Anger and outrage

[Op_Cit]

Many years ago a friend told me of an incident with his four year old son running into the street and his reaction of anger at the boy. He went on to describe his subsequent introspection and discovery that the origin of his anger was at himself and not his son. He found that he was really angry at himself because he wasn't watching the boy and that the four year old was only borderline rational enough by that time to understand the issue of running into the street.

Anyway, I immediately took his exploration into myself and it made me wonder: Could all anger be fundamentally anger with one's self?

To test this hypothesis, I formulated and undertook a task: From that point on, anytime I felt anger, I required myself to stop my reaction and look inside. I had to find the source, the reason for the reaction. Then I had to find a connection to my own responsibility.

It was really hard to do initially. The first few times it took me a day or more, because righteous anger feels so good and is so seductive. But I made myself persevere, and the most amazing thing was that 1) I always found myself at fault--for the anger part, and 2) when I got to that point of understanding why, the anger/outrage evaporated.

Anyway, with all the anger/outrage going around these days, I thought I'd toss this out there to see if anyone else my have reached similar conclusions. Or perhaps, do most like anger and/or see it as a good or proper thing?

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I can empathize with your friend's anger and fear at letting his kid roam free, but when some asshole turns in front of me without signaling in traffic, it's hard for me to understand why I should blame myself. When terrorists rammed their planes into the WTC, I'm not sure how I should feel responsible.

You mean that I should go around expecting things like that to happen?

 

[Op_Cit]

What I realized after a time was that with the traffic incidents there were times when I got angry and times went I just brushed it off with a "whatever". When I looked at that I realized the anger came at the times when I was unprepared to deal with the intrusion.

More fundamentally or importantly though, was the recognition that I had cut people off too in the past. Intentionally or unintentionally. What right do I have to anger with the other person until I have eliminated the behavior and all related behavior from myself?

People immediately think "Well, I never..." but if you are patient and honest you can find examples within yourself. Are you saying you've never not signalled a turn while driving?

Hey, I used to ride a motorcycle as a primary means of getting around in a large city. I had people look right at me while they actually tried to hit me. I learned to reach a place where that didn't matter: if I wanted to live I must accept that behavior and be proactive in my avoidance of it.

And as far as the WTC...
What made you angry about it? Not "bothered", "dismayed", "disappointed",... what about it made anger rise within you?

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

Many years ago a friend told me of an incident with his four year old son running into the street and his reaction of anger at the boy. He went on to describe his subsequent introspection and discovery that the origin of his anger was at himself and not his son. He found that he was really angry at himself because he wasn't watching the boy and that the four year old was only borderline rational enough by that time to understand the issue of running into the street.

Anyway, I immediately took his exploration into myself and it made me wonder: Could all anger be fundamentally anger with one's self?

To test this hypothesis, I formulated and undertook a task: From that point on, anytime I felt anger, I required myself to stop my reaction and look inside. I had to find the source, the reason for the reaction. Then I had to find a connection to my own responsibility.

It was really hard to do initially. The first few times it took me a day or more, because righteous anger feels so good and is so seductive. But I made myself persevere, and the most amazing thing was that 1) I always found myself at fault--for the anger part, and 2) when I got to that point of understanding why, the anger/outrage evaporated.

Anyway, with all the anger/outrage going around these days, I thought I'd toss this out there to see if anyone else my have reached similar conclusions. Or perhaps, do most like anger and/or see it as a good or proper thing?

Hmmm, intriguing theory but incomplete. It can center around more than just your personal actions. Sometimes anger is triggered by remembered event, something about a person or event that reminds you of a past event that something bad happened. There is also anger by proxy which I was surprised to find was the chief source of the part of me that hates. This is anger not for yourself but on behalf of another you revere and feel does not merit the treatment they receive. Thus getting angry over something you felt they had every right to be angry for but didn't or for a more draconian example. Getting angry over something that reminds you of exactly the same shit someone else went through when they didn't deserve it.

Anger at one's own impotency though is a common form of what you discribe. When people are angry at politics, it is often tied to how personally impotent they feel to stop any of it. That's why a lot of political or societal anger ends in sadness.

But your theory does seem to cover irrational anger. Anger at those who don't know better or share radically differing world views not because they tresspass their own moral codes, but because they do something the angry person can't imagine himself ever doing. However, now I think about it, that is also one level removed anger.

Anyway, its an interesting baseline, but I'd toy with it a bit more before commiting an absolutist worldview to it.

 

[Op_Cit]

Anyway, its an interesting baseline, but I'd toy with it a bit more before commiting an absolutist worldview to it.

So you've actually explored the same process personally, then? Or are you discarding it because you think anger has it's place or purpose?

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

So you've actually explored the same process personally, then? Or are you discarding it because you think anger has it's place or purpose?

You mean have I investigated the causes for anger including surprising revelation? Yes, it's a natural part of introspection to investigate your own emotions. To me the investigation was part of a do or die mechanism. There was a specific voice of unstoppable rage and I needed to control it or it would control me. The anger by proxy was one of the most surprising revelations of such investigations.

I'm not sure about anger's purpose, though my most baseline assumption about that would be that it's tied to the fight back instinct, the same instinct which resonates to revenge tales. Or something that makes more sense. I'm sorry, I haven't done as much introspection on anger's purpose and am still working on that one.

 

[Op_Cit]

I'm not sure about anger's purpose, though my most baseline assumption about that would be that it's tied to the fight back instinct, the same instinct which resonates to revenge tales. Or something that makes more sense. I'm sorry, I haven't done as much introspection on anger's purpose and am still working on that one.

But you managed to eliminate anger within yourself? If so, how? Or you reached the conclusion that it's there and there must be a positive purpose for it?

I'm trying to point to evolution: animals get angry, and there is cause for the effect. But then there is cause for all negative effects experienced by society. Do you accept this effect as OK?

 

[Dar~]

Most of my anger comes from my problem dealing with too much stress. They actually have me on Paxil to help combat the rage attacks.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I think that anger is an emotion, and emotions can't be reasoned with. They can be repressed, they can be suppressed, they can be sublimated, but mostly they're just felt. That's what emotions are: feelings. They're not ideas.

I think that when you say you have no right to be angry because you've been guilty of the same behavior in the past, you're basically suppressing your anger and then rationalizing the suppression. At least, that's how it would work for me.

The one event that always comes to mind when I think about anger was when I was at a local carnival here a few years ago. We've got a lot of Russian emigres here, and they tend to be very pushy and aggressive. Me and my kids were standing in line for some carnival ride, and this big Russian guy just barged into line ahead of us. Well, he didn't really barge, he kind of sidled. It was just so offensive and rude that I was just beside myself with anger. Short of getting physical, though, there was nothing really I could do about it, so I just stood there and muttered to the guy till he got onto the ride before us.

The idea that emotions can be mastered and handled by reason is at the heart of most "talking" psychotherapy and has come to be accepted as gospel. Me, I'm not at all convinced. Certainly understanding the root causes of an emotion can help us handle it better by avoiding those situations that provoke it, but no matter how much I understand, if you cut ahead of me at the local carnival, I'm going to get angry.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

But you managed to eliminate anger within yourself? If so, how? Or you reached the conclusion that it's there and there must be a positive purpose for it?

I'm trying to point to evolution: animals get angry, and there is cause for the effect. But then there is cause for all negative effects experienced by society. Do you accept this effect as OK?

Eliminate? Who do you think I am, Ghandi? No, I just managed to best and control it to a degree that it's not in danger of consuming me. And it's a daily battle that sometimes invokes some heavy bouts of ennui (such as I display over politics these days). It's there and it's a part of me, but I'm not sure about positive purpose.

My hero used to escape anger because he had optimism and forgiveness at an unhealthy level. He also was very self-sacrificing and never minded people taking advantage of him. But even then, he had a small list of things that he couldn't help feeling angry over and would become violent over (men treating women like objects and other misogynistic behavior and rape)

I think the whole debate is like that. There are the freaks and gods who have almost entirely escaped anger and serve as guideposts for all of us and then there's the rest of us who are just fighting the best we can with the anger inside of us and then there's another group who embrace the anger with their whole heart and make it the core of their being (a version of being consumed by your anger).




I would say the metaphor is battling rather than accepting. Anger is something to be battled against and even the most fervent battles have sections that will never be conquered except in the most rare of people and even then, perhaps it is incomplete. Perhaps there exists an action so heinous, so unforgiveable that even Ghandi would utter a curse over it.

So not a benefit, but rather something that is there and something one must watch and keep in check so that it doesn't turn to action. Thinking biologically, anger is a right boon (which is why athletes are told to get angry before a competition), but socially and morally it isn't, normally (using it to save a rape victim or possible murder victim for example would be an abnormal moral and social case).


Does any of this make sense or am I just confusing the issue?

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

I think that anger is an emotion, and emotions can't be reasoned with. They can be repressed, they can be suppressed, they can be sublimated, but mostly they're just felt. That's what emotions are: feelings. They're not ideas.

I think that when you say you have no right to be angry because you've been guilty of the same behavior in the past, you're basically suppressing your anger and then rationalizing the suppression. At least, that's how it would work for me.

The one event that always comes to mind when I think about anger was when I was at a local carnival here a few years ago. We've got a lot of Russian emigres here, and they tend to be very pushy and aggressive. Me and my kids were standing in line for some carnival ride, and this big Russian guy just barged into line ahead of us. Well, he didn't really barge, he kind of sidled. It was just so offensive and rude that I was just beside myself with anger. Short of getting physical, though, there was nothing really I could do about it, so I just stood there and muttered to the guy till he got onto the ride before us.

The idea that emotions can be mastered and handled by reason is at the heart of most "talking" psychotherapy and has come to be accepted as gospel. Me, I'm not at all convinced. Certainly understanding the root causes of an emotion can help us handle it better by avoiding those situations that provoke it, but no matter how much I understand, if you cut ahead of me at the local carnival, I'm going to get angry.

Correlary based on dr. mab. He's right about it being an emotion and thus battling it doesn't rely on rationality and logic, but rather willpower, personal control, the emotional naplam: ennui, and sheer effort.

Anyway, what he's saying is a good correlary to my point (if I had one).

 

[Op_Cit]

My experience was that once I found that path to the bottom--the foundation of anger and where it lived-- it didn't require effort after that, it became easier each time until it was almost instantaneous. Often though it would transform to resignation that I had more to do/learn/improve on myself.

I guess I am contesting your statement of it not being rational: that rationality is infact the solution to the emotion the same way a base neutralizes an acid. In all the martial arts I'm familiar with they specifically find anger counter productive and seek to avoid it. I think because while it can produce an immediate increase in strength, it significantly reduces endurance and of course you tend to get stupider...

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

My experience was that once I found that path to the bottom--the foundation of anger and where it lived-- it didn't require effort after that, it became easier each time until it was almost instantaneous. Often though it would transform to resignation that I had more to do/learn/improve on myself.

I guess I am contesting your statement of it not being rational: that rationality is infact the solution to the emotion the same way a base neutralizes an acid. In all the martial arts I'm familiar with they specifically find anger counter productive and seek to avoid it. I think because while it can produce an immediate increase in strength, it significantly reduces endurance and of course you tend to get stupider...

I would disagree. I'd suspect that your rational shortcut to anger is really just a form of specialized ennui. Ennui is the naplam in the fight against any emotion, unfortunately it's nonspecific and overuse can be dangerous.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

I guess I am contesting your statement of it not being rational: that rationality is infact the solution to the emotion the same way a base neutralizes an acid. In all the martial arts I'm familiar with they specifically find anger counter productive and seek to avoid it. I think because while it can produce an immediate increase in strength, it significantly reduces endurance and of course you tend to get stupider...

A base doesn't have to be taught to neutralize an acid. One of the things you have to learn in martial arts, as I understand it, is to overcome your anger and fear, and that's not easy to do. It takes practice and quite a bit of discipline just because it's so unnatural. And I would say that what you end up with isn't neutalization of the anger as much as it is suppresion and control.

Certainly anger makes you more stupid. It's an adrenaline rush, the body's preparation for fight or flight. Your muscles tense, your heart rate increases, the peripheral blood vessels shrink preperatory to reduce bleeding, and rationality is replaced by instinct and reflex. That's probably all to the good in the wild, but very bad when you're facing a human opponent, especially one who'd been taught to control his anger.

And I'd agree that overall it's quite exhausting. Adrenaline is designed to give you a burst of speed and strength, and when it's gone, you've had it. It's emotionally and physically exhausting.

But it occurs to me that I might be taling about something different than what you mean. I'm talking about the kind of anger you feel when you're threatened. I think you might be talking about a more diffused and intellectual kind of anger. The kind of thing we might feel towards a politician or institution.

 

[R. Richard]

Hey, I used to ride a motorcycle as a primary means of getting around in a large city. I had people look right at me while they actually tried to hit me. I learned to reach a place where that didn't matter: if I wanted to live I must accept that behavior and be proactive in my avoidance of it.

I also used to ride a motorcycle in a big city environment. I had much the same kind of traffic experiences that you had. I never reached a point where it did not matter. There was a reason behind this last.

I lived in the streets of nasty black neghborhoods as "The Whi' Boy." I used rage as a survival tool. Rage produces adreniline. Adreniline produces strength. I used adreniline as a tool. Again, when I got into bad situations on the bike, I could use adreniline fueled strength to move the bike faster and more sharply than I could have without the adreniline.

You seem to have your anger as a sort of semi-after the fact reaction. My rage was real-time, of necessity.

I do not endorse rage as a means of coping with normal situations in life. I did not face normal situations.

 

[gauchecritic]

I'd like to ask why does anyone feel the need to control, supress, eradicate or subsume anger?

It's an emotion and it's going to microscopically change your life whatever you do about it. If you try to control or supress it makes no difference, you've already felt it because you're aware of it.

Controlling what it might make you do is another question entirely.

Do you supress love? Do you eradicate sorrow? Do you control hapiness?

It's not the emotion that needs to be removed but the reaction to the emotion. How often do we hear about being made to feel dull and lifeless by those who use prescription medications?

Emotions are part of who you are. Emotions always change the person you are. What is life if not change?

 

[elsol]

It was really hard to do initially. The first few times it took me a day or more, because righteous anger feels so good and is so seductive. But I made myself persevere, and the most amazing thing was that 1) I always found myself at fault--for the anger part, and 2) when I got to that point of understanding why, the anger/outrage evaporated.

Anyway, with all the anger/outrage going around these days, I thought I'd toss this out there to see if anyone else my have reached similar conclusions. Or perhaps, do most like anger and/or see it as a good or proper thing?

As to...

You're really just saying that you blame yourself for feeling angry, right?

You're NOT saying, it's not the other person's fault that I have a REASON to be angry, but my own.

Because, please don't tell this to an abuse survivor.

"It's your fault that you're angry, and not that you were raped as a six-year old."

I think that yes... sometimes the anger is caused by the feeling that you could have done something different.

But sometimes the anger is caused by another negativity.... resentment i.e. my wife has always said 'You're a wonderful husband, a great lover, my best friend... etc, etc, etc.' and then one day she cheats on me with someone at work.

Anger?

Yes?

Is the core of the anger... me? No, I would say it's more resentment towards her.

I also think some angers are simply irrational... like your four year old being angry at you because you wouldn't buy him the toy, is the 'blame' for his anger that he WANTED the toy. I don't think he's that rational... he wanted, you said no, POP comes the anger.

And sometimes the anger is something that someone else put inside you, like a rape survivor... that anger can be a way OUT of self-recrimination for something that they 'could have' done but rationally they really 'couldn't have'... what can that six year old really do if Uncle Tommy wants into her panties at any cost?

As to Outrage... I always thought that outrage was simply a reaction to having the illusion that the way the 'world should be' isn't actually the way it is.

Sincerely,
ElSol