I think there might be a couple of things going on here: 1. Slightly differing definitions of what constitutes 'angry', and 2. Dramatically varying subjective experiences of anger.

For example, in the case of #1, I usually separate 'frustration' from 'anger', but I could see someone else bundling them together. They share a lot of physiological effects, but I generally think of anger as a more focused and directed feeling. I could be frustrated while failing to debug something, but not meaningfully angry, because the bug is not an agent with malicious intent (or other common target of anger).

And for #2, I've known people who get mad and have an extremely hard time controlling it. Someone or something slights them, it ruins their mood, and then sustains. And they're aware of it the whole time, wishing they weren't mad, because they hate feeling that way. But they're still mad.

In comparison, I seem to be lucky. I have gotten genuinely mad before, but exceedingly rarely- maybe a few times in my entire life, and only then mostly in response to years of sustained bad behavior, and only when I was much younger. I wasn't trying to be a paragon of stoicism, I just don't get angry very often by default.

Stack a little bit of effort on top of a baseline like that, and it's pretty easy to go beyond merely not acting on anger to smoothing away even the subjective experience of it. Maybe a short and mild response, here and there, but it almost always immediately fades.

I strongly doubt I'm the most placid person in the world, so there are probably people out there who are even less angry by default. I bet others have put more effort into controlling their anger, too. It seems likely that "eradication" of anger is within the realm of possible for some.

I guess it depends on what you mean by “fundamental”. Anger is typically considered a secondary emotion, stemming from primary emotions. While I’m not sure it is possible to get rid of anger as OP suggests, it may not be outside the realm of possibility to create thought patterns that lead your primary emotions to secondary emotions other than anger.

I find this a little bit more plausible, but still don’t believe it. I don’t think we’re in control of what we feel to the degree that we can redirect our thoughts and entirely or mostly prevent certain feelings. I do believe you can construct defenses that hide your anger from yourself, like GP perhaps has or Buddhist monks, but I believe the anger is still there under the surface.

I think you were stuck on the literality of "eradicate" here a bit. If you think anger can be managed, kept from the surface, have defenses constructed against it and the like, is that not more or less an informal meaning of "eradicate" what compared to how society casually sees anger?

There's value in specificity but I think you jumped pretty quickly to "delusional" in response when as you've seen you both share a decent deal of middle ground. The questions that arise to me from reading this exchange:

1. At what point is anger "practically" removed from someone?

2. What methods can achieve that? Which are healthy to the longterm mental state of a human being?

Personally, my greatest tool against anger is understanding + my belief in determinism. You can't be angry with a person for something they did not choose, and understanding how it happened leads to a larger issue or trend that you can then decide if it is worth spending time correcting or not. That understanding transforms anger into macro frustration, which I find is less harmful to others and I can constructively process into problem solving, which I find to be pretty healthy.

Did I literally eradicate my anger? Not even close. Does anyone see or experience anger as we practically recognize it? Nope! So in terms of the actual world we live in, I very much did remove anger from my actions.

My larger point here being that you have to bring practical readings to the table, even in the comments section of a philosophy piece :)

It’s not so much about conscious control as it is reconditioning your reaction(s) to different stimuli. It’s essentially the premise of cognitive behavioral therapy, which is that your thoughts, lead to feelings, and feelings lead to behaviors. Successful therapy usually includes reworking of thought patterns via neuroplasticity.

I do agree with you though, that for me personally, I could try to get rid of angry reactions until the day I die and I know I will never be successful. I have settled upon finding better outlets for my anger and conditioning reactions that are less destructive than, say, lashing out at someone.

Yea I’m with you there. I think the problem of anger is finding healthy strategies for coping with it. I think feeling anger is inevitable and natural, it’s the actions you take to manage it that are worth being mindful about.

> I don’t think we’re in control of what we feel to the degree that we can redirect our thoughts and entirely or mostly prevent certain feelings

Not everyone is like you.

If I want an emotion I have to cultivate it, otherwise I'll get no emotions. People don't like that, so I've learned to fake emotions, but that doesn't mean I actually feel them.

For example I never bother actually cultivating real anger. But sometimes anger is useful so I'll act like I'm angry. But it's just an act, there is no actual anger there.

When I actually (and rarely) get an actual emotion I'll examine it like it's a stranger "wow that's so cool how it's making me feel, that's such a strange thing to experience".

If it helps: My "I", and my "mind" are two different things. And sometimes my "I" watches my "mind" and wonders "why did it do that?".

Well, you are entitled to your own opinions.

I see another person in this thread already who must be as self-deluded as I am! Perhaps there are more.

I believe Buddhist monks are rarely angry. That's where I would start.

I think most Buddhists would say they still get angry but it doesn't consume them. That's one of the takeaways of Buddhism with respect to all emotions, as well as every thought that arises in consciousness.

These things happen to you, but you don't identify with them, you merely recognize them as feelings and thoughts. The result is the glide path from that emotion or thought to homeostasis (where you were prior to the occurence) is much faster than it would be otherwise.

Yes, I don't think Buddhist monks claim that they are robots. What matter is your reaction to your emotions.

I believe that anger is a signal. But anger can be really dangerous and addictive. However, it does have a place in the human experience, but you should learn to listen to your anger when it really matters.

I believe a Buddhist monk who believes they have abandoned anger is self deceived. And surely my criticism of you made you angry, at least a little bit, somewhere deep down.

And what’s wrong with being angry anyways? The world is shit, there’s a lot that’s worth being angry about. When someone insults you, get angry! When someone bullies your kid, get angry. When hitler marched on France, get angry.

There is a blanket of guilt about anger on the internet, and I find it childish.