I hate the way you transition through feelings

[Skipyrite]

Can the rate or speed at which someone moves from one emotional state to another be immoral epistemologically? introspectively? Metaphysically?

[Grames]

No.

[Skipyrite]

Eddie Willers would've given more of an answer than that.

[Iudicious]

Can the rate or speed at which someone moves from one emotional state to another be immoral epistemologically? introspectively? Metaphysically?

No.

If a person has a valid reason for changing their emotional state, then I don't see why it would be immoral.

I also don't see how something is immoral epistemologically or metaphysically. They could be -wrong-, but not -immoral.-

[Skipyrite]

Because of the psychological or epistemological (knowledge of self) consequences involved in rushing before memorizing. Or the issue of how feelings themselves pertain to the knowing of events. Or how pertain to taking the action to know. When you know the most, or what compromise (if any) is involved in feeling too deeply or too little in thinking things through and thinking them through with the proper feelings (if certain mental or performance corollaries exist) given the context of the moment.

[VcatoV]

Emotions are "effects", never "causes". They are signals or indicators pointing towards some kind of action occurring. As such, it is impossible for them to be immoral. They are not by nature under volitional control.

[Skipyrite]

The're not without a measure of control,

though what measurement and what control?

[VcatoV]

The control you have over your emotions is secondary. "Swallowing your fear" is just evading or overcoming your emotion. They are not in and of themselves controlling the emotion.

The control is a number of things, many biological, though many also are related to an individual's ideas.

[Eiuol]

Because of the psychological or epistemological (knowledge of self) consequences involved in rushing before memorizing.

"Rushing" probably would imply evading some pertinent facts in order to reach a conclusion quickly. That's the only way in which any kind of transition in thinking could be immoral, because that would be willfully ignoring reality it some manner. The rate in which you come to a conclusion alone won't tell you anything important.

[Skipyrite]

Sounds like it could easily be habitual

[Skipyrite]

The control you have over your emotions is secondary. "Swallowing your fear" is just evading or overcoming your emotion. They are not in and of themselves controlling the emotion.

The control is a number of things, many biological, though many also are related to an individual's ideas.

Do you think swallowing fear is all emotional control pertains to? There's still the issue of introspection aside from that. Of how people change from other emotions irrationally. Irrational in regard to how it affects their capacity to gauge things. Though not irrational in the lone motive to gauge things.

Imaginatively, can emotional transitions have a relationship caught between a necessity of performance (such as the petrified soldier can't be petrified, therefore must be fearless in battle) that necessity, though contra to the "momentary" issue of being the best possible introspector to yourself. And at the risk of losing some important detail to know about how to act in the moment.

Stuff like that..