There is always a transcendental element to philosophy beyond strict logic or intellectualism, even if it is simply the "feeling" that an argument is right. The assertion by "awareness" that "something" must exist is an intellectualization of a feeling. We feel existence. We intuit existence.
Intuition is a "sense" of things not readily known by intellectual rationalization. There is a transcendental leap between the abstract concept of what awareness "is" and "being" aware. That transcendental bridge is a "sense", "feeling" or "intuition" of awareness.
Feeling also allows one to empathize, to understand how others "feel" and would or might react, thus enabling one to choose more wisely. Without regard for feeling, many unnecessary wrongs would be commited, even with the best intentions.
Even the greatest chess players, in a game of strict rules and logic which requires clear thinking and strategy invoke feeling/intellect to assess whether their opponent will be defensive or aggressive to a particular situation, and for all the clear minded choices each makes in thinking dozens of moves ahead, if one does not forsee a situation they clearly show emotion. Their choices and actions are full of feeling. There is great feeling in that each cares deeply about the outcome of the game. The game has a set of rules and a logical outcome to play out, which each recognizes and can not change, but neither is dispassionate about that inevitable and often predictable outcome.
Feeling is a tool for the transcendental experience of that which is out of reach for the intellect alone. In turn, intellect is a tool for the reasoned evaluation of experience for its Truth. All feeling is True just as all existence is True in that it exists, but the interpretation of feeling is only always True in that it is an interpretation. An interpretation must be evaluated for its consistent and infallible Truth if it is itself to be Truth, and not merely an interpretation misunderstood.
In philosophy it is key to recognize the equal importance of feeling and intellect and to maintain their balance. To accept a philosophy catering to one's emotions, is akin to finding a religion/ideal tailored to one's desires as opposed to tailoring one's desires to one's religion/ideal, and is flawed for disrupting the balance of feeling and intellect in favor of "feeling" run amok as desire.
At the other end of the spectrum are philosophies which do not account properly for feeling and thus are flawed because they are incomplete. Feeling should not override logic or intellect, but feeling should not be drowned out by intellect any more than intellect should be drowned out by feeling.
Both should be held in equally high regard. Both are invaluable and neither should be discounted. True and complete understanding can only be attained through a perfect balance of feeling and intellect.