(It's funny writing a text through a different headmate, kinda like driving thinking drunk, or like having an inner secretary or something.. anyway, we should probably actually begin the text xD)
Feeling is dumb. That's what most people can agree on. Feeling sad cause the world burns - depressive, should not be feeling it. Happy for a good day - cringe. Confused by some people doing their bullshit - must have lacked social skills. All this stuff is pretty obvious. Feeling is dumb, according to most people.
And that's not new. What was feeling to the Greeks? Pathetic. Like literally, "pathetikos". And to the Romans? Passion, emotion - either passive or already moved out. Great. What an entrance to our oh so mighty "western culture", mighty Feeling!
And what in the newer languages? The Germanic ones? Feeling, Gefühl - like gripping something, sensing it on the skin. Making the skin crawl, feeling a blade, sensing an open wound (definitely not inspired by SH trauma of wanting to lick blood or anything like that, no no xD). Oh, we "feel" so many things! The question is just why we touched them! or something
At least it's somewhat nicer, but it's still clear it's bad. And today? We're back at it being dumb. It's just pain, and just something that shouldn't be. "Atharaxia" for everyone; it's called "well-being" now, or "emotional regulation". Some people call it "emonormativity" or something like that because they think it's bad, but most like it that way, it seems.
So what do we do? Do we simply aimlessly pry against that "emotion bad" by screaming "emotion good"? What does this do? Do we even know what we do here?
I think, that - and I do think that's funny - that they actually were somewhat right, and just forgot the quotes to it [that however change the meaning completely but that wouldn't be as funny tbh]. "Feeling" is dumb. Not feeling - "feeling". What does this mean?
Let's say you're in pain. And then you say "I feel my pain". What does that mean? What can you feel there? Is your pain a relief on a wall? A carving in a tree? This is just absurd. No, you _have_ pain, and you know it. Calling your knowledge "feeling" is just a way of making it less meaningful than a machine reading. Or thinking it's "just a feeling". When like, it is less than that [in the sense of there not being an artifact of it]. There is no relief. You don't touch the feeling by grabbing your own wound. You can't find the "feeling" orb and hold it in your hand.
Or why do we say "I feel happy" and not "I am happy"? Or: "It's happy"? Because "I am X" with X a feeling term is often a substitution for "I feel X" so it's no relieve from it. "It's happy": The day, the world, the coincidence. That's what's meant. But we say: "I feel happy". Why? Again: Can I hold it in my hand? Is it squishy? Can you tell me other things about how it "feels"?
There is not "emotypicality". Emotion is the name for atypical knowledge. I _know_ I'm happy, sad, in pain, or betrayed. I don't "feel" that. But saying that means I have to justify it to a standard I can't. I still will not say that I "feel" that, because I think "feeling" is dumb; I actually know. But I know why others use the word: they have to act dumb to play dumb, to not anger other people by the daring fact that they _know_ they are in pain - that our pathetic little lifes are knowledges, not "feelings"; not squishy reliefs on some goddessforsaken plastic walls in our becoming Neo-Atlantis.