Anger In The Iliad

The golden mean, the celebrated concept inaugurated by Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics¸ posits, roughly speaking, that any individual trait or emotion when held in excess or deficiency is a vice, but, when possessed in moderation, ought to be considered a virtue. Is there ever an appropriate time to act upon the emotion of anger? Anger can certainly act as a powerful motivation for human accomplishment and heroism, willing an individual to perform feats he otherwise, in a rational or calmer state of mind, would balk from undertaking. Thus, it would appear at first glance that anger, or at least some modicum of it, is a useful human emotion, serving as a sort of valor enhancing stimulant. While perfectly plausible, this prima facie suggestion …show more content…
Only the most cruel and unusual mind could so callously dishonor the body of a man the likes of Hector, and particularly after Hector had explicitly entreated Achilles to treat his body with respect in the case that he dies. What accounts for Achilles’ perversity? No doubt the culprit remains the very anger which assisted Achilles in defeating Hector. Anger has caused Achilles to become depraved to the point where he cannot discern a difference in how one ought to treat an individual in death as opposed to in life. Yet again we bear witness to anger’s capacity to neuter man’s sensitivity as well as his moral-decision making processes. What emerges, then, from an in-depth analysis of anger’s role in motivating human action in the Iliad, conclusively points towards a rejection of anger as a useful or legitimate implement to motivate heroic action. Though capable of inspiring daring and courageous behavior, anger’s tendency to totally consume an individual, robbing him of his rational and moral faculties, militates against its overall worth as a beneficial human emotion. Anger is a bitter pill to swallow, too bitter for even the most sickly of patients—it is best left