Skip to main content

Anger; Right or Wrong? // Jackson Riddle

I somewhat enjoyed this week's readings; it was interesting to read how an ancient Greek scholar viewed aspects of character and virtue. I found it particularly interesting how Aristotle considered the virtue of anger, specifically his belief that anger, in moderation, is cause for praise. "The man who is angry at the right things and with the right people, and, further, as he ought, when he ought, and as long as he ought, is praised" (Aristotle, Book 4 Chapter 5). Anger tends to have a negative connotation, given that it usually leads to violence. Aristotle takes an interesting stance on anger, one that I see as somewhat controversial. "Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you." (Ephesians 4:31-32) As Christians anger is something we try to avoid; we strive to live a lifestyle of loving one another, just as Christ loved us. I personally believe that Aristotle's perspective of controlled anger is not all that skewed. Anger, righteous anger, anger with reasonable cause, is not wrong; parents are angry when their children lie, but it is a response that teaches the child that what they did was wrong. 

In essence, While I believe that we ought to live as much as Christ as we can, I agree with Aristotle's perspective that fair, controlled anger (not the kind that leads to violence,) is ok. Now I turn the question to you; what do you think?

I commented on Clabo and Logan's posts.

Comments

  1. I also thought that Aristotle's view on anger was very interesting. I had to think for a while on the idea of righteous anger, but it does somewhat make sense. Anger is just as much an emotional response as things like sadness and happiness, and can be used beneficially just like the two previously mentioned.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lovers of Wisdom, Not Power—Lily Caswell

In Book VIII of Plato’s Republic, Socrates talks about the possibility of having a well-governed city. However, he also talks about how that particular form of government is impossible to have. A well-governed city becomes a possibility only if you can discover a better way of life for your future rulers than holding office.” (Plato, p 215) Maybe his version of a better life was for those in office to not be lovers of power, since it would then become a fight among rival lovers. Socrates gets to the point that the only rulers who don’t love power are true philosophers. Philosophers are lovers of wisdom and knowledge and not power, ergo they are the perfect rulers. Absolute power corrupts and power corrupts absolutely, so I’m thinking that maybe the trick to being a good ruler is for you to be a philosophical person who loves wisdom and not power. I commented on Jamie’s and Isabelle’s posts.

How to Make a Clone - Clabo

I found books three and four to be very cringy. I mean, to me the idea of structurally producing good soldiers/guardians through heavy censorship is somewhat inhumane. I feel as if human beings should be allowed to experience every bit of knowledge they can at some point in their lives. To me, it seems as if the guardians are being guarded against information throughout their entire lives so they can solely fulfill the duties they were birthed into.  However, the influence and importance Plato places on poetry and music do make me wonder what it would be like if we had the same values as our military today. What if the United States military invested in the souls of its soldiers and placed within them emotional and intellectual values outside of what they have learned previously. Perhaps the military instills values and principles within soldiers to fulfill the same purpose as the guardians would in Plato's Republic and that is to only be that which the government wants you to be....

Dystopian Origins Uncovered ////// Isabelle Ferguson

  I think that ideas eventually run out of originality and circle back to the original idea. During this week's reading, many of Socrates’ suggestions for a place of perfection reminded me of some novels I’ve read depicting dystopian worlds. Disclaimer: There are spoilers ahead. You have been warned.        To begin, in  The  Giver  by Lois Lowry censorship is a major theme. The novel is centered around a boy who is receiving memories withheld from the population! The government in The Giver is especially careful to censor the memories that may cause strife, anger, fear, sadness, etc. In the adults, this society is cemented. So, the government is especially strict with the youth. Socrates talks about verses to “obliterate” to prevent the descriptions from doing “harm to our future warriors” for the better half of Book III (Plato, page 44). The warriors he speaks of are the youth. He goes on to list the multitude of verses that should be done ...