The Tyranny of Feelings

But I'm also observing an increasing cost, which I describe in brief as "the tyranny of feelings," or, more expansively, as the constant privileging of our subjective emotional experience. A simplistic interpretation of the idea that "emotions matter" is "My feelings are justified, because they are my feelings. My feelings at this moment take precedence over all other considerations. I have the right to express my feelings any way I see fit. And if I believe that you are causing my feelings, you are obligated to modify your behavior in order to align with my desired emotional state."

The enveloping nature of our emotional response serves an essential purpose by priming us to take swift, decisive action. But sometimes that's exactly the wrong move, and we're better served by resisting those impulses and considering a broader range of options.

The emotion is a transitory state of mind and body, not an identity.

Saying that someone else "makes us feel" an emotion suggests that they are responsible for our emotional state, and that's highly problematic. When another person's statements and behavior trigger an emotional response in us, it's inaccurate to presume that the other person is the responsible party and that we're an innocent bystander.

We're not passive recipients of the data through which we interpret and make sense of the world. We play an active role in every stage of the process as we gather, interpret, and respond to that data, which includes other people's statements and behavior [as well as other circumstances we encounter]. [5]