[rblatz]

That’s an interesting idea. I think I’d be able to touch it, I know I’d dislike it immensely though.

But this question helped me clarify my thoughts around this more. It’s the distinction between rational fear vs irrational fear. Assuming clean water the fear of opening your eyes underwater is irrational, it’s not going to hurt you or do any long term damage. The example from the story about getting an injection on your eye is maybe someplace in between, needle in the eye is much more invasive, but also deemed medically necessary where the risk of not doing it is greater than the risk of doing it.

Not having the ability to override your own emotions in cases where they are irrational is interesting to me. It’s like giving agency to an “external other” that you have no control over.

[burnished]

Well, I think you're getting close, but you still seem to be coming at this from a place of presumed superiority, mostly due to the separation of fears into 'rational' vs 'irrational'. Part of TFA is that they were not given enough information - is it irrational to fear some one stabbing your eye just because they are also confident that it will be for your betterment? From your water example it is clear also that you've learned that some water is safe to open your eyes in and built confidence in that knowledge - what if you hadn't had those experiences? Where I grew up the water was painfully cold, frequently polluted, and silty enough that I wouldn't be surprised if you got a scratch on your eye from doing that. I learned to open my eyes in the water in a public pool and discovered that I could do so with only minor irritation. If the chemical balance had been different that probably would not have been the case.

I think another perspective that might be helpful is to think of this in terms of the flinch reflex. Anyone can control theirs (this is an emotional process, sure), but the difficulty involves how sensitive they are, how strong the input is, how necessary they deem the action, and how afraid they are of potential consequences. Again, I don't think 'rational' or 'irrational' comes into play here or explains anything extra, I think in your case for example you are probably not jumpy (overly sensitive), and confident that your outcomes will be acceptable. I think the author was probably a little jumpy and was not confident in the outcome of an eye-poke.

[cortesoft]

If I absolutely needed to open my eyes under water for an important reason, I likely could. That is just not a common situation and I haven't encountered it.

I don't think not opening my eyes under water is THAT irrational, really. My reason for keeping my eyes closed (my fear and not liking the feeling of water touching my eyes) is greater than my need to open my eyes under water (which has been no real reason so far).

[doliveira]

I seriously doubt you can rationally override your own emotions at any situation. And you should doubt that too, it can make you biased to think you're being rational without noticing you're not.

[rblatz]

It seems like you are stretching my words here.