-
Expand entry
-
Added by: Clotilde Torregrossa, Contributed by: Corbin CovingtonAbstract: This paper strengthens the theoretical ground of feminist analyses of anger by explaining how the angers of the oppressed are ways of knowing. Relying on insights created through the juxtaposition of Latina feminism and Zen Buddhism, I argue that these angers are special kinds of embodied perceptions that surface when there is a profound lack of fit between a particular bodily orientation and its framing world of sense. As openings to alternative sensibilities, these angers are transformative, liberatory, and deeply epistemological.Comment: This is a stub entry. Please add your comments below to help us expand it
-
Expand entry
-
Added by: John BaldariAbstract:
Synopsis generated from the paper: Sherman asks whether a warrior’s anger can belong to virtue, or whether, as the Stoics hold, it is a runaway emotion that should be eliminated. Drawing on Homers Achilles, Aristotles account of anger as an appraisal that one has been unjustly slighted, and Seneca’s On Anger, she argues that anger has a proper role in military and civic life. Resentment at unjust aggression, and outrage at violations of just conduct in war, can be rational motives, not mere frenzy. Interviews with soldiers, including cases from the Gulf War, Rwanda, and My Lai, show anger tracking real wrongs, and also show how combat rage that cannot be turned off becomes destructive at home. Seneca’s therapies aim to cut anger out of the soul. Sherman argues that this is splitting and dissociation rather than integration. Unrestrained revenge must be restrained, but burying all anger does not vanquish it.
Comment: This text is best used as additional reading in ethics and virtue. This chapter is specifically useful in philosophy of war for discussion of effects of war on combatants.
-
Expand entry
-
Added by: Clotilde Torregrossa, Contributed by: Lizzy VenthamAbstract: This paper argues that anger has an important role in political life. By not recognising this, we risk neglecting groups for whom anger is appropriate, and who have never been allowed to be angry.Comment: This paper is a great conversation starter about the place of anger in political philosophy. It provides original arguments that can go against a lot of students' initial intuitions on the topic, so can be a great way to start discussion and debate. I'd use it on classes on politics, feminism, or applied ethics.