disciplines cover all kinds of knowledge, and if they contain obvious myths, should we accept them? Isn't it good to have some sort of a filter to filter actual knowledge from myths and beliefs?

Knowledge is knowledge. What one accepts as useful for oneself depends on individual factors.

Yes, different things have different values when the experience becomes subjective. And this is true to knowledge as well. But there can be traditional disciplines that are accepted as knowledge, but has no practical use for those who accept it as knowledge. Will it still be knowledge? Or will it be just a belief?

[stevie]

The sciences being disciplines themselves "scientifically proven" does not apply as a measure. "traditional discipline" covers all kinds of knowledge, regardless of whether "Various societies have various traditional disciplines" or not.

Let's keep the 'scientifically proven' marker aside. But knowledge should be something that can be practically applied. If these traditional disciplines cover all kinds of knowledge, and if they contain obvious myths, should we accept them? Isn't it good to have some sort of a filter to filter actual knowledge from myths and beliefs?

Knowledge is knowledge. What one accepts as useful for oneself depends on individual factors.

Yes, different things have different values when the experience becomes subjective. And this is true to knowledge as well. But there can be traditional disciplines that are accepted as knowledge, but has no practical use for those who accept it as knowledge. Will it still be knowledge? Or will it be just a belief?

The point is that because knowledge is necessarily connected with 'traditional discipline' it has a history across several generations which is evidence that it is of such a use for a collective that they take the effort to transmitted it from generation to generation.

[Sushan]

Let's keep the 'scientifically proven' marker aside. But knowledge should be something that can be practically applied. If these traditional disciplines cover all kinds of knowledge, and if they contain obvious myths, should we accept them? Isn't it good to have some sort of a filter to filter actual knowledge from myths and beliefs?

Knowledge is knowledge. What one accepts as useful for oneself depends on individual factors.

Yes, different things have different values when the experience becomes subjective. And this is true to knowledge as well. But there can be traditional disciplines that are accepted as knowledge, but has no practical use for those who accept it as knowledge. Will it still be knowledge? Or will it be just a belief?

The point is that because knowledge is necessarily connected with 'traditional discipline' it has a history across several generations which is evidence that it is of such a use for a collective that they take the effort to transmitted it from generation to generation.

Knowledge and practices are transferred from generation to generation due to various reasons, and the usefulness of it to a particular group is one reason. But throughout the history we see how various teachings and beliefs are manipulated for reasons like controlling groups of people and disrespecting cultural values. So being passed through generations does not qualify something as knowledge, or valuable and true.

[stevie]

Knowledge is knowledge. What one accepts as useful for oneself depends on individual factors.

Yes, different things have different values when the experience becomes subjective. And this is true to knowledge as well. But there can be traditional disciplines that are accepted as knowledge, but has no practical use for those who accept it as knowledge. Will it still be knowledge? Or will it be just a belief?

The point is that because knowledge is necessarily connected with 'traditional discipline' it has a history across several generations which is evidence that it is of such a use for a collective that they take the effort to transmitted it from generation to generation.

Knowledge and practices are transferred from generation to generation due to various reasons, and the usefulness of it to a particular group is one reason.

The usefulness for more than one individual is a characteristic and necessary prerequisite for the arising of a traditional discipline - it isn't just one reason of many. And if this usefulness proves valid in the next generation transmission will be continued.

So being passed through generations does not qualify something as knowledge, or valuable and true.

Here we are again:

I don't share you definition of knowledge, so there is no way to come to an agreement about what knowledge is.

But throughout the history we see how various teachings and beliefs are manipulated for reasons like controlling groups of people and disrespecting cultural values.

That is a speculative statement which does not undermine what knowledge is.

[Sushan]

Yes, different things have different values when the experience becomes subjective. And this is true to knowledge as well. But there can be traditional disciplines that are accepted as knowledge, but has no practical use for those who accept it as knowledge. Will it still be knowledge? Or will it be just a belief?

The point is that because knowledge is necessarily connected with 'traditional discipline' it has a history across several generations which is evidence that it is of such a use for a collective that they take the effort to transmitted it from generation to generation.

Knowledge and practices are transferred from generation to generation due to various reasons, and the usefulness of it to a particular group is one reason.

The usefulness for more than one individual is a characteristic and necessary prerequisite for the arising of a traditional discipline - it isn't just one reason of many. And if this usefulness proves valid in the next generation transmission will be continued.

So being passed through generations does not qualify something as knowledge, or valuable and true.

Here we are again:

I don't share you definition of knowledge, so there is no way to come to an agreement about what knowledge is.

But throughout the history we see how various teachings and beliefs are manipulated for reasons like controlling groups of people and disrespecting cultural values.

That is a speculative statement which does not undermine what knowledge is.

'Valid' as per who or which standards? People believe in various traditional disciplines with no scientific validation. The only validation is it being passed through generations. Many tribal practices can be categorized under this. But such practices are considered as knowledge by those tribes. Is that consideration correct and appropriate?

[stevie]

The point is that because knowledge is necessarily connected with 'traditional discipline' it has a history across several generations which is evidence that it is of such a use for a collective that they take the effort to transmitted it from generation to generation.

Knowledge and practices are transferred from generation to generation due to various reasons, and the usefulness of it to a particular group is one reason.

The usefulness for more than one individual is a characteristic and necessary prerequisite for the arising of a traditional discipline - it isn't just one reason of many. And if this usefulness proves valid in the next generation transmission will be continued.

So being passed through generations does not qualify something as knowledge, or valuable and true.

Here we are again:

I don't share you definition of knowledge, so there is no way to come to an agreement about what knowledge is.

But throughout the history we see how various teachings and beliefs are manipulated for reasons like controlling groups of people and disrespecting cultural values.

That is a speculative statement which does not undermine what knowledge is.

'Valid' as per who or which standards? People believe in various traditional disciplines with no scientific validation. The only validation is it being passed through generations. Many tribal practices can be categorized under this. But such practices are considered as knowledge by those tribes. Is that consideration correct and appropriate?

Valid as per the individuals for whom it is useful. If something is useful for you then its usefulness is valid for you. I can't see what there is to argue about.

[Sushan]

Knowledge and practices are transferred from generation to generation due to various reasons, and the usefulness of it to a particular group is one reason.

The usefulness for more than one individual is a characteristic and necessary prerequisite for the arising of a traditional discipline - it isn't just one reason of many. And if this usefulness proves valid in the next generation transmission will be continued.

So being passed through generations does not qualify something as knowledge, or valuable and true.

Here we are again:

I don't share you definition of knowledge, so there is no way to come to an agreement about what knowledge is.

But throughout the history we see how various teachings and beliefs are manipulated for reasons like controlling groups of people and disrespecting cultural values.

That is a speculative statement which does not undermine what knowledge is.

'Valid' as per who or which standards? People believe in various traditional disciplines with no scientific validation. The only validation is it being passed through generations. Many tribal practices can be categorized under this. But such practices are considered as knowledge by those tribes. Is that consideration correct and appropriate?

Valid as per the individuals for whom it is useful. If something is useful for you then its usefulness is valid for you. I can't see what there is to argue about.

Personal preferences, values, and beliefs are there, and yes, it is no use in arguing about them. But we are discussing about traditional disciplines, which are not personal, but are widely accepted among certain groups. And there is a difference between the two. It is nothing wrong to have wrong beliefs personally , until you do not use it and harm others, or try to teach it to others. But if a traditional discipline is wrong, that really matters.

[stevie]

The usefulness for more than one individual is a characteristic and necessary prerequisite for the arising of a traditional discipline - it isn't just one reason of many. And if this usefulness proves valid in the next generation transmission will be continued.


Here we are again:



That is a speculative statement which does not undermine what knowledge is.

'Valid' as per who or which standards? People believe in various traditional disciplines with no scientific validation. The only validation is it being passed through generations. Many tribal practices can be categorized under this. But such practices are considered as knowledge by those tribes. Is that consideration correct and appropriate?

Valid as per the individuals for whom it is useful. If something is useful for you then its usefulness is valid for you. I can't see what there is to argue about.

Personal preferences, values, and beliefs are there, and yes, it is no use in arguing about them. But we are discussing about traditional disciplines, which are not personal, but are widely accepted among certain groups. And there is a difference between the two. It is nothing wrong to have wrong beliefs personally , until you do not use it and harm others, or try to teach it to others. But if a traditional discipline is wrong, that really matters.

I cannot follow your verbal expressions. What's the meaning of "if a traditional discipline is wrong"? A traditional discipline can't be wrong as to the usefulness for its followers of the knowledge it transmits.

[Sushan]

'Valid' as per who or which standards? People believe in various traditional disciplines with no scientific validation. The only validation is it being passed through generations. Many tribal practices can be categorized under this. But such practices are considered as knowledge by those tribes. Is that consideration correct and appropriate?

Valid as per the individuals for whom it is useful. If something is useful for you then its usefulness is valid for you. I can't see what there is to argue about.

Personal preferences, values, and beliefs are there, and yes, it is no use in arguing about them. But we are discussing about traditional disciplines, which are not personal, but are widely accepted among certain groups. And there is a difference between the two. It is nothing wrong to have wrong beliefs personally , until you do not use it and harm others, or try to teach it to others. But if a traditional discipline is wrong, that really matters.

I cannot follow your verbal expressions. What's the meaning of "if a traditional discipline is wrong"? A traditional discipline can't be wrong as to the usefulness for its followers of the knowledge it transmits.

I appreciate your thoughts, and you make a good point about the practical usefulness of traditional disciplines for their adherents. However, when I said a "traditional discipline could be wrong," I was referring to the possibility that certain beliefs or practices within a discipline may not align with more recent or objective findings.

Take, for example, some aspects of traditional medicine. While many of its practices have been invaluable and have even found their place in modern medicine, certain others have been proven to be ineffective or even harmful with advancements in scientific understanding.

So, in this sense, a traditional discipline can be seen as "wrong," or perhaps more accurately, "outdated" or "misaligned" with current knowledge. But it's essential to note that this doesn't discount the entirety of a discipline, nor the benefits it has provided in the past.

[Sushan]

I saw that you have felt like this book does not contain any new facts, but only the facts that we already know, when you have finished reading around 60 pages of the book. Seemingly after that you have found interesting facts or learnt new things. Could you please share some of these valuable thoughts with the community. Thank you.

What I said was "The book doesn't contain any never-before-realized facts about reality. There is nothing in it that is shocking or even controversial." Now that I've read the entire book... I still I stand by that statement. I see no reason to change it.

I see. So the only thing that the author has done is taking a bunch of facts which are already known by many of us, and presented them in a way which will produce a way for us to use them to achieve a final goal. The author has done the analytical part which most of us do not try, although we already know all the facts.

If someone were to ask me what Sushan thinks of this book, I'd say something like "Sushan thinks the author has taken a bunch of facts which are already known by many of us, and presented them in a way which will produce a way for us to use them to achieve a final goal. The author has done the analytical part which most of us do not try, although we already know all the facts." How do I know this? Because that is what you posted.

In addition to what I've already said... This is a self-help book designed to help those who want to master their emotion specifically in the workplace. The author points out that our emotions can cause us problems. He tells us about those problems with the help of stories - and he also suggests solutions.

I also came across this review - https://bookviralreviews.com/book-revie ... er-success

The BookViral Review:

If you thought success was simply down to hard work and fortuitous opportunities. Emotional Intelligence At Work – A Personal Operating System For Career Success by Richard M. Contino and Penelope J. Holt provides a genuine opportunity to readjust your thinking.

Clearly differentiating itself from a deluge of lacklustre offerings in the personal Development and Self Help genres, Contino and Holt leave us with no doubt that Emotional Intelligence plays a huge role in helping us understand and manage emotions.

The applications of Emotional Intelligence range from organizational situations to home life, parenting, romantic relationships, and more but in writing from an organizational perspective Contino and Holt explore how developing Emotional Intelligence can help individuals better deal with career pitfalls like confrontation, impulse control, negativity and poor self-motivation, among others, to build a framework for career advancement.

“When our personal psychology or lack of BEQ distorts or blocks us from witnessing what’s actually happening in business, we become factually blind,” state Contino and Holt and they certainly succeed in focusing the reader’s attention with their thoughts delivered in easily digestible morsels.

Sharing insightful case studies they understand that change comes from within and have judiciously chosen and developed tools that provide the reader with genuine insight without wading through an extraneous level of detail.

Each chapter pulls its weight. But Contino and Holt’s chapters on Uncovering Emotional Baggage, Honing Business EQ by Spotting Tell-Tale Behaviors, Business Battlefield Survival and Building a Personal Emotional Brand For Success are potentially transformational for the reader who actively engages with their perspective.

It’s clear from the start that Contino and Holt understand the psychology of achievement and in Emotional Intelligence At Work – A Personal Operating System For Career Success they have delivered an invaluable read for handbook for emotional transformation and career success./quote]

That's an insightful review, thank you for sharing it. The point you've raised about the book's application in the workplace context is crucial. As you rightly noted, while the facts presented may not be new to many, the way they're applied and analyzed in relation to emotional intelligence and career success may offer a fresh perspective.

I believe that's where the real value of such a book lies. It's not about providing new, earth-shattering revelations, but about helping readers understand familiar concepts from a different angle, thus enabling them to apply these ideas more effectively in their lives.

Moreover, the fact that it provides practical tools for managing emotions, and its focus on business EQ and personal emotional branding, makes it a potentially transformative read for those seeking to enhance their emotional intelligence in the workplace.