The DSM is written by pharma (seriously) and you're not advocating anger; you're advocating vaporizing and killing. Anger is not something to be advocated in any case. It's to be felt. Advocating is politicizing. -----Original Message----- >From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >Sent: Jan 3, 2007 11:53 AM >To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: [lit-ideas] Max Boot and Anger > >Ursula: Emotions cause physical changes. Anger corrodes and >long term anger corrodes absolutely. I see it every day in >someone close to me. > > >It could be that we are discussing several different types >of anger. There's the DSM-IV explosive personality type >anger. There's the anger that comes from unaddressed >personal dissatisfaction, which may either be short term or >chronic. Both of these are undoubtedly debilitating. > >Then there's the type of anger I am advocating. Because you >disagree with my politics you don't see it as a positive >thing, but let me translate it into something acceptable, >like "anger at social injustice." > >This last kind of anger is very productive. Consider Teddy >Roosevelt's anger at the conditions of the urban slums, >Margaret Sanger's anger at the reproductive fealty of women, > or Malcolm X's anger at the state of black Americans in >his time. In all three cases, anger was a justifiable >response to social injustice and motivated these individuals >to seek change and effect it. > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------ >To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, >digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html