Editing Anger (section)

==Philosophical perspectives==
[[File:FLAXMAN John The Fury Of Athamas.jpg|thumb|right|''The Fury of [[Athamas]]'' by [[John Flaxman]] (1755–1826)]]

===Ancient history===
Ancient Greek philosophers, describing and commenting on the uncontrolled anger, particularly toward slaves, in their society generally showed a hostile attitude towards anger. [[Galen]] and [[Seneca the Younger|Seneca]] regarded anger as a kind of madness. They all rejected the spontaneous, uncontrolled fits of anger and agreed on both the possibility and value of controlling anger. There were disagreements regarding the value of anger. For Seneca, anger was "worthless even for war". Seneca believed that the disciplined [[Roman army]] was regularly able to beat the [[Germanic peoples|Germans]], who were known for their fury. He argued that "...{{nbsp}}in sporting contests, it is a mistake to become angry".<ref name="AngerTheory"/>

[[Aristotle]] on the other hand, ascribed some value to anger that has arisen from perceived injustice because it is useful for preventing injustice.<ref name="AngerTheory"/><ref>According to Aristotle: "The person who is angry at the right things and toward the right people, and also in the right way, at the right time and for the right length of time is morally praiseworthy." cf. Paul M. Hughes, ''Anger'', Encyclopedia of Ethics, Vol I, Second Edition, Rutledge Press</ref> Furthermore, the opposite of anger is a kind of insensibility, Aristotle stated.<ref name="AngerTheory"/> The difference in people's temperaments was generally viewed as a result of the different mix of qualities or humors people contained. Seneca held that "red-haired and red-faced people are hot-tempered because of excessive hot and dry humors".<ref name="AngerTheory"/> Ancient philosophers rarely refer to women's anger at all, according to Simon Kemp and K.T. Strongman perhaps because their works were not intended for women. Some of them that discuss it, such as Seneca, considered women to be more prone to anger than men.<ref name="AngerTheory"/>

====Control methods====
{{wikisource|Of Anger}}
[[Seneca the younger|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.<ref name="AngerTheory"/> Seneca suggests, to avoid becoming angry in the first place, that the many faults of anger should be repeatedly remembered. One should avoid being too busy or dealing with anger-provoking people. Unnecessary hunger or thirst should be avoided and soothing music be listened to.<ref name="AngerTheory"/> To cease being angry, Seneca suggests {{Blockquote|one to check speech and impulses and be aware of particular sources of personal irritation. In dealing with other people, one should not be too inquisitive: It is not always soothing to hear and see everything. When someone appears to slight you, you should be at first reluctant to believe this, and should wait to hear the full story. You should also put yourself in the place of the other person, trying to understand his motives and any extenuating factors, such as age or illness."<ref name="AngerTheory"/>}}

Seneca further advises daily self-inquisition about one's [[Behavioral addiction|bad habit]].<ref name="AngerTheory"/> To deal with anger in others, Seneca suggests that the best reaction is to keep calm. A certain kind of deception, Seneca says, is necessary in dealing with angry people.<ref name="AngerTheory"/>

Galen repeats Seneca's points but adds a new one: finding a guide and teacher can help the person in controlling their passions. Galen also gives some hints for finding a good teacher.<ref name="AngerTheory"/> Both Seneca and Galen (and later philosophers) agree that the process of controlling anger should start in childhood on grounds of malleability. Seneca warns that this education should not blunt the spirit of the children nor should they be humiliated or treated severely. At the same time, they should not be pampered. Children, Seneca says, should learn not to beat their playmates and not to become angry with them. Seneca also advises that children's requests should not be granted when they are angry.<ref name="AngerTheory"/>

===Post-classical history===
{{See also|The four humours}}
During the period of the [[Roman Empire]] and the [[Middle Ages]], philosophers elaborated on the existing conception of anger, many of whom did not make major contributions to the concept. For example, many medieval philosophers such as [[Ibn Sina]] (Avicenna), [[Roger Bacon]] and [[Thomas Aquinas]] agreed with ancient philosophers that animals cannot become angry.<ref name="AngerTheory"/> On the other hand, [[al-Ghazali]] (Algazel), who often disagreed with Aristotle and Ibn Sina on many issues, argued that animals do possess anger as one of the three "powers" in their [[Qalb|heart]], the other two being [[appetite]] and [[Impulse (psychology)|impulse]]. He also argued that animal [[Will (philosophy)|will]] is "conditioned by anger and appetite" in contrast to human will which is "conditioned by the [[Intelligence|intellect]]".<ref>{{Cite journal |first=Amber |last=Haque |year=2004 |title=Psychology from Islamic Perspective: Contributions of Early Muslim Scholars and Challenges to Contemporary Muslim Psychologists |journal=Journal of Religion and Health |volume=43 |issue=4 |pages=357–377 [367] |doi=10.1007/s10943-004-4302-z |s2cid=38740431 }}</ref> A common medieval belief was that those prone to anger had an excess of yellow bile or choler (hence the word "choleric").<ref name="AngerTheory"/> This belief was related to Seneca's belief that "red-haired and red-faced people are hot-tempered because of excessive hot and dry humors".

====By gender====
Wrath was sinful because of the social problems it caused, sometimes even homicide. It served to ignore those who are present, contradicts those who are absent, produces [[insult]]s, and responds harshly to insults that are received.<ref>In the Garden of Evil: Vices and Culture in the Middle Ages. Richard Newhauser. PIMS, 200</ref> Aristotle felt that anger or wrath was a natural outburst of self-defense in situations where people felt they had been wronged. Aquinas felt that if anger was justified, it was not a sin. For example, "He that is angry without cause, shall be in danger; but he that is angry with cause, shall not be in danger: for without anger, teaching will be useless, judgments unstable, crimes unchecked. Therefore to be angry is not always an evil."<ref>St. Thomas Aquinas Blackfriars; McGraw-Hill, N.Y.K. 1963, Question 158</ref>

The concept of wrath contributed to a definition of gender and power. Many medieval authors in 1200 agreed the differences between men and women were based on complexion, shape, and disposition. Complexion involved the balance of the four fundamental qualities of heat, coldness, moistness, and dryness. When various combinations of these qualities are made they define groups of certain people as well as individuals. Hippocrates, Aristotle, and Galen all agreed on that, in terms of biology and sexual differentiation, heat was the most important of the qualities because it determined shape and disposition. Disposition included a balance of the previous four qualities, the four elements and the four humors. For example, the element of fire shared the qualities of heat and dryness: fire dominated in yellow bile or choler, meaning a choleric person was more or hot and dry than others. Hot and dry individuals were active, dominant, and aggressive. The opposite was true with the element of water. Water, is cold and moist, related closely to phlegm: people with more phlegmatic personalities were passive and submissive. While these trait clusters varied from individual to individual most authors in the Middle Ages assumed certain clusters of traits characterized men more than women and vice versa.<ref name="In the Garden of Evil">In the Garden of Evil: Vices and Culture in the Middle Ages. Richard Newhauser. PIMS, 2005</ref>

=====Women=====
Scholars posted that females were seen by authors in the Middle Ages to be more phlegmatic (cold and wet) than males, meaning females were more sedentary and passive than males.<ref name="In the Garden of Evil"/> Women's passive nature appeared "natural" due to their lack of power when compared to men. Aristotle identified traits he believed women shared: female, feminine, passive, focused on matter, inactive, and inferior. Thus medieval women were supposed to act submissively toward men and relinquish control to their husbands.<ref name="In the Garden of Evil"/> [[Hildegard of Bingen]] believed women were fully capable of anger. While most women were phlegmatic, individual women under certain circumstances could also be choleric.

=====Men=====
Medieval scholars believed most men were choleric, or hot and dry. Thus they were dominant and aggressive. (Barton) Aristotle also identified characteristics of men: male, masculine, active, focused on form, potent, outstanding, and superior. Men were aware of the power they held. Given their choleric "nature", men exhibited hot temperatures and were quick to anger.<ref name="In the Garden of Evil"/> [[Peter of Albano]] once said, "The male's spirit, is lively, given to violent impulse; [it is] slow getting angry and slower being calmed." Medieval ideas of gender assumed men were more rational than women. Masculinity involved a wide range of possible behaviors, and men were not angry all the time. Every man's [[humorism|humoral]] balance was different, some men were strong, others weak, also some more prone to wrath than others.<ref name="In the Garden of Evil"/> There are those who view anger as a manly act. For instance, David Brakke maintained:{{blockquote|because anger motivated a man to action in righting wrongs to himself and others, because its opposite appeared to be passivity in the face of challenges from other males, because – to put it simply – it raised the body's temperature, anger appeared to be a characteristic of masculinity, a sign that a man was indeed a manly man.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Behold the Man: Jesus and Greco-Roman Masculinity|url=https://archive.org/details/beholdmanjesusgr00conw_914|url-access=limited|last=Conway|first=Colleen|publisher=Oxford University Press|year=2008|isbn=978-0-19-532532-4|location=New York|page=[https://archive.org/details/beholdmanjesusgr00conw_914/page/n40 28]}}</ref> }}

====Control methods====
[[Maimonides]] considered being given to uncontrollable passions as a kind of illness. Like Galen, Maimonides suggested seeking out a philosopher for curing this illness just as one seeks out a physician for curing bodily illnesses. Roger Bacon elaborates Seneca's advices. Many medieval writers discuss at length the evils of anger and the virtues of temperance. In a discussion of [[Confession (religion)|confession]], [[John Mirk]], an English 14th-century [[Augustinians|Augustinian]] writer, tells priests how to advise the [[penance|penitent]] by considering the spiritual and social consequences of anger:<ref name="AngerTheory"/>
{{column
|1=
{{blockquote|<poem>''Agaynes wraþþe hys helpe schal be,''
''Ʒef he haue grace in herte to se''
''How aungelus, when he ys wroth,''
''From hym faste flen and goth,''
''And fendes faste to hym renneth,''
''And wyþ fuyre of helle hys herte breneth,''
''And maketh hym so hote & hegh,''
''Þat no mon may byde hym negh.''<ref>Edward Peacock (editor), revised by F.J. Furnivall (1902). [https://archive.org/stream/instructionsfor00furngoog#page/n67/mode/2up ''Instructions for Parish Priests by John Myrc'', p.48, lines 1567–74], Trübner, accessed 15 December 2014 at [[Internet Archive]].</ref></poem>}}
|2=
{{blockquote|<poem>'Against wrath his help shall be,
if he has grace in heart to see,
how angels, should his anger rise,
flee fast from him and go
and demons run to him in haste;
hell's fury burns his heart
and makes him so hot and high
that none may stand him nigh.</poem>}}
}}
In ''[[The Canon of Medicine]]'', [[Avicenna|Ibn Sina]] (Avicenna) modified the theory of [[temperament]]s and argued that anger heralded the transition of [[melancholia]] to mania, and explained that [[humidity]] inside the head can contribute to such [[mood disorder]]s.<ref>{{Cite journal |first=Amber |last=Haque |year=2004 |title=Psychology from Islamic Perspective: Contributions of Early Muslim Scholars and Challenges to Contemporary Muslim Psychologists |journal=Journal of Religion and Health |volume=43 |issue=4 |pages=357–377 [366] |doi=10.1007/s10943-004-4302-z |s2cid=38740431 }}</ref>

On the other hand, [[Ahmed ibn Sahl al-Balkhi]] classified anger (along with aggression) as a type of [[neurosis]],<ref>{{Cite journal |first=Amber |last=Haque |year=2004 |title=Psychology from Islamic Perspective: Contributions of Early Muslim Scholars and Challenges to Contemporary Muslim Psychologists |journal=Journal of Religion and Health |volume=43 |issue=4 |pages=357–377 [362] |doi=10.1007/s10943-004-4302-z |s2cid=38740431 }}</ref> while al-Ghazali argued that anger takes form in rage, indignation and revenge, and that "the powers of the [[Soul (spirit)|soul]] become balanced if it keeps anger under control".<ref>{{Cite journal |first=Amber |last=Haque |year=2004 |title=Psychology from Islamic Perspective: Contributions of Early Muslim Scholars and Challenges to Contemporary Muslim Psychologists |journal=Journal of Religion and Health |volume=43 |issue=4 |pages=357–377 [366–368] |doi=10.1007/s10943-004-4302-z |s2cid=38740431 }}</ref>

===Modern perspectives===
[[Immanuel Kant]] rejects revenge as vicious. Regarding the latter, [[David Hume]] argues that because "anger and [[hatred]] are passions inherent in our very frame and constitution, the lack of them is sometimes evidence of weakness and imbecility".<ref name="EoE"/> [[Martha Nussbaum]] has also agreed that even "great injustice" is no "excuse for childish and undisciplined behavior".<ref>{{Cite news|last=Srinivasan|first=Amia|date=2016-11-30|title=Would Politics Be Better Off Without Anger?|journal=The Nation|language=en-US|url=https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/a-righteous-fury/|access-date=2020-06-24|issn=0027-8378|archive-date=2020-06-26|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200626180505/https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/a-righteous-fury/|url-status=live}}</ref> Two main differences between the modern understanding and ancient understanding of anger can be detected, Kemp and Strongman state: one is that early philosophers were not concerned with possible harmful effects of the [[#Suppression|suppression of anger]]; the other is that, recently, studies of anger take the issue of [[gender differences]] into account.<ref name="AngerTheory"/> Soraya Chemaly has in contrast argued that anger is "a critically useful and positive emotion" which "warns us, as humans, that something is wrong and needs to change" when "being threatened with indignity, physical harm, humiliation and unfairness" and therefore "a powerful force for political good".<ref name="Chemaly-2019">{{Cite news|last=Chemaly|first=Soraya|date=2019-05-11|title=How women and minorities are claiming their right to rage|language=en-GB|work=The Guardian|url=https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/may/11/women-and-minorities-claiming-right-to-rage|access-date=2020-06-24|issn=0261-3077|archive-date=2020-07-14|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200714042901/https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/may/11/women-and-minorities-claiming-right-to-rage|url-status=live}}</ref> Furthermore, she argues that women and minorities are not allowed to be angry to the same extent as white men.<ref name="Chemaly-2019" /> In a similar vein, [[Rebecca Traister]] has argued that holding back anger has been an impediment to the progress of [[women's rights]].<ref>{{cite web|last=Kipnis|first=Laura|date=2018-10-02|title=Women Are Furious. Now What?|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/rebecca-traister-good-and-mad/570826/|access-date=2020-06-24|website=The Atlantic|language=en-US|archive-date=2020-06-27|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200627052020/https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/rebecca-traister-good-and-mad/570826/|url-status=live}}</ref>

The American psychologist [[Albert Ellis (psychologist)|Albert Ellis]] has suggested that anger, rage, and fury partly have roots in the philosophical meanings and assumptions through which human beings interpret [[wikt:transgression|transgression]].<ref name="Ellis">Ellis, Albert (2001). Overcoming Destructive Beliefs, Feelings, and Behaviors: New Directions for Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy. [[Prometheus Books]].</ref> According to Ellis, these emotions are often associated and related to the leaning humans have to absolutistically depreciating and damning other peoples' humanity when their personal rules and domain are transgressed.