Don’t get too excited, they are both important. This is pure Aeoli theory talk, but it will also seem uncharacteristically sensible.
The basic idea of EQ is that big brains don’t predict general intelligence because some axons are much bigger than others. For example, giant squids have a giant axon that is 1 mm in diameter and very long, adding up to lots of volume, but they aren’t very smart. It is unlikely we will begin engaging them in rational symbolic discourse in the near future. Incidentally, they are actually chopping up these axons (from jellyfish) and putting them in pills as memory aids for old people.
Seems intuitive that the best diet for building and repairing white matter is to eat white matter, like eating animal muscles for building muscles.
When it comes to abstract computation, what matters is how many axons there are in the white matter network. So if we know the average axon size and the volume, we can compute the number of axons. While it does seem to matter whether axons are specialized (some are located in the amygdala and specifically do emotional calculations) or more general-purpose, it also seems to be the case that this matters less as the number gets larger. The existence of creative flow or “holistic thinking” which engages all of the white matter network at a consistent activation level (all blue, for instance) suggests that even specialized axons can be used for abstract computation.
Therefore, in the rational animals (man) we are only concerned with the number of axons because “rational animals” presumes the number is already very high. So the estimation of rational intelligence from number of axons calculated from volume and average size is expected to be accurate.
Now we have to figure out a way to estimate average axon size. This is why I talk about comparably graceful fine motor skills indicating similar volume~IQ correlation strata. Graceful movement indicates fine motor control rather than gross motor control, which suggests many smaller nerves rather than a few big ones (as in the giant squid). But graceful movement = IQ is not a good estimator because it isn’t well understood or objective at this point, but it is excellent for explaining that both volume and EQ matter.
If we could quantify a general factor of fine motor control and gracefulness and call it F, then classes of rational organisms with the same F would fit much better on a simple linear regression of IQ and V (intuition suggests a correlation north of 0.5, maybe 0.7 or so).
More to the point, I am suggesting that F*V = verbal IQ.
Except for all that nonsense I talk about gray matter contributing to verbal if properly accessed by white matter, of course. Why does everything have to be so complicated?