I’ve been looking for writing on grumpiness, which is slightly different than anger. There’s very little out there specifically on grumpiness, though much writing on mood, mindfulness and awareness can be applied.
Anger Management
11–20 of 35 posts
Re: Anger Management
#12I’ve been looking for writing on grumpiness, which is slightly different than anger. There’s very little out there specifically on grumpiness, though much writing on mood, mindfulness and awareness can be applied.
Personally I've found that grumpiness is usually a symptom. Either a physical imbalance (lack of sleep or food, for example) or a mental one (stress, unaddressed frustrations, etc)
Re: Anger Management
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Buddhism anger is viewed as a poison. Over the years I am agreeing with this more and more. It seems lately it has become very fashionable to constantly being "outraged", "angry" or similar. Sometimes anger can motivate people to change things but usually it causes a lot of friction and prevents finding solutions to problems. Anger can also easily be exploited by political leaders.
I've seen the phrase "Anger is a good servant but a terrible master" used to encapsulate some of this. The idea being that if you control it but get energy from it then it can be used positively, but if you become angry and lose control then that will lead to bad things. I don't know if this can be squared with the Buddhist view however. Is seeing it as poison meant to say it's bad in all measures, or is there an app…
This is definitely not the Buddhist view, which, clumsily reduced, is that you want to root out the cause of the anger, which is not actually external to you. (i.e. Your buddy doing something didn't make you angry; you chose at some level to get angry when your buddy did something.)
There is no exception for "good anger" or "motivating anger".
At least, I'm pretty sure that applies to all strains of Buddhism, but there are many, so YMMV.
Re: Anger Management
#14> A few weeks ago, I was mailing my friend a gift for his upcoming birthday when I recalled that he got me nothing for my birthday. I experienced a flash of anger, and was tempted to trash the package instead of mailing it. This speaks more to the author’s selfishness (more accurately childishness) rather than anger. The need to be completely reciprocated in every gesture is selfish and speaks to a zero-sum mindset.…
The author did not flied ofd the handle and was not childish.
The author experiences emotion which the author recognized, controlled, analyzed where it came from. The emotion itself helped the to realize long term pattern of behavior of the other person and think about it more and decide what to do about it.
So it was both useful emotion and author succesfully controlled reaction to it. What is also good is that author does not pretend the emotion did not existed and is not trying to pretend that everything was pure logic whole time.
Re: Anger Management
#15> A few weeks ago, I was mailing my friend a gift for his upcoming birthday when I recalled that he got me nothing for my birthday. I experienced a flash of anger, and was tempted to trash the package instead of mailing it. This speaks more to the author’s selfishness (more accurately childishness) rather than anger. The need to be completely reciprocated in every gesture is selfish and speaks to a zero-sum mindset.…
> This speaks more to the author’s selfishness (more accurately childishness) rather than anger.
I think it speaks more to a lack of organizational skills. Have a single, low-impact moment of indignation on your birthday, then plan accordingly. :)
Re: Anger Management
#16Meta: typo in title, "Mangement" is missing an 'a'.
Many thanks, kind and helpful mods.
Re: Anger Management
#17> A few weeks ago, I was mailing my friend a gift for his upcoming birthday when I recalled that he got me nothing for my birthday. I experienced a flash of anger, and was tempted to trash the package instead of mailing it. This speaks more to the author’s selfishness (more accurately childishness) rather than anger. The need to be completely reciprocated in every gesture is selfish and speaks to a zero-sum mindset.…
I disagree. There's nothing childish about "a flash of anger" - most people have many small impulses and feelings. I'd bet many people might make a small joke about the situation - but the joke depends on precisely that small unhappiness, even if they won't admit it (or can't, because they're not aware of it). "A flash of anger" (in the author's words) is very different from "fly[ing] off the handle" (in your words).…
I'm thinking deeply on your comment, and appreciate it.
Aren't these just degrees of the same? I'm not sure the value of cultivating positive view of the small manifestation, but then scolding it when it becomes big. Imho, yes it's understandable, but not a perspective we should value as part of our growth -- we should just work to will it out of our minds, and maybe someday succeed?
Yours seems like a perspective that's valorizing the control of the impulse, putting fault in "lack of control", but still aspiring to salvage a wisdom compass from the feeling...? Many would say the core feeling doesn't truly serve us in any way that something more positive couldn't equally stand in for.
Regardless, I appreciate your sharing your perspective. I'm willing to consider we're both right, and mumble mumble "different strokes for different folks", and the world works out only when we can both push for it as we please :)
Re: Anger Management
#18I made a couple of reads to try to parse out what was going on... and I just ended up confused. I think the following quote best shows the frame of reference I eventually came to.
> Consider the conflict between the person whose sense of justice makes it impossible for her to give up on her anger, and the person whose sense of justice makes it impossible for her to become angry.
There is a lot of discussion, but I don’t really see the author come to any useful, supported conclusion. The ending comment about people being nicer to each other seemingly comes out of no where.
I’m not sure what to make of it. Maybe I’m expecting an informative article when there isn’t one, or I’ve grossly missed some stated point or necessary context.
Re: Anger Management
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. There's nothing childish about "a flash of anger" - most people have many small impulses and feelings. I'd bet many people might make a small joke about the situation - but the joke depends on precisely that small unhappiness, even if they won't admit it (or can't, because they're not aware of it). "A flash of anger" (in the author's words) is very different from "fly[ing] off the handle" (in your words).…
I'm thinking deeply on your comment, and appreciate it. Aren't these just degrees of the same? I'm not sure the value of cultivating positive view of the small manifestation, but then scolding it when it becomes big. Imho, yes it's understandable, but not a perspective we should value as part of our growth -- we should just work to will it out of our minds, and maybe someday succeed? Yours seems like a perspective th…
Not your parent poster, but I view the initial emotional reaction to an event as "an emotion that is to be observed, cannot be prevented, but must only reach the surface if the situation calls for it."
Say you are talking in a small group of people. You perceive something that someone says to you as an implied insult. You _will_ feel a flash of anger, you should observe that you are angry as it bubbles up through you, but you MUST choose (a) whether or not they meant it as an insult , (b) whether or not to let it show on your face and (c) if you are going to call it out gently, call it out with a "Hey!", or turn into a pillar of rage in public (unwise, of course, but an option).
But in that moment, when you feel that initial impulse of emotion, I assert (without evidence) that the emotion cannot be suppressed -- only your outward appearance can be modulated.
Re: Anger Management
#20I made a couple of reads to try to parse out what was going on... and I just ended up confused. I think the following quote best shows the frame of reference I eventually came to. > Consider the conflict between the person whose sense of justice makes it impossible for her to give up on her anger, and the person whose sense of justice makes it impossible for her to become angry. There is a lot of discussion, but I do…
Funny. I found this able to put words on something I've struggled with. I found it pretty profound in its observation
In my reading: This author is acknowledging that they're "not nice" in small personal interactions, but is feeling others are "not nice" in large structural interactions with groups and systems. And they're lamenting that others commonly praise a "water under the bridge" thinking about small person-to-person things that this author struggles with, whereas the author's choice to view larger forces that way is scolded as deserving more anger.
Does that interpretation ring with you? (I'm not saying I agree with that interpretation btw, but it's a new thought for me.)