anger- what is it good for?

[Athena]

I am using Flip's words from the morning thought thread, to start this thread.

Flip Jackson
Greetings From Mars




Join Date: May 2005
Location: Owasso, OK
Posts: 479 I would say that being dogmatic, aggresive, and defensive can come from a few different things. Dogmatism could be a result of arrogance. You are so sure you are right, that you refuse to even acknowledge fair arguments agianst you. This could also be why people get defensive. When some dogma of yours is challenged well, and you don't know how to react, you might get defensive. You might get aggressive when your ideas are challenged, but only if you are demeaning as well as arrogant.

I think you have a good life if you don't subdue emotion, but just use it at the right time. Getting angry is probably never a good thing, but if someone never gets angry, then explodes for some reason, we know it had to be a good reason. Or if we know when to be serious, and when to party and goof around. When practice the right emotion at the right time, we seem to be happier. Especially if we recognize that happiness and kindness are emotions that are almost always appropriate.
__________________
**Gold Stars Isherwood-five, Orgaelin-one, Prometheus-four, Flip-two, belverron-two, G. Adams-five, SoccerfreakAB2-one, Critter-one, Mia-one**

[Athena]

A person for a Diabetic Association gave me important information about anger. Anger is our body's warning system. It warns us that something is wrong, and we are possibly in danger. Ideally we make note of this warning, and check things out. Are we really in danger? What is the attack and how is it a threat to us? What is the most rational way to deal with the threat?

What really pisses me off is, when something is wrong and I tell someone who might be able to correct the problem, or direct me to someone who might be able to correct the problem, and the person takes the position that correcting the problem is not his/her responsibility, and then expects me to passively ignor the problem and conform to the mass. I rapidly become indignant when this happens.

On the other hand, I am great at working with upset people in tense situations, because I empathize with their feeling that something is wrong and something needs to be done to correct the problem, if possible.

A few days ago, my sense of indignity grew to the explosive stage as one person after another could not understand the problems I precieved and reacted as though it was a personal problem, and not an organizational problem, people faced by everyone. There were some simple solutions to the problem, but only by communicating this to the right people would anything be done. Finally, one person immediately got, I was distressed and wanted to act on what was distressful, and gave me the means to communicate with the people who could resolve the problems. What a relief!

I regret my expressed distressed, only because the initial response to it was not a problem solving one, so my distress became excessive. I am glad I cared enough to take action, and that meant experiencing the emotion that was the motivating force. People who couldn't feel the problem, were like dead wood.

As I think this through, it seems to have more to do with what was said in "morning thought" than I realized. Has our society become more angry because of "group think" mentality that denies the individual? Time and gain, I run into automated telephones or receptionist which act like robots, and seem to expect the whole world to know that particular organization's system of doing things, and unquestionally expect every individual to comply with that systemized way of doing things. If for some reason, an individual has a problem complying, the automatic telephone or robotic person, just doesn't seem to know how to cope?

Is it possible we should be less tolerant of this systematic dehumanization and possibly a little more angry? Or are my expectations out of line?

For example, when pointing out telephone poles in the middle of the side walk prevent people in wheel chairs from passing, is reasonable to think the person in the city office should think this a problem that needs correcting, when there is agreement side walks should be cut so people in wheel chairs can use the sidewalks? How about a city celebration that blocks off the down town in such away, people in wheel chairs are repeated trapped in crowds and can not go forward because they can't go over curbs, and there no maps to help people avoid this problem? This is in a city that has been aware of people with disabilities for several years, but is still not aware enough to recognize the problem even when someone in a wheel chair is trapped and saying there is a problem. Hello, are you a robot are a real interactive human being capable of problem solving?

What of other differences as well. Like the homosexual or other minorities? Isn't it dehumanizing to be locked into a psychological need for everyone to be the same, and to know how the organizational systems work, and to passively conform? Does anger sometimes serve an important function?

[deedee]

Quote by: Athena I am using Flip's words from the morning thought thread, to start this thread. Flip Jackson Greetings From Mars Join Date: May 2005 Location: Owasso, OK Posts: 479 I would say that being dogmatic, aggresive, and defensive can come from a few different things. Dogmatism could be a result of arrogance. You are so sure you are right, that you refuse to even acknowledge fair arguments agianst you. This could also be why people get defensive. When some dogma of yours is challenged well, and you don't know how to react, you might get defensive. You might get aggressive when your ideas are challenged, but only if you are demeaning as well as arrogant. I think you have a good life if you don't subdue emotion, but just use it at the right time. Getting angry is probably never a good thing, but if someone never gets angry, then explodes for some reason, we know it had to be a good reason. Or if we know when to be serious, and when to party and goof around. When practice the right emotion at the right time, we seem to be happier. Especially if we recognize that happiness and kindness are emotions that are almost always appropriate. __________________ **Gold Stars Isherwood-five, Orgaelin-one, Prometheus-four, Flip-two, belverron-two, G. Adams-five, SoccerfreakAB2-one, Critter-one, Mia-one**

I believe in getting 'righteously angry'. This anger is a strong passion that can cause a person to be motivated enough to initiate a good project for a good cause. That's what I try to do with anger, anyways.......my two cents.

[Flip Jackson]

I think anger can get some good stuff done and is the only way to deal with some people. The more laid back and happy you are, the more efecttive anger will be. I personally don't like getting angry, not because of what other people think, but because of the sour mood it puts me in.


The way you put it makes sense, and gives plenty of good reasons to express anger. I think it ahould be used as sparingly as possible though. Anger itself is also used as a way to make others conform, not only to get out of conformity. People don't like to mess with those that are angry. They comply with shouted orders to get the angry person to shut up. Then when the person sees that they got the desired results, they continue the bahvior.

Anger should never be the first reaction, nor should it be used regularly if it is to be effective. I suppose it does have good uses if used appropriately.

[Athena]

Quote by: Flip Jackson I think anger can get some good stuff done and is the only way to deal with some people. The more laid back and happy you are, the more efecttive anger will be. I personally don't like getting angry, not because of what other people think, but because of the sour mood it puts me in. The way you put it makes sense, and gives plenty of good reasons to express anger. I think it ahould be used as sparingly as possible though. Anger itself is also used as a way to make others conform, not only to get out of conformity. People don't like to mess with those that are angry. They comply with shouted orders to get the angry person to shut up. Then when the person sees that they got the desired results, they continue the bahvior. Anger should never be the first reaction, nor should it be used regularly if it is to be effective. I suppose it does have good uses if used appropriately.

You hit the nail on the head! I am uncomfortable with my anger because I am using it to get my way. My mother said I act like the Queen of Hearts in Alice in Wonderland, yelling "off with their heads". I do recognize this quality in myself. In fact, I thought of changing my name to "Queen of Hearts".

And yet, I think my sense of right and wrong, and my feelings that motivate me to speak or act, serve a purpose. I wonder if a greater sense of person power and self confidence, would make me more like a Saint Benard than a little Terrier. I know there are times when I have been in a position of greater power, and this does wonders for how I react to the world. When we have the power, problems are small and a matter of rational action. When we feel helpless, LOOK OUT!

Hum, any tricks to preceiving ourselves as holding power? Any social adjustments we might make to making feel empowered? I am darn sure there would be no suicide bombers if these people felt they had personal power any other way.