Now there's a moment to elaborate . . . .Pye wrote: There is a qualitative difference between feeling emotion and being emotional, just as there is a palpable gap between the rational and rationalization.
Take a less-fanged word morph like commercial ------> to commercialize.
In the first, we have named thing or quality, neutral in that sense; and in the second, we have the thing or quality turned back upon itself as its own raison d'etre; its own activity; for its own sake. The noun-like descriptive quality of 'commercial' becomes a verb-like self-circular activity; its own justification. At least that's how I see the linguistic pathology here.
The same thing happens when you move from rational -------> to rationalize. The descriptive nature has become self-prescriptive, and in this sense, closed off to any further dynamic but itself.
And of course, from emotion to emotionalize . . . .
That gap, or rather, that pathology, that dynamic taking place between the thing, and the self-justified thing, I like to call clinging . . . . in the brightest of buddha-sense, if you like.