But that is not what the filioque states -- it speaks of the eternal procession of the Spirit. If it were necessary to state that Christ, in His interaction with His creation, sent the Holy Spirit to the Church in AD 33, then this could have been spelled out by the Fathers of the 2nd ecumenical council. But it wasn't.
To say the the Spirit proceeds from the Son in the same way that He proceeds from the Father and then say that it is a description of what happened in time, in the economy of our salvation would have been like saying that the Son was "begotten of the Father and the Spirit", and then try to explain this by saying that what was really meant was that the Spirit played a role in Christ's conception, and thus the manner of his being sent to us for us and for our salvation.
Obviously something more than the economy of our salvation was intended by the people who added the filioque, and was understood differently by the Roman Church. I have a Catholic Catechism that describes the Holy Spirit as "the consubstantial love of the Father and the Spirit," or something like that. This is a very depersonalized view of the Spirit. The "multidimensional" view of the Trinity, summarized by the famous triangle with the persons at the corners and the Divine Essence in the center, can lead to a depersonalized and amorphic concept of God.
The Catholic understanding is that "Who proceeds from the Father through the Son" is a valid interpretation, which was intended in Filioque.
Attitudinal nuances that you refer to when you speak of a depersonalized concept of God may or may not be reality, but we don't need to discuss them now, since clearly many differences like that exist and will continue to exist.
I'll post the Catechism on the Holy Ghost later today.