by Leo Volont » Wed Jan 28, 2015 4:21 am
Dear McCain,
I so nice to finally talk. I’ve seen your name and read some of your posts.
Anyway, yes, there are a great many of the experts who agree with you, that Anger is an emotion all by itself, like happiness or sadness. Not as basic and just pleasure or pain, but very close.
But here is the problem that brings up, especially in regards to the various Anger Therapies. We are stuck with having to accept that Anger is quite inevitable, and only then do we get a chance to deal with the Reactions and Responses that people have to this basic emotional anger. But the more I looked at it, the more I came to see Anger as the Reaction and the Response, to the real emotions which bring out different reactions and responses in different people. If Anger is a Primary Emotion then why, when presenting different people with the same Triggers, do some people react with what we know as Anger and other people just become sad and hurt. Take insults for instance. In the domain of the Angry, an Insult is the Philosopher’s Stone, the Golden Chalice, it is the almost certain bait for making an anger prone person Angry. An insult is that last thing on that great list of things that the Angry Person must learn to conquer. But for a great many people, an insult only hurts their feelings. For an Emotional Response, they may simply cry.
So in this regards Anger is on the same par as Crying. It is a Reaction to an emotion. Now, yes, people say that Crying is Natural, but nobody calls it one of the primary Emotions. And they treat excessive Crying much like they would treat for excessive Anger – they point out that too much of it can be bad for you, and that with a certain degree of familiarity with the phenomena, one can begin to control it and come to terms with it.
Indeed, I am beginning to like this Crying Anger analogy. Look back at our infancies and you can see how a little person grows to make a preference between one and the other. By the time we are two or three we have fully decided between bouts of crying to get our way, or throwing Tantrums. And unless dealt with at some time or another the preference stays with us through our entire lives – when hurt or frustrated, we either cry about it, or we break into bluster and start demanding our own way.
But, there are also other things, even more basic things to consider, once I’ve thought of it. For instance, there is something very basic to all of the Animal Kingdom, and that is the Fight or Flight reaction. Animals react to threats in one of two ways (actually three) – they run away (Flight), or they stand and Fight (the third option is to ‘freeze’ or play dead ). Well, such Fighting as we see in this regards is not an Emotion at all. The Scientific Community even calls it a “Reaction”. When defending their territories aggressively nobody is wondering how these animals ‘feel’. We understand cleanly and clearly enough what animals are doing, but we overcomplicate the same dynamic when we see it in People. Anger is simply a clear cut example of the Fight Reaction. The only problem with it is that now that we live in advanced Societies where Aggression has become the monopolized Function of the Police, and Threats the monopolized Function of the Lawyers, it is no longer appropriate for individuals to act aggressively on their own behalf. Society is helping us humans evolve beyond the basic animal things.
Oh, and there is another point that we should consider. If Anger is an Emotion then we should expect that everybody at one time or another will be Angry. But such is not the case. Some people go their entire lives without manifesting a bout of Anger. Well, you might answer saying that they do not have to SHOW Anger in order to FEEL Anger. But that is where I can jump in and say, well, No, that Anger defines itself in its manifestation as overt threatening or aggressive behavior. If there is no behavior then we do not have anger.
I once read an essay in French on Intelligence. What is Intelligence? How can we discern those who are more intelligent from those who are less intelligent? Well, that essay proposed that the More Intelligent discern finer and finer distinctions. For the More Intelligent Person phenomena comes with complications, details, shades, nuances, types, stages, divisions, and he finds that there is a lot to understand. But to the Less Intelligent Person, the same phenomena present as much simpler. When Captain Cook came to the Islands he found that the people there only recognized two colours – what they called Red and Green. All the colours he pointed out, were, to them, simply different shades of Red or Green but nothing that they would consider distinctive and of its own class and category.
Anyway, here in the Anger Management Community, we can make a choice. We can see Anger simplistically as being two things at once, that it is both an Emotion and also the Reaction to that Emotion. But the French Essayist might feel that if we look at the complexity inherent within the Thing we are contemplating, and find Two or More Separate Things, well, it should only make sense to Distinguish them and to give them Different Names. Before there is Anger, a behavioral manifestation, there is some more basic causative process in the Mind – various unpleasant emotions or sense of impending threat. But these More Basic Things are not Anger in themselves, as they cannot be shown to always Manifest in overt Angry Behaviors.
But, yes, many experts agree with you, that Anger is an Emotion. But as I have shown, it is an Argument that works against us, and which we can abandon at any time we feel like, because there are plenty enough cogent arguments against the point. Treating Anger as a Reaction to more basic Emotions or Impulses will get us where we want to go without the complication of admitting that Anger is Inevitable, Necessary and Useful – effectively giving up our efforts before we can even get started.