Martha Nussbaum on Anger (Part Three - Discussion)

Aug 15, 2016, 12:00 PM

Post-interview discussion of more aspects of Martha Nussbaum's Anger and Forgiveness. Is Nussbaum right in saying that payback should not play any part in our justice apparatus? We try to lay out what changes in policy she's pushing for and discuss her self-improvement regimen of limited Stoicism.

Wes thinks contra Martha (but with Aristotle) that ALL anger involves "down-ranking," but that this doesn't have to do just with your public status (what Martha is concerned with in describing some anger as involving this), but with any case where someone is disregarding something you care about, that you've identified as part of your circle of concern, i.e., part of yourself in a way.

Dylan, on the other hand, thinks that anger is better analyzed in the dynamic of the will to power, where you get mad because you're being thwarted in some way.

Mark brings up cases where we get mad at objects like your malfunctioning computer. Are those really just fringe cases where we're anthropomorphizing objects, or contra Martha, is it actually the case the anger does NOT necessarily involve an attribution of blame or desire for retribution? #philosophy #nussbaum #anger #forgiveness #justice #retribution #aristotle #will #power Go to the blog: