i think most people confuse their emotions with reality. or maybe don't see the barrier between the emotional world and the real world. why do we think it is important to, for instance, commiserate? or be commiserated with? if how a person feels about our misfortune does not affect that misfortune then their emotional state is arbitrary, and yet we demand that they feel sympathy or pity or something negative like that so our misfortune can infect all around us. we've actually created a social custom to aid in the transmission of suffering from one to another. if in the future anyone should observe some misfortune of mine, they should view it as a joke and derive as much enjoyment from it as possible. that doesn't mean let me get hit by a train or whatever but do laugh about it if it should happen beyond your control.. people should want other people to be happy, not to get caught up in their problems. when we share misfortune there is always enough to go around. and it applies personally too. if feeling angry that my car broke down will not get me to the nearest gas station, then why do i feel angry? i could just as easily look at the comedy in it. people seem to be under the impression that they do not control their emotional state, and because they think they don't they don't. but if they would just try they would find that as all emotions exist only within their personal perception all emotions must be subject to their perception. if it's real because you see it, what happens when you change how you see it? i think my consciousness should be seated at the point from which my emotions originate not within the emotional field itself. i should perceive, but not be subject to, my emotions.