|
Objection 1: It would seem that a man's excellence is not the cause
of his being more easily angry. For the Philosopher says (Rhet.
ii, 2) that "some are angry especially when they are grieved, for
instance, the sick, the poor, and those who are disappointed." But
these things seem to pertain to defect. Therefore defect rather than
excellence makes one prone to anger.
Objection 2: Further, the Philosopher says (Rhet. ii, 2)
that "some are very much inclined to be angry when they are despised
for some failing or weakness of the existence of which there are grounds
for suspicion; but if they think they excel in those points, they do
not trouble." But a suspicion of this kind is due to some defect.
Therefore defect rather than excellence is a cause of a man being
angry.
Objection 3: Further, whatever savors of excellence makes a man
agreeable and hopeful. But the Philosopher says (Rhet. ii, 3)
that "men are not angry when they play, make jokes, or take part in a
feast, nor when they are prosperous or successful, nor in moderate
pleasures and well-founded hope." Therefore excellence is not a
cause of anger.
On the contrary, The Philosopher says (Rhet. ii, 9) that
excellence makes men prone to anger.
I answer that, The cause of anger, in the man who is angry, may be
taken in two ways. First in respect of the motive of anger: and thus
excellence is the cause of a man being easily angered. Because the
motive of anger is an unjust slight, as stated above (Article 2).
Now it is evident that the more excellent a man is, the more unjust is
a slight offered him in the matter in which he excels. Consequently
those who excel in any matter, are most of all angry, if they be
slighted in that matter; for instance, a wealthy man in his riches,
or an orator in his eloquence, and so forth.
Secondly, the cause of anger, in the man who is angry, may be
considered on the part of the disposition produced in him by the motive
aforesaid. Now it is evident that nothing moves a man to anger except
a hurt that grieves him: while whatever savors of defect is above all a
cause of grief; since men who suffer from some defect are more easily
hurt. And this is why men who are weak, or subject to some other
defect, are more easily angered, since they are more easily grieved.
This suffices for the Reply to the First Objection.
Reply to Objection 2: If a man be despised in a matter in which he
evidently excels greatly, he does not consider himself the loser
thereby, and therefore is not grieved: and in this respect he is less
angered. But in another respect, in so far as he is more undeservedly
despised, he has more reason for being angry: unless perhaps he thinks
that he is envied or insulted not through contempt but through
ignorance, or some other like cause.
Reply to Objection 3: All these things hinder anger in so far as
they hinder sorrow. But in another respect they are naturally apt to
provoke anger, because they make it more unseemly to insult anyone.
|
|