So this will be the last post for a while about spirituality and psychology in general.
There has been a small flurry of activity around the concept of spiritual intelligence. Some of this is pop psychology; using the idea of people having an intelligence quotient, IQ, emotional intelligence quotient, EQ, and spiritual intelligence quotient (SQ).
SQ is distinct from IQ and EQ neurologically. IQ and EQ are primarily localised in opposite hemispheres, whereas SQ is associated with hemispheric synchronisation and whole-brain activation at the same frequency. The SQ neural frequency thus combines part-brain functions from both hemispheres into the integrated field of the whole brain, which represents the same brain state underlying meditation and the experience of presence. SQ capability is therefore hard-wired in the human brain. However, conscious exercise of attention is required to engage SQ, except when SQ occurs spontaneously. http://sqi.co/ accessed 31 December.As far as I can tell this nonsense builds on the readily accepted myth of the left brain and right brain being the source of different kinds of thinking. As Jarrett (2012) explains one of the things that undermines the myth is the way that the two hemispheres are massively connected, another being that the neat division of left and right thinking doesn't happen, and so the claim that SQ uses the whole brain probably isn't false as such. As all thinking uses the whole brain. The idea that SQ can only be engaged consciously except when it occurs spontaneously is just funny.
There is another set of spiritual intelligence material that is coming from various faith positions and might be a way to present that material in a form more acceptable within a secular society, or to try to present material that doesn't exclude any particular faith tradition. Hyde (2004) reports that in an Australian faith school context a spiritual intelligence discourse is used by teachers in those schools, presumably rather than a discourse about teaching pupils about a particular brand of Christianity.
This scale http://noblaming.com/sq_assess.htm from a motivational speaker and life coach seems to mash up several belief systems in an attempt not to alienate people he is trying to sell product to. It is also an example of how not to create a measure.
So if I do one of those actions for another reason then I ought to say Seldom, if ever. It is also an attempt to be as all encompassing as possible.
Q6. I seek to identify with my Higher Mind, or Spirit through daily contemplation, prayer, affirmation, meditation, pattern interrupts, ritual, and/or consciously shifting my thoughts, etc. That is, I do something or several things to keep myself connected to Source or Spirit.
While ridiculing pop psychology, and being suspicious of the way that faith groups try to infiltrate education, are both useful in their own terms I want to concentrate on the more academic work on spiritual intelligence.
Howard Gardner was responsible for the notion of multiple intelligences as an attack on the traditional IQ literature within Psychology. Gardner (2000) briefly reviews his own work on multiple intelligences, he currently lists eight types of intelligence, linguistic, logical-mathematical, musical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal and an eighth intelligence based on noticing patterns in flora and fauna in the wild. Gardener is unconvinced by the arguments about spiritual intelligence, suggesting aspects of it fit with other areas already identified, and conceding that there may be an existential intelligence, particularly about finding meaning. Gardner is also not that interested in creating different psychometric scales for each of these types of intelligence.
Many of those who are pursuing the notion of spiritual intelligence within psychology use the work of Gardner and multiple intelligences as a background (presumably having satisfied themselves that his objections are not insurmountable). However, they also often call for ways to measure spiritual intelligence.
Sperry (2008) critiquing one particular attempt to psychologise spirituality points out the problems of defining it in a way that satisfies both the needs of psychometrics and remains meaningful. Sperry argues that the subject of his critique has ended up with such a broad definition of spirituality that it becomes meaningless. Although Sperry's agenda is that spirituality needs to be understand as separate from psychology.
There is little more practical to a psychologist than a good measuring scale, and King & DeCicco (2009) provides one that seems to have met all of the assumptions of a psychological measuring instrument. King has kindly made his scale freely available for research.
Now that the instrument exists it to some extent side steps the issues of definition, Spiritual Intelligence becomes that which a carefully validated scale measures. It also leads to its use by other researchers. There are already claims made by motivational speakers seeking to create their own USP that spiritual intelligence will lead to more productive business. There is now an attempt to validate such claims, for example Rezaei, Kazemi & Isfahani (2011) which uses King's model. Likewise their are claims that to become a successful leader one needs to have spiritual intelligence.
I do have some objections to particular questions that King uses in his instrument, of the 24 questions there are eight that I find particularly silly, as there is no sensible way to answer them.
- I recognize aspects of myself that are deeper than my physical body.
- I am able to enter higher states of consciousness or awareness.
- It is difficult for me to sense anything other than the physical and material.
- I often see issues and choices more clearly while in higher states of
consciousness/awareness. - I am highly aware of the nonmaterial aspects of life.
- Recognizing the nonmaterial aspects of life helps me feel centered.
- I have developed my own techniques for entering higher states of consciousness or
awareness. - I define myself by my deeper, non-physical self.
- I have deeply contemplated whether or not there is some greater power or force (e.g.,god, goddess, divine being, higher energy, etc.).
- I am aware of a deeper connection between myself and other people.
My ultimate objection is of course that should this measure gain traction then truthful people who do not believe in a religion or something like a religion may be screened out of certain positions and jobs because of their lack of belief.
There is also an irony, in that one of the sources that attempts to destroy meaningfulness in human existence, neoliberal managerialism, will use instruments to detect people with a particular view of how to make meaning from their lives, as they may be more productive workers.
And a happy new year!
References
Gardner, H. (2000). A case against spiritual intelligence. International Journal For The Psychology Of Religion, 10(1), 27-34.
Hyde, B. (2004). The plausibility of spiritual intelligence: spiritual experience, problem solving and neural sites. International Journal Of Children's Spirituality, 9(1), 0-52.
King, D. B., & DeCicco, T. L. (2009). A Viable Model and Self-Report Measure of Spiritual Intelligence. International Journal Of Transpersonal Studies, 28(1), 68-85.
Rezaei, H., Kazemi, A., & Isfahani, M. (2011). An Analysis of
Spiritual Intelligence effect on Marketing Performance and Innovation in
Sales and Marketing unit (Case Study: Isfahan Mobarakeh Steel Company).
Interdisciplinary Journal Of Contemporary Research In Business, 3(6), 683-692.
Sperry, L. (2008). The Psychologization of Spirituality: A Compelling Case for It Has Yet to Be Made. Journal Of Individual Psychology, 64(2), 168-175.
