anger

[White Warlock]

Good link, thanks Comet. Quoting just one part of the report that reaffirms my earlier assertions:

Is It Good To "Let it All Hang Out?"

 

Psychologists now say that this is a dangerous myth. Some people use this theory as a license to hurt others. Research has found that "letting it rip" with anger actually escalates anger and aggression and does nothing to help you (or the person you're angry with) resolve the situation.

 

It's best to find out what it is that triggers your anger, and then to develop strategies to keep those triggers from tipping you over the edge.

The whole of the article is worth reading, especially for us studying MA and the psychology of violence.

[Sasori_Te]

My question is this. When exactly did anger and aggressiveness become wrong in our society? We as a species would be nowhere near where we are right now without these traits. Ask any sociologist or anthropologist. I don't think you should go off on a shooting spree when you get angry, but I think that our natural anger and aggressive traits are necessary for our species to continue to thrive or even continue to exist.

[TheDevilAside]

The United States is going completely overboard. When I first moved to the United States, I was absolutely shocked when I found out that I would get a three day suspension or expulsion for DEFENDING myself in a fight.. I was even shocked that suspension was a punishment for getting into a fight. Now, banishing school violence completely and utterly may seem to be a wonderful solution to all of our problems, but, obviously, it doesn't seem to be working. While I was living in Switzerland, I would get into fights and feuds all the time, I would maybe come him with a bloody nose and a welts, but never anything serious. I was never harshly punished, it was just a talk with the teacher, and that was it. I find it funny how in Switzerland the murder count is nothing compared to that in the US, but the Swiss are absolutely not as strict as they are when it comes to violence. In Switzerland, the saying "boys will be boys" is actually followed, and Switzerland's (and Europe in general) approach to it seems to give better results.

 

They see violence as an acceptable part of life, it's always going to be a part of life. And, somehow, this seems to have a positive impact on people... I don't know, I really don't understand it. I've just observed it. In Switzerland I would have to worry about getting punched a couple of times and come home with a few bruises.. but I never had to worry about being shot, stabbed and murdered.

[White Warlock]

First i'll address TDA's thoughts.

 

It used to be said that New York was the melting pot of the world, mainly due to all the immigrants coming from Europe. Now, it's both the west and east coasts of the United States, with far more coming in from Central & South America, and from the Asian countries. There is a clash of a thousand cultures in this nation. A nation with adopted indigenous culture and hardly any history to speak of. United States is a nation of divergent philosophies, with vastly different social rights and wrongs. It is this miasma of beliefs and non-beliefs, compounded with a lack of historical or national identity, that presents the United States as being dangerous. We just don't know when we're insulting someone.

 

Most other nations are far more grounded. They have a history or have adopted the regions indigenous history. They have a commonality in race, creed, culture, and/or religion. What do we have in common with our fellow American citizen? The right to vote? The ability to get pizza delivered, along with a bowl of curry? 100 cable channels, with nothing to watch?!?

 

Think only of the martial arts. Where is it that 'diversity' of the arts has most been encouraged? Where is it that Bruce Lee pushed for "using no way as way," or where the Gracies decided to present their style internationally? Where first did you find Chinese sharing with non-Chinese or where you would see 5 or more systems being taught under one roof, before disco went out of style?!?

 

The stringent nature of rules developed due to the hardships encountered in this society during the early stages, when the nation was still a frontier and cultures were beginning to clash. The United States is a young nation. A very young nation, with a very very young 'native' element. And no, i'm not talking the American Indians. The native element in the United States is the American Citizen, whatever that is. Seriously... what is it? If you think of a citizen of China, you think someone who follows communism and is of Asian descent. A nation loaded with historical icons and identity. Same goes for just about every European nation.

 

So... when you think about it, it makes sense. I walk down the road in California, and I meet all types of people. Some who would be offended by me posing the sole of my feet in their direction if i were to sit down, others that would take offense if i stare just a tad too long at them. And yet others that would take that same action as an invitation. What we are dealing with in the United States, i have not experienced in any other country. We have a lack of identity, and too many cultures. All the answers, and not a clue in the world.

[White Warlock]

Sasori_Te's is a bit more challenging, as i'll end up tossing out more conjecture than fact.

but I think that our natural anger and aggressive traits are necessary for our species to continue to thrive or even continue to exist.

There are three basic needs. That of security, sustenance and shelter (SSS). It is these three that set the foundation for survival. Assertiveness determined who received what first, but aggressiveness determined who would hold it in the end and was fueled by one or more of the three basic needs. The wars of old were fought for these reasons, and not anger. Anger was merely a tool. An emotion that served as one means to fuel aggression.

 

Now... conjecture.

 

Eventually, people recognized that grouping together provided a larger chance of survival, and in doing so, civilization began to grow. In order for people to live together, they had to devise a set of rules and responsibilities. A means to ensure those in the same group would not enter into battle with each other. A means to ensure that everyone in the group participated in some manner, to optimize the chances at survival.

 

As time went by, groups became larger, cities emerged, rules were expanded, and specializations developed. Merchants, artisans, farmers, warriors and, eventually, wimps. Oh... umm... politicians. These city-states occasionally clashed with each other, but mostly there was peace.. and lots of babies.

 

I made a joke about it earlier... but there's actually a seed in the comment about politicians. Initially, warriors were the governing body. However, with the removal of combat, came complacency and the eventual breakdown of the warrior code, until those that governed merely donned battle regalia for ceremonies and practiced none of the arts of war. Eventually, due to peace, a new breed of rulers emerged... the politicians. Masters at manipulating the masses, and skilled in court frivolities, such as the arts. The renaissance period was birthed by this, as well as the ancient Greek arts, the Japanese and even the Chinese arts. Mathematics, painting, tea ceremonies, etc.

 

Civilization provided a great change, for good. But, it also brought with it an age of denial.

 

The expression of anger and the behaviors of an aggressive nature became less a requirement and more a hindrance. Such things actually endangered the sanctity of this nicely oiled thing called civilization where thousands, even hundreds of thousands, of people could live safely, comfortably, and well nourished... in a relatively small area of land.

 

But, when populations grew, more city-states developed or the existing states simply grew larger. Less land, insufficient resources... and security becomes an issue once again. Politicians then garnered warriors to protect the sanctity of these drops of civilization... and we have the paradigm of our modern-day societies.

 

To maintain civilization... we must have barbarism to protect it. We must train parts of our society to be barbarians in order to protect the relative security our congregations have created. And, when there are no wars for these barbarians to fight, they must live among us. And when they live among us, there is tension. We praise them for their duty, and despise them for their actions. For we... are civilized.

[White Warlock]

Another thought: Ages ago, anger helped a person to survive, but also helped them to die. Warriors that thought with their head lived longer than those that thought with their heart. Nowadays, we know that, besides the obvious dangers of constantly expressing your anger by posing it as aggressiveness, there is a physiological detriment.

 

I spent a large part of my early life 'living' off of adrenalin rushes. However, as i grew older, i noticed that the moments of adrenalin actually started causing me physical pain. I researched this and found that being repeatedly subjected to adrenalin does cause physical problems, such as tendonitis and IBS. It can even cause heart problems and substantially increases your chances of having a stroke. This was definitely not something I wanted to hear, especially not after spending the majority of my life living off the rush that I now knew had been eating away at me. I was even more disturbed to find that those in high-risk occupations (you know, those who also 'live' off of adrenalin rushes), on the average, have far shorter 'natural' lives!

 

In the olden days of chivalry and slaughter, such things didn't matter. But now, we have civilization... and we have long life. An essential part of living a long life and staying healthy actually does mean we must remain calm at all times, or as much as reasonably possible. Add to this our need to stay within the good graces of the civilized majority... and really... what other choice is there? Prison?

[Red J]

My question is this. When exactly did anger and aggressiveness become wrong in our society?

 

Probably when the terms "Postal" and "Road Rage" became everyday venacular.

[Sasori_Te]

Well, let's look at it from a different point of view.

 

Holding in feelings of anger and aggression are the main stressors in our society today. If you watch television at all or read, I'm sure you've heard that a leading factor of many of today's most potentially deadly illnesses, i.e. hypertension, heart disease, strokes....etc. I would have to disagree with you and say that bottled up stress is potentially far more injurious than adrenaline. Not to mention, not everyone is an adrenaline junkie. However, everyone does feel anger and aggression on a daily basis and not dealing with it causes more stress than would ordinarily be warranted by going ahead and expressing these feelings. Again, I'm not saying that it's healthy to go on a rampage and shoot 50 people.

[Sasori_Te]

One more thing. I also don't think that it 's fair to paint everyone with the same brush because a few people go nuts when they get angry. I find this to be the exception rather than the rule. Invariably, some psychologist or psychiatrist will write a book stating something that is their opinion which is supported by their research so that they can make a buck by discovering a new disorder. Sorry I'm starting to rant. I have 2 years worth of psychology classes under my belt. After abnormal psychology I couldn't take it anymore. I packed away my DSM III or IV ( Whatever, I don't remember what it is now ) and haven't looked back since.

[Red J]

One more thing. I also don't think that it 's fair to paint everyone with the same brush because a few people go nuts when they get angry. I find this to be the exception rather than the rule. .

 

I couldn't agree more with this point.

 

I think that this thread has drawn some really good comments.