Who
is angry if a school trip is cancelled due to a bad weather? Certainly not. If
there are, there would be a few people. What on the earth are supposed to be
angry with? Would it be nature? Would it be the earth? Would it be natural
laws? Would it be a low pressure atmosphere floating above the Japanese Sea?
I have never seen such a person. In terms of
these situations, people might feel sorry, regret, depressed or disappointed.
Would you feel angry with a stray dog if you are bit? If you feel angry with
the dog, it must be extraordinary cases, and you would be angry with the
government that did not prevent people from suffering. It is, however, natural
that people would be angry with a friend if the friend is late or ignored the
promise.
Moreover,
people might be angry if people do not say hello, do not present a gift, do not
consult with them before taking an action, or do not expose an appropriate
attitude.
Why
are people angry? It is because some people did not display an attitude which
is expected or the attitude might not be recognized as a common sense. If I
expect some attitude and it must be naturally occurred, this expectation—as if
often case with it—must be just an unreasonable belief. I think that those
people with angry with their belief must be disrespected because the angry
caused by this mechanism is based on their innocence. Besides, this attitude
reveals their infancy and a deficiency of imagination.
Someone,
however, might argue that angry must be natural under some specific conditions.
There are people who angry with those do not respect a manner. A person might
claim that the problem is that most people do not angry with others’ disrespectful
behaviors and attitudes.
Is
it true? No, blaming and reproving are conceptually different. Blaming is
originated in feeling while reproving is originated in reason. If you are a
normal adult, then feelings caused by such case would be not angry but be disappointing,
disrespect, dislike, sorrow, pity, or disgust. If you are wiser, you might not
be affected by such situations.
On
the one hand, there are cultural norms in the human society, and it is
uncontestable that people must obey those cultural norms. On the other hand,
those cultural norms have been divergent recently and people have been faced
with multi-cultural contexts in every day. Thus, those divergent cultural norms
must be distinguished. Some might adhere to one cultural norm and even believed
that must be respectful, although I think it is in vain.
In summary, those who excessively connected to
one cultural norm must be a person with incompetency to tell cultural
differences and must be too conservative to understand it. Cultural differences
have rapidly been expanded. Thus, angry as such must be originated in an
incompetency with recognizing multiculturalism or those individuals must not
accept that situation.
Anger
and hate from these kind of level are indifferent for me to analyze, although
it might cause homicide. Thus, it could be carefully observed. It was widely
accepted that people might feel angry with someone who killed some family
member of them. Moreover, angry is provoked by the War because an individual
might be suffered vital damage by the War. The angry might cause hate and might
drive people to revenge.
Would
it be justifiable such kind of anger might cause revenge? It is obvious that
the presupposition of this anger holds that the others who triggered anger are
also the same human. Since they are the same human, people cannot pardon them.
If they do not recognize them as the same human, it must be hate not angry.
There might be a theory that can deny angry and reason is predominant to
feeling, although I cannot easily conclude that theory would be correct.
Do
you think that reason must be more significant than feelings? Do you think that
reason must be always significant than feelings? Do you think there is a rule
for an exception? If you believe these statements are true, what are feelings
for people? I believe that feelings are the essence of human. In these days,
rapid decision making are praised, whereas it is also true that the long term
decision making process is also respectful based on philosophical tradition,
particularly, if you must make significant decision. I would argue this issue
later and then go to the next chapter.
No comments:
Post a Comment