3 ms·
This holds that "genuine" emotional reactions are all equally valid. What makes rage over a slightly-crushed croissant a valid emotional response? There is als
by Millennium 14y ago
This holds that "genuine" emotional reactions are all equally valid. What makes rage over a slightly-crushed croissant a valid emotional response?
There is also a question of what makes the "genuine" qualifier necessary. It presupposes the idea of an emotional response that is not genuine: what would this mean? What would a "false" emotional response look like, to the one feeling it (and are they truly feeling it at all?) or to others?
- DanBC 14y ago> This holds that "genuine" emotional reactions are all equally valid. What makes rage over a slightly-crushed croissant a valid emotional response? It was from a five year old. Children haven't learnt how to regulate their emotions. That's part of the job of parenting.
- Millennium 14y agoThat makes it genuine, certainly. Maybe even understandable. But does that mean it's valid?
- raganwald 14y agoLet me get the thesis of the post out of the way first. The post asserts that the word "overreacting" is unproductive to discussion. If someone's emotional reaction is genuine, i.e. represents how they feel, then you or I may think it's 100% bogus and invalid, but their response to the word "overreacting" is still going to be negative. Now what I meant by "genuine"--and I'm open to learning that I used the word incorrectly--is that it represents how they feel. The alternative, to me, is when someone feigns anger or distress in order to consciously manipulate people.