Anger is Often a False Story of Empowerment
How we substitute doing with feeling
“Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn and cauldron bubble” - Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”
As the witches brew their potion, stirring the pot of their machinations, the nature of magic comes front and center, the idea that with word and intent, one can shape the future outcomes to align with desire. There are many rituals associated with magic, including using various tools like wands and the entrails of animals, but at its core, magic is about the manifestation of one’s supposedly pure desire. That so often our desires are much less pure and far more nuanced than when caught up in the centrifugal force of emotion’s pull provides a neverending source for plot twists in literary and cinema entertainment based on magic.
Regardless of so many examples telling us that the world isn’t as simple as our basic desires tell us, we are as a species particularly good at ignoring the pieces of reality that don’t fit our desired goals. This could be called a form of magic, but psychology is a little more pointed in its declaration of just calling it out as bias, or for those who want to expand their vocabulary, “cognitive heuristics”. Most forms of bias fall under a broad frame of “selection.” Basically, it is impossible for any of us to hold in conscious awareness the sum total of every data point in the world, let alone our immediate surroundings. Therefore, the very thing we call experience is formed out of various selection pressures as consciousness serves the function of providing a coherent hallucination for us to interact with and through.
Yes, you read that correctly: a hallucination. We simply don’t see “the world” as it is if, in fact, such a separation even makes sense to consider. Our perspectives do not create new worlds as they combine things in variable ways within many constraints. You can no more by force of will choose to see the sky as another color than how it is interpreted through the rods and cones of your eyes as then organized by your visual cortex. Another example I often use with clients is that you do not choose your next thought or emotion; they’re simply there. You are not sitting around contemplating from a smorgasbord of options what thought or emotion you will activate next, as even that mental game assumes the very act of not choosing the selection process itself. Thoughts and emotions simply appear in their entirety, and therefore, not only should we not feel any shame over whatever their content may be as we did not, in fact, choose them, but the only form of will we can exert is one of influencing what we may do next.
The greatest act of freedom is one of humility, of learning to question what shows up as our experience; of doubting, even a little, the felt immediacy of judgment that accompanies our thoughts and emotions. Here’s the thing: we’re always wrong. Always. Maybe a little. Maybe a lot. But we’re always wrong. What cognitive heuristics, or bias, does is help us ignore that fundamental fact of our constant assessments and judgments. We forget every iteration of a judgment being false, only to double down on when we were “right,” even though we may only be correct by accident. Gambling is a great example here, where “winning” isn’t so much based on what we do as it is an emotional state facilitated by the game or casino that helps us ignore the, at times, vast amounts of resources, like time and finances, that we just spent on playing and losing.
Engaging in the activity of self-doubt is the polar opposite of what modern society wants us to do. Often, such is even deemed as being mentally unhealthy. While there certainly is a point where doubt for the sake of doubt can lead to stagnation and various forms of destructive behavior, the act of skeptical inquiry is not in itself a bad thing, so long as the practical function is kept in mind. We should not doubt merely to do it but to broaden our awareness, gain greater knowledge of what is possible, and, therefore, enlarge the flexibility of how we react in our lives.
Unfortunately, modern society despises uncertainty and, when it comes to politics, is even morally vilified by the dreaded judgment of being a “flip-flopper.” As much as social influencers talk about narcissism and how to identify it in every behavior your romantic partner does that you disagree with, we’re quite enamored of the righteous, unquestioned fury of leaders we agree with. This is why I consider fundamentalism not just a character-induced flaw of certain religious ideologies but a baseline bias that we all struggle with.
How the Authoritarian Desire is Fueled by a Fundamentalist Psychology
Humanity’s Values is a free and 100% reader-supported publication. To help support the continued delivery of content you enjoy and build the community, please become a subscriber.
That righteous fury is enticing in leadership because it helps us avoid how much of the world doesn’t, in fact, align with our desires. It is also enticing because in our own personal lives, anger often serves the exact same purpose.
In my role as a mental health therapist and consultant, I’ve worked with active duty and veterans of the military for nearly a decade, and often over the last twenty years with those, frequently, but not exclusively male, who struggle with anger. One of the first lessons I work on with clients is acknowledging how anger itself never gets people into trouble. In fact, quite often, nobody even knows that anger exists, as noted in the phrase “slow boil” or “simmering anger.” No, what gets people into trouble is the actions deemed appropriate or assumed inevitable when supported by anger.
Anger, like all emotions, comes with automatic narratives and associated learned behaviors. Such behaviors seem inevitable precisely because they’ve “worked” previously to help bring about a desired outcome (regardless of whether said outcome is ultimately healthy or ethically beneficial). However, precisely because we don’t do a good job of separating emotions from narratives and behavior, it becomes easy to think of anger as an action and, therefore, bringing about certain consequences or effects.
Herein lies the trap of anger, the felt sense that merely by emoting, we have somehow, like stirring a cauldron, magically set the world, or at least our small part of it, on a potentially new path. Talk about intoxicating! Think of it, the power were such to be true. To simply emote and, by emotional fiat, declare the world to be different would indeed be the stuff of legendary, fantastical influence. It is, of course, like all magic, utter and complete bunk. Anger doesn’t matter. Our actions do.
Our anger indicates that something in the world has violated our sense of what is properly an expression of a Value we hold dear. We absolutely should pay attention to such an assessment, but the immediate question that should be asked is: How then will I attempt to change it? Stop, reflect, and consider options. It’s the emotional equivalent of stop-drop-roll that most of us learned in first aid when on fire.
If we don’t stop or pause, we risk engaging in behavior that is ultimately destructive. If we don’t reflect, we risk getting stuck in the emotion itself and deluding ourselves into thinking we’ve actually done something when we haven’t. If we don’t consider options, the ripple effects of our actions may blow back in ways that may start a destructive process over again.
Anger isn’t a substitute for action. If you want your actions to echo through time, use the anger to direct yourself to the expression of a Value. It’s a tool to direct our awareness, not a destination to sit in and think that one has arrived.
