"Anger evolved as a way to get someone else to treat you as important. That is Sell’s theory. Not sure I buy it. Does anger achieve that objective?"
I think anger can do an effective job if done in groups rather than between individuals. Directing anger at someone, with an audience present, based on my experience in all three roles, can r…
"Anger evolved as a way to get someone else to treat you as important. That is Sell’s theory. Not sure I buy it. Does anger achieve that objective?"
I think anger can do an effective job if done in groups rather than between individuals. Directing anger at someone, with an audience present, based on my experience in all three roles, can raise status.
1) Dishing out anger usually shows up with an argument from authority. If you're an authority, anger can burnish that authority. Status-backed righteous anger is effective at keeping people in line.
2) If you're in the crowd, the authority's anger may seem harsh, but most people quietly roll with the poor behaviour if the angry person already has some status. They may sympathize with the recipient but are very unlikely to react boldly at the time.
3) If you're the recipient of the anger and the crowd doesn't back you up, you'll often just roll over. You might seethe, but unless you're articulate or have equivalent status (in that moment) to back up your anger a counter reaction will fail.
Anger - from stern tone to sound and fury - isn't well defined. (Though Callard has done a good job on it.) Outside WEIRD societies status coupled with anger is starkly effective.
"Anger evolved as a way to get someone else to treat you as important. That is Sell’s theory. Not sure I buy it. Does anger achieve that objective?"
I think anger can do an effective job if done in groups rather than between individuals. Directing anger at someone, with an audience present, based on my experience in all three roles, can raise status.
1) Dishing out anger usually shows up with an argument from authority. If you're an authority, anger can burnish that authority. Status-backed righteous anger is effective at keeping people in line.
2) If you're in the crowd, the authority's anger may seem harsh, but most people quietly roll with the poor behaviour if the angry person already has some status. They may sympathize with the recipient but are very unlikely to react boldly at the time.
3) If you're the recipient of the anger and the crowd doesn't back you up, you'll often just roll over. You might seethe, but unless you're articulate or have equivalent status (in that moment) to back up your anger a counter reaction will fail.
Anger - from stern tone to sound and fury - isn't well defined. (Though Callard has done a good job on it.) Outside WEIRD societies status coupled with anger is starkly effective.