Do you see anger as evil?

[scorpia]

Most often I tend to see in some debates mentioning how someone or something might be portrayed as angry and mentoioned so in a negative light. So I would simply like to know; Do you see anger as evil? Yes? No? Why?

Personally I don't think it is evil. It may make people who are angry scary in some manner. But anger is an emotion that people are born with, and there are enough cases when it is more right for people to feel angry rather than anything else.

[Chimp]

I think the obvious aspect to anger is that it can lead to something
that is evil, like violence etc...

Because it is a very powerful emotion it can lead to irrationality, which
leads to all kinds of things. I'm tempted to quote Yoda, but I won't

[ST88]

Do you see anger as evil? Yes? No? Why?

I think the chief reason that anger is seen as evil is because it leads to unpredictable behaviors, usually destructive. I would also say that anger is one of the more reactionary emotions. It is comprised of a sense of justice combined with some kind of shock value. That is, in order for you to get angry, there would have to be an immediate cause. Contrast this with something like discontentment which is more of a chronic condition.

I don't think anger by itself is evil because it is merely the expression of an underlying sense of right and wrong. Good people can get angry as well as bad people. And you can get angry without flying into a frothing rage.

I would think it's useful in an evolutionary sense in that it shows your social unit that you disapprove of something (whatever that may be). If it's an appropriate something, then corrective action can be taken by the group and it survives.

I would like to know, is anger useful in a solitary setting? That is, would anger evolve only in a pack setting, or is there something that happens to the individual that makes it advantageous to get angry. I argue for the social unit hypothesis, but I'd be curious if others can think of a different scenario.

[keltzkroz]

I don't see anger as evil, although some things we might do out of anger might be. I consider anger (perhaps a mother bear defending her cubs) and fear (an antelope running from a lion) as related, both of which are vital for survival.

[atheist_infidel0304]

Most often I tend to see in some debates mentioning how someone or something might be portrayed as angry and mentoioned so in a negative light. So I would simply like to know; Do you see anger as evil? Yes? No? Why?

Personally I don't think it is evil. It may make people who are angry scary in some manner. But anger is an emotion that people are born with, and there are enough cases when it is more right for people to feel angry rather than anything else.

Excellent topic!. I don't see it as "evil," though I do see it as a bad thing in general. It's a by-product of our more primitive past where you had to guard your territory and family from intruders, so in that sense, it did serve a purpose. It also serves a "good" purpose today in that it prods you to be proactive towards those who would take advantage of you otherwise. I guess that I view it as being in a state of mind where your rational thinking is momentarily hijacked in other circumstances. In that way, you accept that you are mad and move on. The Buddhist thinkers have some great remedies for the problem known as anger.

[scorpia]

I would like to know, is anger useful in a solitary setting? That is, would anger evolve only in a pack setting, or is there something that happens to the individual that makes it advantageous to get angry. I argue for the social unit hypothesis, but I'd be curious if others can think of a different scenario.

I'd expect it would be. Of course, a person can get angry at others. But in a solitary setting, there is still oneself to get angry with. As for being advantageous, seeing as the only example I can think of as being angry at oneself, I am unsure, but perhaps it may help to emphasize a flaw a person may notice about themselves which they might try to correct more than someone who feels less about the things they have done.

[1John2_26]

Yes it is evil. The Gospel makes it clear that anger towards anyone is not a Christian ideal.

[scorpia]

concerning gospel; I had thought that although anger does lead to sin, it is not a sin itself

[CJK]

Anger is one letter short of danger, regardless of creed.

[MagusYanam]

I'd like to make a distinction at this point between anger, which in itself accomplishes little but destructive impulses, and indignation, which can be directed in useful ways. Indignation against social inequality, for example, was often the driving motivation of Jesus in resisting the religious authorities of his time.

Wrath (anger in my stipulation) is considered on a Biblical basis to be one of the seven cardinal sins, so I don't see how your position is defensible, scorpia. I know that it is the failing of which I am guilty most often, and indeed the one for which I feel the most guilt after I have calmed down. Trust that I'm speaking from experience when I say that anger can be the greatest barrier to understanding and graciousness I've experienced yet. Indignation (in the cases of Jesus, Rauschenbusch, FDR, Gandhi, Rev. King, Jimmy Carter, et cetera) can be a beginning for understanding and grace.