This morning, while listening to Econtalk, I encountered interesting back-and-forth discussion on Anger as relates to Paul Bloom's controversial ideas on empathy.

• Some people argue anger is good, e.g. it indicates injustice
• but it makes you blind
• still it may indicate areas that require action
• as long as you don't act out of anger (directly)
• anger has the effect of justifying all sorts of regrettable action and even making you feel virtuous at the moment of lashing out
• you always have a choice of how you respond to anger
• how you choose to respond to anger is part of being an adult

The discussion gets personal and considered for both, host and guest, when they consider anger in regards to parenting.

• When you're disciplining your child... you shouldn't let your anger dictate how you would respond
• Both host and guest never struck their kids
• There are things you can do to your kids which isn't hitting them that is a lot worse: humiliating, belittling, etc.
• It's easy to fool yourself that what you do in anger is "in the kid's best interest"
• Anger and Empathy are poor emotions for a parent to use as a moral guide

Very fascinating discussion. Check it out. http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2017/02/paul_bloom_on_e.html