The Hurt Locker: Battlefield IQ - Why we want emotional intelligence in the foxhole

Much of The Hurt Locker plays like a war drama on steroids. In this rollercoaster of testosterone, the primary theme is, “War is an addiction.” Naturally, James, the protagonist and expert bomb disposer, is the addict. His brain only experiences calm when the world around him is exploding; he seems happiest when beginning that long, lonely march toward half-buried bombs. Such a risky world attitude often proves worrisome to those who value such societal norms as safety and order. On countless occasions those around James tag him as reckless and impulsive, inciting nicknames that range from the self-explanatory “Wildman” to the poetically understated “stupid piece of white trash.” Judging by national reviews the media largely concurs with this personality assessment.

Further, personality bi-directionally ties into intelligence. James is an action junkie and, therefore, not too rational or bright. In some ways this appears to be true. He does dismiss army protocol more than he abides by it and he could definitely stand to be more self-reflective. The traditional world of intelligence testing would likely highlight these factors en route to a negative verdict. But this is problematic, because James is not stupid, reckless or even psychologically guarded. As this movie shows, quite the opposite is true. James is actually the smartest guy on the battlefield. Not only that but this unorthodox notion of amped up warrior as genius is illustrative of the dramatically evolving, 21st century image of intelligence.

The traditional tale of intelligence:

Like DNA exploration, the question of how to define and measure intelligence has only increased in complexity and nuance over time. The traditional and still dominant tale of intelligence unfolds like this: You take an IQ test, probably the WAIS (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales), and whatever score you earn reflects what is often taken to be an underlying and innate “smartness.” This score influences resources and expectations, that is, you are placed in classes with teachers who expect less and have fewer resources to provide. Over the long-term, this can lock you into a specific academic and occupational trajectory.  Read Article

By Jeremy Clyman