Rain Kierr wrote:
...It is normal because anyone can be angry at times. Just like you, I believe that you're angry with your comment because you didn't like what bestcatcher said on his list. It is normal if you didn't like something or someone. You are angry but did you smack someone
Dear Rain,
I think that you are doing what many English Speaking People Do... you are Using the Word Anger in Two Different Senses -- in ONE Sense, you are referring to what is an Unpleasant and Agitating Emotion concerning something that One find Objectionable, that is, ANGER as an EMOTION; and then there is the Second Sense of the word 'Anger', meaning Impulsively Aggressive, Confrontational and Hostile BEHAVIOR, that is, ANGER as a BEHAVIOR.
As a credentialed Philosopher and an amateur Linguist, well. it is Appalling Derelict of the English Language to use One Word for Two Separate Things. If Anger is BOTH an Emotion AND a Behavior, then we can say "The Man became Angry because he got Angry". Now, exactly WHAT does that explain?
SO, I use the Word Anger only in regards to the BEHAVIOR. In THAT CASE, well, I THINK you owe me an apology for insisting in your argument that I myself had beome ANGRY. Now, how is that? Did I Cuss? Did I Swear? did I Threaten? Well.... I was a bit Sarcastic at times, and so you could redeem yourself, but only if you could Isolate one of my Inappropriate Behaviors, but Not Simply My Annoyed and Offended Emotional Reception of that Person's intrinsically ambiguous and misleading and somewhat useless Post.
If any King of the English Speaking World would ask me my Opinion as to how to Fix the dilemma of using the Word Anger to mean both a Behavior and an Emotion, I would say to keep Anger as purely the Behavior Word, but to give a New Name, really, and Old One, to the Underlying Emotion... the Word "HATE". Yes, People hate the word HATE. they try to avoid the word hate as being somehow indecent. they think it is Softer somehow to use the word Anger, when what they really mean is HATE, pure and simple. If it is Important enough to become Angry about, then you can admit that it is caused by something you simply HATE. Don't people say it all the time... during Angry Discourses how often do you hear people listing all the Reasons why they HATE whatever has provoked their Anger?
"The Man got Angry because something happened to him which he Hates". Now, THAT explains something. It would be far better if English were not imprecise and ambiguous. What are we anyway? Savages?
But, moving on. Again, NORMAL means Nothing. Animals get Angry. but we are Evolved and Evolving Human Beings. If certain Cultures are so Un-Evolved that Animalistic Behavior is Normal For them, well, what a pity it is for them... and for any of US who have to deal with them. but we KNOW that some people.... indeed, a great many people in absolute terms, even if not approaching a Majority, but these Many People have Cultured Themselves and Risen to the Level of no longer behaving Impulsively. They've Learned a Kind of Bio-Feedback. If a Hateful Emotion occurs to them, well, they've Conditioned themselves to Respond with the Mind and Intellect, and not with the Animal Body's Instinctive and Impulsive (thoughtless) Reaction.
the best example I can think of is the English Gentile Classes of about 100 years ago, when Servants were still quite common. there was the Universal Dictum "Shush! Not in front of the Servants". and this was not so much insisted upon by Adults to other Adults, as all of the Gentile Adults understood the Principle already, but it was pounded into the children even from their First Tantrums. Don't give the Servants anything to gossip about, or the entire Neighborhood will know our Business. It was understood that with the Convenience of keeping Servants, there came the inherent Cost of Losing ones Privacy. but it forced them into Behaving Proper at all Times... and the Conditioning Went On Generation after Generation. These People, because of their consistent Upbringing, were simply not prone to becoming behaviorally angry. If a Gentile Person ever did become noticeably Angry, well, people would invariably question that person's 'Breeding'. Even the Servants thought Loud and Agitated Behavior from one of their 'Betters' was LOW, and would soon be looking for a New Position (good Servants were in quite high demand toward the end... before the Wars...
and, finally, as to Anger being Healthy. Well, of course Angry Behavior is Always to be Lamented. BUT, who is REALLY ready to Absolutely Insist that HATE is healthy?
Hate IS an emotion. Hate is not an Intellectual Evaluation. Hate, as a Reactive Emotion is more than likely going to Get Us into, if not Trouble, then Turmoil... Mental Anguish... that kind of thing. Is THAT what is so Healthy?
Look at the Stoic Philosophies of the Hellenic Civilization of Rome, and the Philosophies of the East. they insist upon Dispassion, Objectivity, and Detachment. their Idea is that Emotions Cloud Clear Thinking.
So, in my Final Assessment, there is No Way On God's Green Earth that Anger, or Whatever You Call It, can Ever be Healthy. As I said in my first Post... it is some Silly Gimmick of Profiteering and Predatory New Age Authors looking for a New Angle for Selling Anger Management Books...