Why You Should Not Get Angry

[mindatrisk]

Think about this...

When you express anger towards someone then there is the potential to anger them too. When that person is angered then there is the potential for them to anger others too. This might be one other person, say, a colleague or family member, but it could be many people, including colleagues, friends, family and strangers. If each of these people are angered in turn then the potential arises for them to then anger others in their lives, and quite quickly we see that from our initial anger many others can be affected.

In fact, there is no logical end to this branching out from our initial anger. Our seed of anger can branch out and blossom in countless other people all around the world, each in turn branching out to potentially affect many others.

This is a reality. There is no way around it, and there is no way to deny it. Once we have expressed anger then we have no way to know or control how many others will be affected. Nor do we know how people will be affected. For example, we may get angry with someone in traffic who in turn gets angry, they then might go home and vent their anger at their teenage son who is suffering depression from being bullied at school, who then takes an overdose and kills themselves. This is an extreme example, but it is possible, and such examples will be realities in many situations around the world.

If we each knew how many people had been affected by our initial anger and how they had been affected then we would never feel justified in our initial anger. It is only ignorance that allows us to justify our anger, but with understanding then we see clearly that our anger is not an island, and that through our interconnection with all other human beings our anger can and does have the potential to affect many, many other human beings.

 

[estwig]

Listen if anyone else says I'm angry, I can assure you I'm not, but you keep it up and we'll be having serious words!

Alright!!

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

Not entirely true...

On Sunday I took some furniture back to a store that I'd bought from. I was a tad bit annoyed with the fact that in order to get the offending item I had to trail 30 miles all in all - only to be given something that was cracked!

I entered the store, informed the lass at the till what the issue was. Told her I was a bit annoyed with the fact that the day before when I collected the item it had taken the "stores person" 45 minutes to locate it.

She apologised and said and I quote "Don't worry, we'll have you on your way quicker than that".

Half an hour later I'm still waiting, he comes over and tells me there's no beds left! Next minute the Manager's stood next to him telling him that there's a full pallet in the back, they argue - he wanders off a further 25 minutes later I'm still in the shop waiting... Obviously I'm a big pee'd off now and I mention this to the other half... Enter the Manager again with a nice big box of chocolates and an apology for the delay!

So you see... Being annoyed or angry at someone does have it's benefits... it's how you deal with the situation that matters not the emotion part at all.

 

[mindatrisk]

Not entirely true...

On Sunday I took some furniture back to a store that I'd bought from. I was a tad bit annoyed with the fact that in order to get the offending item I had to trail 30 miles all in all - only to be given something that was cracked!

I entered the store, informed the lass at the till what the issue was. Told her I was a bit annoyed with the fact that the day before when I collected the item it had taken the "stores person" 45 minutes to locate it.

She apologised and said and I quote "Don't worry, we'll have you on your way quicker than that".

Half an hour later I'm still waiting, he comes over and tells me there's no beds left! Next minute the Manager's stood next to him telling him that there's a full pallet in the back, they argue - he wanders off a further 25 minutes later I'm still in the shop waiting... Obviously I'm a big pee'd off now and I mention this to the other half... Enter the Manager again with a nice big box of chocolates and an apology for the delay!

So you see... Being annoyed or angry at someone does have it's benefits... it's how you deal with the situation that matters not the emotion part at all.

This is a nice story, and a fine counter-example. The key word, however, is 'potential'. I recognise that anger on occasion can lead to a positive outcome, the problem is that we cannot know or control this. So, in this case it seems to have worked out alright, but in another situation it could have gone very differently.

 

[vvaannmmaann]

"Don't get mad,get even."

Wise words,wise words.

 

Without anger there would be little change in societies.

 

[hmmm]

you are allowed to be angry.
what you do with that anger and how you express it, is another matter.

 

[Beachcomber]

The original premise is flawed and over-simplistic.

Firstly, it assumes that you will pass on anger to all you meet and that each person you pass it on to will be as equally affected as you and continue the cycle. This is unrealistic as it taken no account of other peoples perceptions, attitudes, feelings or reactions but merely assumes an automatic emotional parrot effect.

Secondly - it assumes no-one in the equation has realised that their own emotional reaction to a circumstance has absolutely no bearing on it's outcome, and that it is a matter of personal choice whether you are angered by a situation or not.

An event can only anger you as much as you allow it to.
Your emotional response cannot change the factual reality of a situation. All you can control is how you let that situation affect you.

Understand this and you relieve 95% of stress in your life.

 

[Steve Sellers]

We are all a bunch of apes for heavens sake. Anger is inbuilt. Anger to humans is as natural as swimming is to fish and talking rubbish is to Earl. Earl

 

[mindatrisk]

The original premise is flawed and over-simplistic.

Firstly, it assumes that you will pass on anger to all you meet and that each person you pass it on to will be as equally affected as you and continue the cycle. This is unrealistic as it taken no account of other peoples perceptions, attitudes, feelings or reactions but merely assumes an automatic emotional parrot effect.

Secondly - it assumes no-one in the equation has realised that their own emotional reaction to a circumstance has absolutely no bearing on it's outcome, and that it is a matter of personal choice whether you are angered by a situation or not.

An event can only anger you as much as you allow it to.
Your emotional response cannot change the factual reality of a situation. All you can control is how you let that situation affect you.

Understand this and you relieve 95% of stress in your life.

These are good points, thanks for sharing. However, the key word is 'potential', and the key thing to understand is that we cannot know or control how people will respond to our anger. So, absolutely, not everyone that we express anger to will be angered in response, and not everyone who is angered in response will then anger others, but this is irrelevant, because we cannot know or control who will or won't be angered, nor how many they will affect, nor how they will be affected. The question is, in full awareness of the potential consequences of our anger, is it worth taking the risk?

 

[mindatrisk]

Without anger there would be little change in societies.

I'm not sure that this is true. Certainly anger has provoked changes in our society, but for whatever benefits those changes have brought, we have still been left with our single greatest poison... Anger!

So, maybe anger brought about changes - significant changes, indeed - but we remain a society with anger present and, therefore, we continue to experience all of the significant detriment and damage that anger causes.

The key question is, do we need anger to create changes? And furthermore, does anger benefit the change process or harm the change process? I suggest it harms it, and that greater good can be caused from a calm mind than an angry mind.

 

[mindatrisk]

you are allowed to be angry.
what you do with that anger and how you express it, is another matter.

Indeed, we are all free to be as we wish, my point is what your wishes would be in full awareness and understanding of how your being and acting impacts the world. My suggestion is that if you knew how many people were harmed, and how they were harmed, by your being angry then you would never feel justified in being angry. And it is important that this point is made in relation to being and not just acting, because being tends to lead to acting, and even with the greatest self control, if you are being angry then there is a much better chance of acting angry than there is if you are simply being peaceful. Why take the chance when you can just solve the problem at the root?

 

[mindatrisk]

We are all a bunch of apes for heavens sake. Anger is inbuilt. Anger to humans is as natural as swimming is to fish and talking rubbish is to Earl. Earl

Poor Earl. Maybe the key consideration then is less to do with anger as a concept and more to do with how we understand and express anger? Anger arises when we strongly dislike or disapprove of something, which in and of itself is not a bad thing, but how we understand and relate to that anger and then how we express it. If we experienced our anger as a positive energy to be utilised to effect positive change then anger could be helpful, but because we experience anger as a negative energy that someone or something else is to blame for, we react to it and express it as something unwanted and something to be vented, which can cause serious damage.

 

I'm not sure that this is true. Certainly anger has provoked changes in our society, but for whatever benefits those changes have brought, we have still been left with our single greatest poison... Anger!

So, maybe anger brought about changes - significant changes, indeed - but we remain a society with anger present and, therefore, we continue to experience all of the significant detriment and damage that anger causes.

The key question is, do we need anger to create changes? And furthermore, does anger benefit the change process or harm the change process? I suggest it harms it, and that greater good can be caused from a calm mind than an angry mind.

In such an unequal world there is one hell of a lot for people to be angry about.

And yes anger in all its guises is central to change.

 

[mindatrisk]

In such an unequal world there is one hell of a lot for people to be angry about.

And yes anger in all its guises is central to change.

I don't think there is anything to be angry about. I volunteer with addicts, which helps to bring positive changes into the world, but I didn't begin volunteering because I was angry about addiction. We are perfectly capable of identifying problems in the world and working towards solutions without being angry, and I think we are better able to identify problems and deliver solutions with a peaceful mind.

As for 'anger in all its guises is central to change'... I think Jesus, Buddha and most other spiritual teachers would think otherwise, given that religious and spiritual teachers have been central to the most significant changes in our history.

 

[Root 66 Woodshop]

Utter codswallop! Jebus threw tables about in the market because he was an angry little man... look at what happened there! Didnae do him any good eh!

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

You can't really say "don't get angry". It's like saying "don't get upset" or "be happy all of the time". It's an innate human emotion which we have little conscious control over.

You can adjust your sensitivity towards different scenarios, but that doesn't influence the emotion itself.

How you express it is a different matter of course, but expression is a key part of what makes us human. We need to physically and emotionally express ourselves for our overall wellbeing. One of the most damaging things we can do is bottle up our emotions because we're overly concerned of how they may influence other people. That's just an unnecessary burden on your shoulders which can cause far more stress and worry in your life.

Another key part of it is the logical reason behind anger. If you have a very justified reason to be angry at someone or something, then anger is not a "bad" thing.

 

I don't think there is anything to be angry about. I volunteer with addicts, which helps to bring positive changes into the world, but I didn't begin volunteering because I was angry about addiction. We are perfectly capable of identifying problems in the world and working towards solutions without being angry, and I think we are better able to identify problems and deliver solutions with a peaceful mind.

As for 'anger in all its guises is central to change'... I think Jesus, Buddha and most other spiritual teachers would think otherwise, given that religious and spiritual teachers have been central to the most significant changes in our history.

So do you think discontent with a situation does not involve anger.:|

"Modern psychologists view anger as a primary, natural, and mature emotion experienced by virtually all humans at times, and as something that has functional value for survival."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anger

 

[mindatrisk]

You can't really say "don't get angry". It's like saying "don't get upset" or "be happy all of the time". It's an innate human emotion which we have little conscious control over.

You can adjust your sensitivity towards different scenarios, but that doesn't influence the emotion itself.

How you express it is a different matter of course, but expression is a key part of what makes us human. We need to physically and emotionally express ourselves for our overall wellbeing. One of the most damaging things we can do is bottle up our emotions because we're overly concerned of how they may influence other people. That's just an unnecessary burden on your shoulders which can cause far more stress and worry in your life.

Another key part of it is the logical reason behind anger. If you have a very justified reason to be angry at someone or something, then anger is not a "bad" thing.

True, it is not as simple as saying 'do not get angry', but it is possible to take steps that will reduce our anger and, ultimately, end our anger. This is not as difficult as it might seem, and I know that because I have achieved it!

When I was younger I had a very short temper and got angry a lot, but because I didn't like the consequences of my anger I worked on reducing it, to the point now where the last time I expressed anger was January 2012, and although brief feelings of anger have arisen at certain points since, I have been able to control myself and recognise my thinking to remove the anger.

I have experienced both states - I have lived many years as an angry young man, and I have now lived a fair few years as a very peaceful young-ish man, and without doubt my life has been incredibly enriched through being more peaceful, and I honestly can say that I have not experienced any downside to becoming peaceful, nor can I see how the reintroduction of anger would benefit my life or the life of anyone else. My peaceful mind provides me with endless motivation to help others, and my peaceful mind enables me to help them to a greater degree.

So, it is absolutely possible to have conscious control over your anger, and through understanding - as well as the willingness and openness to practice - you can very easily achieve a state of mind that does not react with anger to situations that you do not like or disagree with. If you are interested (and willing to make an honest attempt to practice) then i'll happily share some ways to reduce anger in your life.

 

[mindatrisk]

So do you think discontent with a situation does not involve anger.:|

Absolutely. If I see an elderly lady struggling with her shopping bags then I am 'discontent' with that situation, i.e. I don't like it and would like to act to change it, but I don't feel any anger about an elderly lady struggling with her shopping bags. That is one simple example. I am sure you can imagine many more.

"Modern psychologists view anger as a primary, natural, and mature emotion experienced by virtually all humans at times, and as something that has functional value for survival."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anger

This is irrelevant. Modern psychologists in the 19th century believed that masturbating women with hysteria would help them. So, I really don't care what the current theory is on anything, I am more concerned with my own reasoning and my own experience. I can think for myself, I can reflect upon and examine my own experiences, and I am more than comfortable having my conclusions contradict those of a modern psychologist. And, who knows, maybe one day it will be my theories held up as the latest theory by the then modern psychologists, and someone else shooting me down. This is how we progress, and i'm certainly not going to let authority stand between me and what is true.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

So, it is absolutely possible to have conscious control over your anger, and through understanding - as well as the willingness and openness to practice -

I disagree. I can guarantee that there will be some situations out there, however extreme they may be, where you would boil over with fury. It's just a natural human response to certain scenarios. In fact, there are certain scenarios where your failure to be angry could be downright offensive or hurtful.

You could avoid these scenarios, but that isn't the same as being able to suppress innate feelings of anger on a whim.

However, as I said before, I'm sure you certainly can tweak your sensitivity to certain types of anger. A lot of it is to do with hormones where anger arises for very little reason, and that is something which can be dealt with and controlled to some degree.

 

Absolutely. If I see an elderly lady struggling with her shopping bags then I am 'discontent' with that situation, i.e. I don't like it and would like to act to change it, but I don't feel any anger about an elderly lady struggling with her shopping bags. That is one simple example. I am sure you can imagine many more.



This is irrelevant. Modern psychologists in the 19th century believed that masturbating women with hysteria would help them. So, I really don't care what the current theory is on anything, I am more concerned with my own reasoning and my own experience. I can think for myself, I can reflect upon and examine my own experiences, and I am more than comfortable having my conclusions contradict those of a modern psychologist. And, who knows, maybe one day it will be my theories held up as the latest theory by the then modern psychologists, and someone else shooting me down. This is how we progress, and i'm certainly not going to let authority stand between me and what is true.

"Anger repression – some people consider that anger is an inappropriate or ‘bad’ emotion, and choose to suppress it. However, bottled anger often turns into depression and anxiety. Some people vent their bottled anger at innocent parties, such as children or pets. "

 

[mindatrisk]

I disagree. I can guarantee that there will be some situations out there, however extreme they may be, where you would boil over with fury. It's just a natural human response to certain scenarios. In fact, there are certain scenarios where your failure to be angry could be downright offensive or hurtful.

You could avoid these scenarios, but that isn't the same as being able to suppress innate feelings of anger on a whim.

However, as I said before, I'm sure you certainly can tweak your sensitivity to certain types of anger. A lot of it is to do with hormones where anger arises for very little reason, and that is something which can be dealt with and controlled to some degree.

I am sure that there are certain situations which would make me angry, but that does not mean that I would be right to angry, and again, the point is, of what benefit would me being angry offer? I'm not concerned whether others would be offended or hurt by my lack of anger, and I certainly don't see that there exists a situation that objectively requires anger, even if the consensus suggested otherwise.

Anger does not need to be suppressed. A peaceful mind (including an absence of anger) arises from understanding, not suppression. A peaceful mind is not anger being controlled, but the absence of anger. I have understanding, which means that I perceive and interpret situations that you may deem worthy of anger as not worthy of anger.

One such understanding is that anger does not benefit the situation that I dislike, but rather is detrimental to it, and as such it makes little sense to dislike a situation whilst at once negating our ability to solve it. This, to me, is common sense, i.e. I do not like a situation, I wish to change / solve it, and so i'd like to be best able to change / solve it. Anger negates my ability to change / solve a situation and therefore is redundant. Simples!

 

[mindatrisk]

"Anger repression – some people consider that anger is an inappropriate or ‘bad’ emotion, and choose to suppress it. However, bottled anger often turns into depression and anxiety. Some people vent their bottled anger at innocent parties, such as children or pets. "

I'm not suggesting that anyone represses their anger, i'm suggesting that they gain understanding so that anger doesn't arise.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

I am sure that there are certain situations which would make me angry, but that does not mean that I would be right to angry,

What if someone seriously hurt a close member of your family? Do you not feel that you would have a right to be angry?

and again, the point is, of what benefit would me being angry offer? I'm not concerned whether others would be offended or hurt by my lack of anger, and I certainly don't see that there exists a situation that objectively requires anger, even if the consensus suggested otherwise.

It's not really the point. The point is that anger is an innate human emotion. A very raw emotion. It doesn't have to have a point. You just have to accept that it IS a part of the natural human psyche and hard wired into our brain as a reaction to certain stimulus.

Anger does not need to be suppressed. A peaceful mind (including an absence of anger) arises from understanding, not suppression. A peaceful mind is not anger being controlled, but the absence of anger. I have understanding, which means that I perceive and interpret situations that you may deem worthy of anger as not worthy of anger.

It does need to be suppressed as it is a natural human emotion. It's hard wired into your brain just as much as happiness is. Do you think you could prevent yourself from feeling happy if you were surrounded by things which make you happy? Could you just turn it off like you somehow turn off your anger?

You may believe that you have some deep understanding of the human mind but your view actually seems quite naive. Expression is a key part of what keeps the mind healthy, and expression can be both positive and negative. No creature on earth, including humans, are permanently positive without anything having an influence on them. If that was the case for someone, then they would simply be emotionally numb, devoid of love and unable to experience a full range of emotion. Once you deeply care about other people, places or things, then you expose yourself to feelings such as pain, hurt and anger when something bad happens to them. It's just normal.

 

[owas]

So what about when..

I can tell my wife is really angry, but she says she not angry, but I know she is angry, so I go on my merry way pretending not to know she is angry, which makes her more angry...

 

I'm not suggesting that anyone represses their anger, i'm suggesting that they gain understanding so that anger doesn't arise.

LOL one might be able to do that to a degree if one had a crystal ball.

But most of us live with the uncertainty of slings and arrows.

Hence if some toe rag nicks me car I will not be amused.

 

[mindatrisk]

Thank you for your well thought out response! It can be rare here.

What if someone seriously hurt a close member of your family? Do you not feel that you would have a right to be angry?

No, I don't feel I would have the right to be angry. I might feel anger, but I wouldn't feel it was right or that I had the right.

It's not really the point. The point is that anger is an innate human emotion. A very raw emotion. It doesn't have to have a point. You just have to accept that it IS a part of the natural human psyche and hard wired into our brain as a reaction to certain stimulus.

For me, given the unknowable and uncontrollable potential consequences that may follow me being angry there would absolutely need to be a good point for getting angry. However, since I do not know and cannot control the potential consequences, and since those consequences can be exceptionally severe, I see no good point / justification in me being angry. And since I have proven to myself that I am able to not get angry in reaction to certain stimulus without any detriment to my life, there is little reason for me to believe that it is innate, natural or hard-wired.

It does need to be suppressed as it is a natural human emotion. It's hard wired into your brain just as much as happiness is. Do you think you could prevent yourself from feeling happy if you were surrounded by things which make you happy? Could you just turn it off like you somehow turn off your anger?

I don't turn off anger. I don't have a little store of anger within me that can be turned on or off. Anger arises from perception, i.e. you perceive that you do not like something and so you allow anger to arise, but what if everything you perceived you liked? There is a saying 'happiness is not getting what you want, but wanting what you get'. What if I simply do not experience things that I do not like, how then could anger arise? What if i've trained my mind to like everything I experience?

You may believe that you have some deep understanding of the human mind but your view actually seems quite naive. Expression is a key part of what keeps the mind healthy, and expression can be both positive and negative. No creature on earth, including humans, are permanently positive without anything having an influence on them. If that was the case for someone, then they would simply be emotionally numb, devoid of love and unable to experience a full range of emotion. Once you deeply care about other people, places or things, then you expose yourself to feelings such as pain, hurt and anger when something bad happens to them. It's just normal.

Quite the opposite. My lack of anger allows me to love much more freely because my mind is at peace, and I don't need anything to be any particular way because my happiness is guaranteed by my mind, not by my circumstances.

Here is a thorough exposition on anger as taught by the Buddha, should you be interested...

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/piyatissa/bl068.html

 

[hmmm]

Indeed, we are all free to be as we wish, my point is what your wishes would be in full awareness and understanding of how your being and acting impacts the world. My suggestion is that if you knew how many people were harmed, and how they were harmed, by your being angry then you would never feel justified in being angry. And it is important that this point is made in relation to being and not just acting, because being tends to lead to acting, and even with the greatest self control, if you are being angry then there is a much better chance of acting angry than there is if you are simply being peaceful. Why take the chance when you can just solve the problem at the root?

why should me being angry harm others?
surely its the anger actions of others that harm others?
my happiness can have the same effect. happiness of some make others angry.
any anger i feel is how i feel.its my actions that matter. to feel anger is not an action

 

[mindatrisk]

why should me being angry harm others?
surely its the anger actions of others that harm others?
my happiness can have the same effect. happiness of some make others angry.
any anger i feel is how i feel.its my actions that matter. to feel anger is not an action

If you are simply feeling anger with no affect on your behaviour then it would not affect others. However, it is likely that there is affect on your behaviour, even if you are unaware of it, and by feeling anger there is a much greater chance of it affecting your behaviour than not feeling anger. As I said earlier, solve the problem at the root (your perception) rather than attempting to control angry feelings.

 

[mindatrisk]

LOL one might be able to do that to a degree if one had a crystal ball.

But most of us live with the uncertainty of slings and arrows.

Hence if some toe rag nicks me car I will not be amused.

Will anger return your car?

You don't need a crystal ball. You already have understanding that prevents certain actions. You know now that if someone steals your car that you are not going to hunt them down and kill them, right? And that is because you do understand that that would be wrong (others wouldn't). You can also have the understanding that reacting with anger would be 'wrong', and therefore not react in anger provoking circumstances.

 

[mindatrisk]

So what about when..

I can tell my wife is really angry, but she says she not angry, but I know she is angry, so I go on my merry way pretending not to know she is angry, which makes her more angry...

What are you asking? What you should do, or what she should do?

 

Will anger return your car?

You don't need a crystal ball. You already have understanding that prevents certain actions. You know now that if someone steals your car that you are not going to hunt them down and kill them, right? And that is because you do understand that that would be wrong (others wouldn't). You can also have the understanding that reacting with anger would be 'wrong', and therefore not react in anger provoking circumstances.

Control freakism is generally caused by inadequate potty training.

As I am 96% animal I am quite happy to go with the flow,trying to control the world is to bigger job for me.

 

[Nuno]

Another strawman thread. Anger is presented as an all in: you are either angry or not angry, there is nothing in between.

In fact anger stretches from mild annoyance to psychobilly-on-the-warpath anger and most people can adjust to suit the circumstances, environment and probable results.

I'd imagine that the people who suffer the most anger, who are targets of the most anger are the placid, I-refuse-to-get-angry sort who are so socially inept they can't tell when they are pissing people of by being boring, time consuming empty vessels. People get bored, then annoyed, then dismissive of them.

It's the will of [insert deity/emotional crutch here].
Irony alert.

 

[mindatrisk]

Control freakism is generally caused by inadequate potty training.

As I am 96% animal I am quite happy to go with the flow,trying to control the world is to bigger job for me.

The aim is not to control the world, but to control your mind. A good analogy is this, if you wish to walk comfortably across the earth then you can either a) carpet the whole planet, or b) put comfortable shoes on... I am advocating that you put shoes on.

 

The aim is not to control the world, but to control your mind. A good analogy is this, if you wish to walk comfortably across the earth then you can either a) carpet the whole planet, or b) put comfortable shoes on... I am advocating that you put shoes on.

Controlling one mind is good,controlling ones emotions is not healthy.:|

 

[trebor8]

Controlling one mind is good,controlling ones emotions is not healthy.:|

where do emotions manifest?

 

where do emotions manifest?

Animal instincts

 

[mindatrisk]

Another strawman thread. Anger is presented as an all in: you are either angry or not angry, there is nothing in between.

In fact anger stretches from mild annoyance to psychobilly-on-the-warpath anger and most people can adjust to suit the circumstances, environment and probable results.

I'd imagine that the people who suffer the most anger, who are targets of the most anger are the placid, I-refuse-to-get-angry sort who are so socially inept they can't tell when they are pissing people of by being boring, time consuming empty vessels. People get bored, then annoyed, then dismissive of them.

It's the will of [insert deity/emotional crutch here].
Irony alert.

That there are varying degrees of anger is irrelevant to the point I made. Whether you are going ballistic or expressing mild annoyance, you cannot know or control how the other will be affected.

 

[mindatrisk]

Controlling one mind is good,controlling ones emotions is not healthy.:|

Controlling one's mind is to control your emotions. If you have a mind that is able to see a potential good in all situations then positive emotions will arise. If you have a mind that sees a negative angle in most situations then negative situations will arise. I am, by and large, able to either see or forecast seeing a positive in every situation and so negative emotions do not arise, simply because I do not see anything negative to prompt negative emotions!

Again, it comes down to understanding. If you understand that you have a mind that is capable of perceiving in any way that you wish, and if you recognise that changing your perception is of benefit to you, then you will understand that nothing in the outside world is anything at all. Everything you experience is an interpretation. So why not interpret it positively if this improves your life?