feelings part 2: the supremacy of feelings

There's a big difference between feelings and thoughts.

Anyone can have a thought. Anyone can have someone else's thoughts. All it takes is someone explaining to you exactly* what they think, and why they think it, for you to take that thought and make it [at least in some way] you're own; for you to 'understand where they are coming from'. You may not agree, but you can at least put yourself in that same mental space. You can share in it. 

Feelings are different. People can explain to you how they feel, yes; but you can't have those same feelings. You can't make those feelings yours (even for arguments' sake). Even if you can empathize and sympathize, you cannot adopt those feelings as your own. 

We seem to pay less respect, and give even less authority, to our feelings. Why? When thoughts are so easily transferrable; when feelings are so distinct and specific to the individual; why would we not, when looking at a person, look to their feelings first? Why would we not consider their feelings first? And, most importantly, why would we not place the most value on what their feelings tell us about how they are really* feeling (and who they really are)?

These are my thoughts on feelings.