X feels anger—
(a) X thinks: R did something bad
(b) I don’t want such things to happen
(c) X feels something bad toward R because of that
(d) X wants to do something bad to R because of that
X feels liget—
(a) X thinks: I don’t want people to think that they can do things that I can't do
(b) I want to do something because of that
(c) I don’t want to think:
» “Someone will feel something bad because of that”



   “I don’t want to do it because of that”
(d) X feels something because of that
(e) X can do things because of that that other people can’t. Three types of anger are recognized by psychologists: The first form of anger, named "hasty and sudden anger" by Joseph Butler, an 18th century Engish bishop, is connected to the impulse for self-preservation. It is shared between humans and animals and occurs when tormented or trapped. The second type of anger is named "settled and deliberate" anger is a reaction to perceived deliberate harm doing or unfair treatment by others. These two forms anger are episodic. The third type of anger is however dispositional and is related more to character traits than to instincts or cognitions. Irritability, sullenness and churlishness postures are examples of the last form of anger.
   Anger can potentially mobilize psychological resources and boost determination toward correction of wrong behaviors, promotion of social justice, communication of negative sentiment and redress of grievances. It can also facilitate patience. On the other hand, anger can be destructive when it doesn't find its appropriate outlet in expression. Anger, in its strong form, impairs one's ability to process information and to exert cognitive control over his behavior. An angry person may lose his objectivity, empathy, prudence or thoughtfulness and may cause harm to others. A common metaphor for the physiological aspect of anger is that of a hot fluid in a container.

Causes of anger

Most commonly, those who experience anger explain its arousal as a result of "what has happened to them" and in most cases the described provocations occur immediately before the anger experience. Such explanations confirm the illusion that anger has a discrete external cause. The angry person usually finds the cause of his anger in an intentional, personal, and controllable aspect of another person's behavior. This explanation is however based on the intuitions of the angry person who experiences a loss in self-monitoring capacity and objective observability as a result of their emotion. Anger can be of multicausal origin, some of which may be remote events, but people rarely find more than one cause for their anger.

Philosophical perspectives on anger

Ancient times

[[Image:Galen.jpg|thumb|right|250px|"WhenI was still a young man..., I watched a man eagerly trying to open a door. When things didn't work out as he'd have them, I saw him bite the key, kick the door, blaspheme, glare wildly like a madman, and all but foam at the mouth like a wild boar. When I saw this, I conceived such a hatred for anger that I was never thereafter seen behaving in an unseemly manner because of it," remarked Galen. Furthermore, the opposite of anger is a kind of insensibility, Aristotle stated.
   Related to Seneca's belief that "red-haired and red-faced people are hot-tempered because of excessive hot and dry humors," a common medieval belief was that those prone to anger had an excess of yellow bile or choler. However, there's a difference; most often a spiritual person is aware of the emotion and the way it can be handled. Thus, in response to the question: "Is any anger acceptable in Buddhism?' the Dalai Lama answered:

"Buddhism in general teaches that anger is a destructive emotion and although anger might have some positive effects in terms of survival or moral outrage, I don't accept that anger of any kind as a virtuous emotion nor aggression as constructive behavior. The Gautama Buddha has taught that there are three basic kleshas at the root of samsara (bondage, illusion) and the vicious cycle of rebirth. These are greed, hatred, and delusion--also translatable as attachment, anger, and ignorance. They bring us confusion and misery rather than peace, happiness, and fulfillment. It is in our own self-interest to purify and transform them." Saint Basil viewed anger as a "reprehensible temporary madness."

In Hinduism, anger is equated with sorrow as a form of unrequited desire. The objects of anger are perceived as a hindrance to the gratification of the desires of the angry person. Alternatively if one thinks one is superior, the result is grief. Anger is considered to be packed with more evil power than desire.

The Qur'an, the central religious text of Islam, attributes anger to Prophets and believers and Muhammad's enemies. It mentions the anger of Moses against his people for worshiping a golden calf; the anger of Jonah at God in a moment and his eventual realization of his error and his repentance; God's removal of anger from the hearts of believers and making them merciful after the fighting against Muhammad's enemies is over.

In Judaism, anger at the sight of wrong done is holy. If the anger kindles into passion, it'll become however conducive to strife. According to the Hebrew Bible: "He that's slow to wrath is of great understanding, but he that's hasty of temper[A. V. "spirit"] exalteth folly...A wrathful man stirrers up strife: he that's slow to anger appeases strife...He that's slow to anger is better than the mighty...Be not hasty in thy spirit to be angry; for anger rests in the bosom of fools." In the Book of Genesis, Jacob condemned the anger that had arisen in his sons Simon and Levi: "Cursed be their anger, for it was fierce; and their wrath, for it was cruel"

Anger of God or gods

In many religions, anger is frequently attributed to God or gods. Primitive people held that gods were subject to anger and revenge in naive anthropomorphic fashion. The Hebrew Bible says that opposition to God's Will results in God's anger. The Hebrew Bible explains that:

God isn't an intellectual abstraction, nor is He conceived as a being indifferent to the doings of man; and His pure and lofty nature resents most energetically anything wrong and impure in the moral world: "O Lord, my God, mine Holy One... Thou art of eyes too pure to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity." The characteristics of those upon whom God's wrath will fall is as follows: Those who reject God; deny his signs; doubt the resurrection and the reality of the day of judgment; call Muhammad a sorcerer, a madman or a poet; do mischief, are impudent, don't look after the poor (notably the orphans); live in luxury or heap up fortunes; persecute the believers or prevent them from praying;...

Dealing with anger

According to Leland R. Beaumont, each instance of anger demands making a choice:

Respond with hostile action, including overt violence

Respond with hostile inaction, such as withdrawing or stonewalling

Initiate a dominance contest

Harbor resentment

Work to better understand and constructively resolve the issue

Views of ancient philosophers

Seneca addresses the question of mastering anger in three parts: 1. how to avoid becoming angry in the first place 2. how to cease being angry and 3. how to deal with anger in others. On the other hand, Ahmed ibn Sahl al-Balkhi classified anger (along with aggression) as a type of neurosis, while al-Ghazali (Algazel) argued that anger takes form in rage, indignation and revenge, and that "the powers of the soul become balanced if it keeps anger under control."

Modern times

According to R. Novaco, anger is an emotional response to provocation. R. Novaco recognized three modalities of anger: cognitive (appraisals), somatic-affective (tension and agitations) and behavioral (withdrawal and antagonism). In order to manage anger the problems involved in the anger should be discussed Novaco suggests. The situations leading to anger should be explored by the person. The person is then tried to be imagery-based relieved of his or her recent angry experiences.
   Modern therapies for anger involve restructuring thoughts and beliefs in order to bring about a causal reduction in anger. This therapy often comes within the schools of CBT (or cognitive behavioral therapy) or other modern schools such as REBT (or rational emotional behavioral therapy). Research shows that people who suffer from excessive anger often harbor irrational thoughts and beliefs towards negativity. It has been shown that with therapy by a trained professional, individuals can bring their anger to manageable levels.
   The therapy is followed by the so-called "stress inoculation" in which the clients are taught "relaxation skills to control their arousal and various cognitive controls to exercise on their attention, thoughts, images, and feelings. They are taught to see the provocation and the anger itself as occurring in a series of stages, each of which can be dealt with." John W. Fiero cites Los Angeles riots of 1992 as an example of sudden, explosive release of suppressed anger. The anger was then displaced as violence against those who had nothing to do with the matter. Another example of widespread deflection of anger from its actual cause toward a scapegoat, Fiero says, was the blaming of Jews for the economic ills of Germany by the Nazis.

Anger and social position

Tiedens, known for her studies of anger, claimed that expression of feelings would cause a powerful influence not only on the perception of the expresser but also on his power position in the society. She studied the correlation between anger expression and social influence perception. Previous researchers, such as Keating, 1985 have found that people with angry face expression were perceived as powerful and as in a high social position. Similarly, Tiedens et al. have revealed that people who compared scenarios involving an angry and a sad, attributed a higher social status to the angry character. Based on these findings Sinaceur and Tiedens have found that people conceded more to the angry side rather than for the non-angry one. A question raised by Van Kleef et al. based on these findings was whether expression of emotion influences others, since it's known that people use emotional information to conclude about others’ limits and match their demands in negotiation accordingly. Van Kleef et al. wanted to explore whether people give up more easily to an angry opponent or to a happy opponent. Findings revealed that participants tended to be more flexible toward an angry opponent compared with a happy opponent. These results strengthen the argument that participants analyze the opponent’s emotion in order to conclude about their limits and carry out their decisions accordingly.
   

Further Information

Get more info on 'Anger'.

External Link Exchanges Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page: <a href="http://anger.totallyexplained.com">Anger Totally Explained</a> Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.    As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned.