My intuitive answer would be yes, but now I am realizing that for me sadness or fear is probably much closer to anger than for you. In my mind they all are “feel bad, be unhappy and express it too”.
I suppose if we define anger in a very granular and precise way and not just as a general bad feeling, “being mad at” but more like, giving a long rant, it can only apply to humans because I will swear to the rain but only briefly, to let steam out, I will not give a long angry rant to it. I will be “mad at it”, but not angry in that social sense that is clear.
Halfway conceded: anger in the very granular sense only applies to humans.
But. Can you think of a counter-example where 1) humans violate our expectations 2) but it is no a social rule or cohesion violation, and do we get angry or not?
This is very tricky, because our expectations are, of course, based on social rules! Usually. Now I am searching for a case when not.
Can you think of a counter-example where 1) humans violate our expectations 2) but it is no a social rule or cohesion violation, and do we get angry or not?
I already did give such an example—a short story with a “twist” ending. Such an ending violates our expectations (that’s what makes it a “twist”) but it doesn’t break any social rule, so people often find these amusing, clever, etc. On the other hand, a “twist” ending in a context where there is a social rule against such endings might well make people angry—for example, if the recent movie Exodus: Gods and Kings had ended with the Israelites being drowned in the Red Sea and the Pharoah triumphant, that would no doubt have upset many viewers.
Hmmm… most social rules generally want people to behave in a predictable ways, for various reasons, so they avoid surprises. It seems almost like surprises are only allowed in special cases…
I almost accept your point now, but one objection. A good and a weak soccer teams play a match. Surprisingly, the weaker one wins. It was fair play. Nobody violated a rule. Still the fans of the losing one are angry—at their own team, because how could they let a much weaker team win. Is that a social rule violation that if you are generally better you are never allowed to lose? Or just an expectation violation? Is it more of a bias on the side of fans: their team must have violated to rule to try hard and not be lazy, because they cannot imagine any other explanation?
If you generally agree, I accept your point with a modification: anger is about perceived social rule violation: but people are not perfect judges of social rule violations, there are mistakes made both ways, and tententious, bias-driven mistakes.
Thus, as in my soccer example, sometimes all you see at first is a violated expectation. You see no rule violation. Then you need to figure out why exactly may other people think it is a rule violation. This is not always easy and we don’t do it that often, and thus often we just see a violated expectation, and not see how others perceive it as a rule-violation.
I just want to say I am glad to have lost this debate, because it is working. For me. I mean, yesterday I was able to manage my anger better by asking myself questions like “what social rule I think is broken here? Is that a real one or just my wish? If real, a reasonable one?” even when the answer was yes/yes just being conscious of it worked.
I think I will shamelessly steal and apply this idea in discussions where it can be useful. Thanks a lot.
My intuitive answer would be yes, but now I am realizing that for me sadness or fear is probably much closer to anger than for you. In my mind they all are “feel bad, be unhappy and express it too”.
I suppose if we define anger in a very granular and precise way and not just as a general bad feeling, “being mad at” but more like, giving a long rant, it can only apply to humans because I will swear to the rain but only briefly, to let steam out, I will not give a long angry rant to it. I will be “mad at it”, but not angry in that social sense that is clear.
Halfway conceded: anger in the very granular sense only applies to humans.
But. Can you think of a counter-example where 1) humans violate our expectations 2) but it is no a social rule or cohesion violation, and do we get angry or not?
This is very tricky, because our expectations are, of course, based on social rules! Usually. Now I am searching for a case when not.
I already did give such an example—a short story with a “twist” ending. Such an ending violates our expectations (that’s what makes it a “twist”) but it doesn’t break any social rule, so people often find these amusing, clever, etc. On the other hand, a “twist” ending in a context where there is a social rule against such endings might well make people angry—for example, if the recent movie Exodus: Gods and Kings had ended with the Israelites being drowned in the Red Sea and the Pharoah triumphant, that would no doubt have upset many viewers.
Hmmm… most social rules generally want people to behave in a predictable ways, for various reasons, so they avoid surprises. It seems almost like surprises are only allowed in special cases…
I almost accept your point now, but one objection. A good and a weak soccer teams play a match. Surprisingly, the weaker one wins. It was fair play. Nobody violated a rule. Still the fans of the losing one are angry—at their own team, because how could they let a much weaker team win. Is that a social rule violation that if you are generally better you are never allowed to lose? Or just an expectation violation? Is it more of a bias on the side of fans: their team must have violated to rule to try hard and not be lazy, because they cannot imagine any other explanation?
If you generally agree, I accept your point with a modification: anger is about perceived social rule violation: but people are not perfect judges of social rule violations, there are mistakes made both ways, and tententious, bias-driven mistakes.
Thus, as in my soccer example, sometimes all you see at first is a violated expectation. You see no rule violation. Then you need to figure out why exactly may other people think it is a rule violation. This is not always easy and we don’t do it that often, and thus often we just see a violated expectation, and not see how others perceive it as a rule-violation.
I just want to say I am glad to have lost this debate, because it is working. For me. I mean, yesterday I was able to manage my anger better by asking myself questions like “what social rule I think is broken here? Is that a real one or just my wish? If real, a reasonable one?” even when the answer was yes/yes just being conscious of it worked.
I think I will shamelessly steal and apply this idea in discussions where it can be useful. Thanks a lot.