Your last question is very pertinent, actually, because I would say DBT doesn't argue that you can control emotion - but it doesn't state that they're completely out of your control either. I don't think anything is actually ascertained explicitly when it comes to how controllable emotions are. I think because people coming into DBT already feel like their emotions are in control of them, to say "no, you can control those emotions that you feel are ruining your life" would only serve to invalidate them and make it more difficult to teach them how to increase their quality of life.
For example, a common metaphor brought up in DBT is the idea of seeing emotions as ships on a body of water. If you try to force ships away from you, they'll often get stuck in a sandbar and no amount of forcing will help (a metaphor for negative emotions). If you try to keep them closer, the ship eventually has to sail away (a metaphor for positive emotions). DBT focuses less on controlling emotions explicitly and more in partaking in actions (mindfulness exercises, distress tolerance methods, visualization exercises, etc. etc.) that will inevitably lead to reducing the intensity of painful emotions. While this may seem like controlling emotions, I think they explicitly don't call it that because of how easily it is to mix that up with suppressing emotions, which is not something they want to encourage with those who require DBT therapy in the first place.
That being said, I'm in no way an expert and I don't have my gigantic binder beside me with all the DBT modules and descriptions, so please take my conclusions with a hefty grain of salt. I'm sure someone who's done a PhD involving such therapies would likely find a ton of flaws in my statements.
You make a very good point about how telling people from the beginning that they can control their emotion could be seen as invalidating by them. I think a mixed approach where you begin by acknowledging and validating the other person's feelings and experience then guide them towards methods of improving those feelings would work best.
The metaphor you used for controlling emotions is very apt. Which is why stoics don't try to control their emotions directly but influence them by changing their cations and perspective. Stoics are opposed to suppressing emotions. The stoic way of dealing with an unwanted emotion is to acknowledge it but not let it control your actions. Then they analyze what they felt try to find the cause of the emotion and change their perspective in such a way that the emotion becomes irrelevant.
Your last question is very pertinent, actually, because I would say DBT doesn't argue that you can control emotion - but it doesn't state that they're completely out of your control either. I don't think anything is actually ascertained explicitly when it comes to how controllable emotions are. I think because people coming into DBT already feel like their emotions are in control of them, to say "no, you can control those emotions that you feel are ruining your life" would only serve to invalidate them and make it more difficult to teach them how to increase their quality of life.
For example, a common metaphor brought up in DBT is the idea of seeing emotions as ships on a body of water. If you try to force ships away from you, they'll often get stuck in a sandbar and no amount of forcing will help (a metaphor for negative emotions). If you try to keep them closer, the ship eventually has to sail away (a metaphor for positive emotions). DBT focuses less on controlling emotions explicitly and more in partaking in actions (mindfulness exercises, distress tolerance methods, visualization exercises, etc. etc.) that will inevitably lead to reducing the intensity of painful emotions. While this may seem like controlling emotions, I think they explicitly don't call it that because of how easily it is to mix that up with suppressing emotions, which is not something they want to encourage with those who require DBT therapy in the first place.
That being said, I'm in no way an expert and I don't have my gigantic binder beside me with all the DBT modules and descriptions, so please take my conclusions with a hefty grain of salt. I'm sure someone who's done a PhD involving such therapies would likely find a ton of flaws in my statements.
You make a very good point about how telling people from the beginning that they can control their emotion could be seen as invalidating by them. I think a mixed approach where you begin by acknowledging and validating the other person's feelings and experience then guide them towards methods of improving those feelings would work best.
The metaphor you used for controlling emotions is very apt. Which is why stoics don't try to control their emotions directly but influence them by changing their cations and perspective. Stoics are opposed to suppressing emotions. The stoic way of dealing with an unwanted emotion is to acknowledge it but not let it control your actions. Then they analyze what they felt try to find the cause of the emotion and change their perspective in such a way that the emotion becomes irrelevant.
Our discussion inspired me to post an explanation on how stoics view control: http://snapzu.com/ReV/what-we-control/
You can also check out this blog about the application of stoicism in modern psychotherapy.