One of the main obstacles to thinking clearly about the morality of anger is that we have two competing intuitions: we think that the effects of anger are often bad, destroying both our relationships and our peace of mind, and that the expression of anger in response to injustice can be good or even required. The tension caused by these competing intuitions has long been noted in Western philosophical works on anger and has led to two distinct approaches to the problem of moral anger, the moderation approach and the elimination approach. Here it is argued that neither approach can fully make sense of the moral contours of anger. A third view on anger is defended, the Tantric view, according to which moral excellence involves a sophisticated facility with complex emotional states. In the presentation of the Tantric view, two tenth-century Buddhist texts are referred to, both by the Indian Buddhist philosopher Dharmaraksita.


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 466-484
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.