Anger is not always wrong

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@Joseph Maynor definitely disagree.

You can be critical in assessment with discernment only, removing judgement. Judgement typically provokes the ego. 

Criticism tends to trigger anger when it hits at someones identity. 

Criticism can be received when it is not entangled with identity. Or we trust the others intentions IE in a good faith discussion.

I suppose it depends if it touches at identity. Which is why I propose criticism isn't always ego related. 

[Joseph Maynor]

Just now, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@Joseph Maynor definitely disagree.

You can be critical in assessment with discernment only, removing judgement. Judgement typically provokes the ego. 

Criticism tends to trigger anger when it hits at someones identity. 

Criticism can be received when it is not entangled with identity. Or we trust the others intentions IE in a good faith discussion.

I suppose it depends if it touches at identity. Which is why I propose criticism isn't always ego related. 

Are you open to having a conversation about this?  I don't want to insist if it's a touchy subject.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

3 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Are you open to having a conversation about this?  I don't want to insist if it's a touchy subject.

As in, will I engage in good faith? Or course! 

Why else would I discuss this? If someone presents a good argument I will concede a point for sure. That's why I engage.

I am not so entrenched in an epistemic worldview like some here. Who insist, interject and correct incessantly. Clash of epistemic worldviews that ends up in constipated passive aggressive shit.

I can agree to disagree in peace. But I know the context we come from given all the recent forum shenanigans.

Edited 6 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Joseph Maynor]

2 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

As in, will I engage in good faith? Or course! 

Why else would I discuss this? If someone presents a good argument I will concede a point for sure. That's why I engage.

I am not so entrenched in an epistemic worldview like some here. Who insist, interject and correct incessantly. 

I can agree to disagree in peace. But I know the context we come from given all the recent forum shenanigans.

The reason I ask is because emotions are already on shaky ground in spiritual enlightenment discussions.  For me to even say emotions go beyond ego is already going to be unpopular.  So this is an uphill battle for me.  It's not really a battle, but it could easily devolve into one, which I'm trying to avoid.

Edited 3 hours ago by Joseph Maynor

[Natasha Tori Maru]

Just now, Joseph Maynor said:

The reason I ask is because emotions are already on shaky ground in spiritual enlightenment discussions.  For me to even say emotions go beyond ego is already going to be unpopular.  So this is an uphill battle for me.  It's not really a battle, but it could easily devolve into one, which I'm trying to avoid.

You could also look at it as an opportunity to further refine your worldview regarding emotions / feelings. I suppose anger is both. 

Good questions prompt refinement and insight 😃

This forum in general is quite lacerated from emotion / feeling. Much more heady, ungrounded intellectualism here.

[Rishabh R]

@Natasha Tori Maru So separating one's identity from criticism and then adjusting based on the feedback is necessary for improving one's life based on feedback ?

Even though at times criticism tends to be based on misunderstanding and wrong assumptions.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

20 minutes ago, Rishabh R said:

@Natasha Tori Maru So separating one's identity from criticism and then adjusting based on the feedback is necessary for improving one's life based on feedback ?

I find when I am not attached to what is being criticised I do not get angry or react.

Just as an example - I submitted a claim for a lot of electrical work to a client. One of the consultants wrote an email back raising the lack of diligence in detailed costs and breakdowns. There were some hard words about levels of professionalism and diligence in the email. The consultant was having an emotional anger based reaction because the price was their design - so they felt partially responsible for the price. However, to avoid this feeling of shame for designing something of high price, he attempted to shame me by criticizing my work compiling the submission. I did not get angry due to his criticism. It was a poor submission and lacked detail. 

What the consultant did not know, was that I had no time for a detailed price; we had to begin the work asap prior to the ceiling being plastered. So the figures were lump sums simply to gain approval. The submission was not to my standard - but sometimes done is good enough under pressure. 

I gave the fella a call to clarify, and then later provided a detailed breakdown which was accepted.

I was heavily criticised in email with the client, superintended, architect, consultants and qty surveyor. I think most people would feel shame in my shoes, but I did not. Even if I had submitted sloppy work with no excuse. So what? I submitted crap work. I just take responsibility regardless of fault. Just need a solution. 

For me, my work is what I do. It isn't who I am. It doesnt make me more valid. I just ' am '. I perform when I need to under given restraints. I am not attached.

Similar to my thoughts & ideas. They happen, but I am not attached to them. Just ideas. 

The problem is, most people cannot detangle their emotions from their work. Their creation. They are entangled. 

I still experience being triggered at work, but much less so. A lot of deep, deep shame, trauma and emotional / feeling work has gone to get me into this space. Spirituality is beautiful for this process.

I have problems when people treat each other cruelly, or display deep, deep hubris / bigotry.

Edited 5 hours ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Rishabh R]

@Natasha Tori Maru I have been treated badly in the past several times by different people in general but I think that personal development/self-help work has been a large part in my emotional well being. For example - Holding the perspective in mind that in life people come and go no matter how rude or how good they are.

Also , I felt good by seeing the responsibility part of your response. In overcoming adversity radical responsibility instead of blame is extremely useful such as - I am responsible for everything in my experience no matter what the external circumstance.(This last line is not my own word but from a self-help book that I read 3 times from beginning to end).

Edited 5 hours ago by Rishabh R

[No1Here2c]

 

4 hours ago, No1Here2c said:

Anger is as a direct result of ego. Anger would not arise without a self to defend.

In complete selflessness what would there ever be to be upset about?

 

1 hour ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Nobody behaves this way.  

What claims have I made about any individuals behavior?

I am simply pointing out the relative source of anger in conscious experience.

Edited 5 hours ago by No1Here2c

[Joseph Maynor]

The reality is that people express anger in very passive aggressive ways or even aggressive ways.  Once you see this you can't unsee it.  To deny anger is present in your life I think is delusional.  See I'm getting at the crux of the issue here and it's not being seen, which I already anticipated.  I know this drill, I've had this conversation many times before.  There's a desire to deny anger.  I would suggest becoming directly aware of your anger more.  But this is not going to resonate with people who want to pretend they are above anger.  Anger is real in every person.  How they deny their anger or try to conceal it is a different matter,  If you know someone long enough you can forecast their anger.  And your anger too, and my anger.  This is not just about pointing the finger outward.  You have to accept your own anger and not see it as bad necessarily.  Don't try to pretend you have no anger.  This is not going to float well with spiritual people, but I want to stay honest and true and I'm open to discussion.  Tell me where I'm wrong again please.

 

Edited 46 minutes ago by Joseph Maynor

[Mellowmarsh]

Anger often acts as a survival mechanism, a fight or push back against threats perceived as "anger" due to fear or a defensive reaction.

Anger is not wrong or right. It’s a natural programmed response, or knee jerk. It can’t be intentional if it’s completely spontaneous in the moment it arises. 
Anger is just an attribute of sentience, representing a basic "fight, flight, or freeze" response common to humans and many animals. As a component of conscious life, it serves as an adaptive mechanism for survival, reacting to perceived threats, injustice, or obstacles. Nothing wrong about it. If anything it’s completely okay to be angry because it’s simply part and parcel of sentient life’s intelligence. 

It’s just a release of negative energy that’s all, because the body naturally gravitates toward an equilibrium state.

Edited 1 hour ago by Mellowmarsh

[Joseph Maynor]

1 minute ago, Mellowmarsh said:

Anger often acts as a survival mechanism, a fight or push back against threats perceived as "anger" due to fear or a defensive reaction.

Anger is not wrong or right. It’s natural programmed response, or knee jerk. It can’t be intentional if it’s completely spontaneous in the moment it arises. 
Anger is just an attribute of sentience, representing a basic "fight, flight, or freeze" response common to humans and many animals. As a component of conscious life, it serves as an adaptive mechanism for survival, reacting to perceived threats, injustice, or obstacles. Nothing wrong about it. If anything it’s completely okay to be angry because it’s simply part and parcel of sentient life’s intelligence. 

It’s just a release of negative energy that’s all, because the body naturally gravitates toward an equilibrium state.

This is the standard line, you articulated it well.  

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@Joseph Maynor in the recent line of enquiry I don't think anyone is denying anger in their experience. Well at least, I do not. Anger happens in everyone's experience. I think it is part of being human.

This topic is very tied in to our individual affect and temparements in general. 

As a side point, most people aren't even able to distinguish anger from a whole host of other feelings/emotions that run parallel or can feel very similar.

Edited 1 hour ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[Joseph Maynor]

12 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

@Joseph Maynor in the recent line of enquiry I don't think anyone is denying anger in their experience. Well at least, I do not. Anger happens in everyone's experience. I think it is part of being human.

This topic is very tied in to our individual affect and temparements in general. 

As a side point, most people aren't even able to distinguish anger from a whole host of other feelings/emotions that run parallel or can feel very similar.

I don't feel like I want to argue about this anymore.  

[Natasha Tori Maru]

15 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I don't feel like I want to argue about this anymore.  

No worries. I didn't even realise there was disagreement. 

 

[Joseph Maynor]

14 minutes ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

No worries. I didn't even realise there was disagreement. 

 

You said you definitely disagree with me and now you're denying disagreement.  I don't want to start a conflict here but this is what I'm referring to when I mention denying anger.  Minimizing conflict while engaging in it.  I get it, it's important to get along.  I'm all for that, but nobody does that 100%.

[Joseph Maynor]

5 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

You could also look at it as an opportunity to further refine your worldview regarding emotions / feelings. I suppose anger is both. 

Good questions prompt refinement and insight 😃

This forum in general is quite lacerated from emotion / feeling. Much more heady, ungrounded intellectualism here.

In what way is my worldview regarding emotions / feelings unrefined?

[Natasha Tori Maru]

8 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

You said you definitely disagree with me and now you're denying disagreement.  I don't want to start a conflict here but this is what I'm referring to when I mention denying anger.  Minimizing conflict while engaging in it.  I get it, it's important to get along.  I'm all for that, but nobody does that 100%.

Oh right, got it. I just couldn't see where you argued a clear case that anger was arising outside of ego. I felt like that conversation went by the wayside and didn't even get started.

I'm certainly not minimising conflict. I don't mind conflict.

[Natasha Tori Maru]

3 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

In what way is my worldview regarding emotions / feelings unrefined?

Okay this is why you are quite charged. Read what I wrote again - at no point did I say it was unrefined. More that we can always refine our views. Not you per se. All of us. The conversation is an opportunity for me to refine my thoughts also !

I didn't say it was unrefined - you assumed.

Edited 39 minutes ago by Natasha Tori Maru

[JoshB]