There is a perfect recipe for never getting angry or annoyed. If we stop caring and become indifferent, we won’t experience irritation when things don’t go our way. The problem with this recipe is that it will also destroy our motivation for achieving success and happiness.
Seneca reflected extensively about the cause of anger and irritation. He viewed those as the root of evil and violence in general. He wrote that, if we steer away from anger and keep a cool head, we will do ourselves a great favour.
In his essay “On Anger,” Seneca characterised anger as a form of mental illness. He was referring to hot, explosive ire. I would not put minor feelings of irritation in the same category.
Seneca condemned all sorts of irrational anger, irrespective of reasons or context. He did not differentiate between the anger felt by a drunken fool or an irrational bully. Irrational is simply irrational.
All his examples though portray evil people, not those who have been wronged. I understand why Seneca concentrated on the former. In his lifetime, he must have witnessed a great deal of injustices, but rarely seen any real chance of remedying them.
Anger is temporary insanity
When Seneca categorises anger as temporary insanity, he could have referred to King Cambyses II of Persia (558-522 BC), who got enraged while he was drunk and killed a boy for no reason.
Similarly, he could have recalled how Alexander the Great (356-323 BC) became extremely angry because he had been criticised by one of his best generals. Alexander reacted by killing the man on the spot, even if the criticism had been sound and well-intended.
I would have used those two cases to illustrate Seneca’s categorisation of temporary insanity, precisely because they do not typify everyday angry reactions.
Seneca maintained the view that anger is irrational and superfluous, and that we should eradicate it completely, but I find his argument weak and unrealistic.
People do feel angry naturally when they are mistreated or abused. Their feelings are not irrational or wasteful. If those individuals did not experience anger, they would not have the moral strength to combat mistreatment and abuse.
Let me start with an example that illustrates Seneca’s views on anger. Imagine that a storm is capsizing a sailing ship in the middle of the ocean. In that context, a mariner should not feel angry about the storm because his anger is not going to help improve the situation.
Indeed, it is irrational to get angry at natural phenomena, but the mariner’s reaction is not far away from the reactions of people who get angry at abuse and mistreatment.
If we deprive individuals of their feelings of outrage, in particular in cases of injustice, we will see the number of victims grow by leaps and bounds.
In his essay “On Anger,” Seneca keeps giving examples of irrational, wasteful anger. He wants to present those cases as archetypes of anger, but they are not.
Most people realise that it is indeed a waste of time to grow angry with small children, who make innocent mistakes out of ignorance, or with people who perform poorly because of their physical or mental impediments.
Seneca is wrong in portraying those cases as the archetypes of anger. If anything, those are examples of wasteful, irrational emotional reactions, but most people know better than that.
Pause before reacting
Not only does Seneca misrepresent the typical situations in which people feel angry, but gives fairly poor advice to prevent disproportionate emotions. “We should make a pause before we react, so that we do not react in a disproportionate manner,” advised Quintus Sextius, a Stoic thinker who had lived two generations before Seneca.
I regard Sextius’ recommendation as impractical because of the difficulty of suppressing one’s feelings by counting to ten, and because some situations call for a strong, quick reaction to prevent further damage.
Seneca had endorsed Sextius’ advice and invoked Socrates (470-399 BC) in his support. Socrates had condemned angry reactions as irrational when he had suffered a minor insult, and opted for ignoring it altogether.
“Forbearance and forgiveness constitute the best reaction,” wrote Seneca in his essay “On Anger.” His recommendation preceded the Christian doctrine on anger by one generation.
The doctrines put forward by Seneca in this respect barely differ from those preached by Paul and the other Apostles. The foundations of Seneca’s advice are not theological, but when it comes to the implementation, they resemble Christianity.
Seneca provides examples that support his statements. For instance, he refers to Homer’s “Iliad” and its central hero, the Greek warrior Achilles, who only returns to battle when his friend Patroclus is killed by the Trojans. Achilles grows angry, returns to the battlefield, and changes the course of the war.
I wonder why Seneca did not mention the Carthaginian general Hannibal (247-183 BC), who had inflicted a massive defeat on Rome at the Battle of Cannae in 216 BC because he had been extremely angry.
In the ensuing weeks, Hannibal let his anger cool down. As a result, he failed to act decisively and finish off his enemies. I am ready to believe that Hannibal would have done better if his anger had not subsided too quickly.
The missing element
Seneca should have emphasised the distinction between rational and irrational anger. On the one hand, he praised Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) for restraining his anger and pardoning his enemies Brutus and Cassius. On the other hand, is it not true that Caesar had made a mistake because those two men ended up assassinating him? Did he not make an irrational decision?
Proportionality is the missing concept in Seneca’s essay “On Anger.” His overall condemnation of anger does not make any distinctions between right and wrong, rational or irrational, proportionate or disproportionate.
I regard his 11th and 12th Letters to Lucilius as complements to the advice, reasoning and conclusions in the essay “On Anger” because those Letters are placing emotional reactions in wider context.
Instead of condemning anger indiscriminately, Seneca gives more importance to self-sufficiency in this Letter. If we possess a strong level of self-sufficiency, we won’t get irritated, angry, or litigious unless the situation rationally calls for it.
Seneca blanket condemnation of all anger as irrational does not leave sufficient margin of action. We do need to reflect and avoid foolish reactions, but this does not mean that we should suppress the human natural desire for justice and peacefulness.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas in all areas of life, I recommend my book “Consistency: The key to permanent stress relief.”
Related articles
What Seneca taught about dealing with failure
The main benefit from reading Seneca today