Hostility: Difference between revisions
m Reverted edits by 110.23.227.144 (talk) (HG) (3.4.6) |
|||
| (28 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Form of emotionally charged angry behavior}} |
|||
{{Redirect|Hostile}} |
{{Redirect|Hostile}} |
||
{{multiple issues| |
|||
{{Unreferenced|date=February 2007}} |
|||
{{Original research|date=September 2007}} |
|||
}} |
|||
{{Infobox medical condition (new) |
{{Infobox medical condition (new) |
||
| name = Hostility |
| name = Hostility |
||
| synonyms = |
| synonyms = |
||
| image = Anger during a protest by David Shankbone.jpg |
| image = Anger during a protest by David Shankbone.jpg |
||
| caption = Two people in a heated argument in New York City |
| caption = Two people in a heated argument in [[New York City]] |
||
| pronounce = |
| pronounce = |
||
| field = [[Psychiatry]] |
| field = [[Psychiatry]] |
||
| Line 26: | Line 23: | ||
| frequency = |
| frequency = |
||
| deaths = |
| deaths = |
||
}}{{Emotions}} |
|||
}} |
|||
'''Hostility''' is seen as form of emotionally charged [[aggressive]] behavior. In everyday speech it is more commonly used as a [[synonym]] for [[anger]] and [[aggression]]. |
'''Hostility''' is seen as a form of emotionally charged [[aggressive]] behavior. In everyday speech, it is more commonly used as a [[synonym]] for [[anger]] and [[aggression]]. |
||
It appears in several psychological theories. For instance it is a [[Facet (psychology)|facet]] of [[neuroticism]] in the [[Revised NEO Personality Inventory|NEO PI]], and forms part of [[personal construct psychology]], developed by [[George Kelly (psychologist)|George Kelly]]. |
It appears in several psychological theories. For instance it is a [[Facet (psychology)|facet]] of [[neuroticism]] in the [[Revised NEO Personality Inventory|NEO PI]], and forms part of [[personal construct psychology]], developed by [[George Kelly (psychologist)|George Kelly]]. |
||
==Hostility/hospitality== |
|||
For hunter gatherers, every stranger from outside the small tribal group was a potential source of hostility.<ref>J Diamond, ''The World Until Yesterday'' (Penguin 2013) p. 50 and p. 290</ref> Similarly, in archaic Greece, every community was in a state of hostility, latent or overt, with every other community - something only gradually tempered by the rights and duties of hospitality.<ref>M I Finley, ''The World of Odysseus'' (Pelican 1967) p. 113-4 and p. 116-7</ref> |
|||
Tensions between the two poles of hostility and hospitality remain a potent force in the 21st century world.<ref>K Thorpe ed., ''Hospitality and Hostility in the Multilingual Global Village'' (2014) p. 2-7</ref> |
|||
==Us/them== |
|||
[[Robert Sapolsky]] argues that the tendency to form in-groups and out-groups of Us and Them, and to direct hostility at the latter, is inherent in humans.<ref>R Sapolsky, ''Behave'' (London 2018) Ch 11 384-424</ref> He also explores the possibility raised by [[Samuel Bowles (economist)|Samuel Bowles]] that intra-group hostility is reduced when greater hostility is directed at Thems,<ref>R Sapolsky, ''Behave'' (London 2018) p. 45</ref> something exploited by insecure leaders when they mobilise external conflicts so as to reduce in-group hostility towards themselves.<ref>E Smith, ''Social Psychology'' (Hove 2007) p. 493</ref> |
|||
==Non-verbal indicators== |
|||
Automatic mental functioning suggests that among universal human indicators of hostility are the grinding or gnashing of teeth, the clenching and shaking of fists, and grimacing.<ref>D Maclean, ''The Triune Brain in Evolution'' (London 1990) p. 460</ref> [[Desmond Morris]] would add stamping and thumping.<ref>D Morris, ''The Naked Ape Trilogy'' (London 1988) p. 109</ref> |
|||
The [[Haka]] represents a ritualised set of such non-verbal signs of hostility.<ref>R Sapolsky, ''Behave'' (London 2018) p. 17</ref> |
|||
==Kelly's model== |
==Kelly's model== |
||
In psychological terms, [[George Kelly (psychologist)|George Kelly]] considered hostility as the attempt to extort validating evidence to confirm types of social prediction, [[Social constructionism|constructs]], that have failed. |
In psychological terms, [[George Kelly (psychologist)|George Kelly]] considered hostility as the attempt to extort validating evidence from the environment to confirm types of social prediction, [[Social constructionism|constructs]], that have failed.<ref>D Lester, ''Theories of Personality'' (1995) p. 52</ref> Instead of reconstructing their constructs to meet disconfirmations with better predictions, the hostile person attempts to force or coerce the world to fit their view, even if this is a forlorn hope, and even if it entails emotional expenditure and/or harm to self or others.<ref>D Lester, ''Theories of Personality'' (1995) p. 52-4</ref> |
||
In this sense hostility is a form of psychological [[extortion]] - an attempt to force reality to produce the desired feedback, even by [[acting out]] in [[bullying]] by individuals and groups in various social contexts, in order that preconceptions become ever more widely validated. |
In this sense hostility is a form of psychological [[extortion]] - an attempt to force reality to produce the desired feedback,<ref>G Claxton, ''Live and Learn'' (Bristol 1984) p. 132 and p. 250</ref> even by [[acting out]] in [[bullying]] by individuals and groups in various social contexts, in order that preconceptions become ever more widely validated. Kelly's theory of cognitive hostility thus forms a parallel to [[Leon Festinger]]'s view that there is an inherent impulse to reduce [[cognitive dissonance]].<ref>D Lester, ''Theories of Personality'' (1995) p. 76</ref> |
||
While challenging reality can be a useful part of life, and [[Persistence (psychology)|persistence]] in the face of failure can be a valuable trait (for instance in invention or discovery {{citation needed|date=October 2012}}), in the case of hostility it is argued that evidence is not being accurately assessed |
While challenging reality can be a useful part of life, and [[Persistence (psychology)|persistence]] in the face of failure can be a valuable trait (for instance in invention or discovery {{citation needed|date=October 2012}}), in the case of hostility it is argued that evidence is not being accurately assessed but rather forced into a [[Procrustes|Procrustean]] mould in order to maintain one's belief systems and avoid having one's identity challenged.<ref>D Lester, ''Theories of Personality'' (1995) p. 52-3</ref> Instead it is claimed that hostility shows evidence of [[Thought suppression|suppression]] or [[denial]], and is "deleted" from awareness - unfavorable evidence which might suggest that a prior belief is flawed is to various degrees ignored and willfully avoided.<ref>G Claxton, ''Live and Learn'' (Bristol 1984) p. 14 and p. 19</ref> |
||
==See also== |
==See also== |
||
*[[Antisocial personality disorder]] |
*[[Antisocial personality disorder]] |
||
*[[Death drive]] |
|||
*[[Narcissism of small differences]] |
|||
*[[Righteous indignation]] |
*[[Righteous indignation]] |
||
*[[Cook–Medley hostility scale]] |
|||
==References== |
==References== |
||
| Line 46: | Line 59: | ||
== External links == |
== External links == |
||
*{{Wikiquote-inline}} |
|||
*{{Wiktionary-inline}} |
|||
{{Medical resources |
{{Medical resources |
||
| DiseasesDB = |
| DiseasesDB = |
||
| Line 59: | Line 74: | ||
{{Emotion-footer}} |
{{Emotion-footer}} |
||
{{Cognition, perception, emotional state and behaviour symptoms and signs}} |
{{Cognition, perception, emotional state and behaviour symptoms and signs}} |
||
{{Authority control}} |
|||
[[Category:Emotions]] |
[[Category:Emotions]] |
||
[[Category:Rage]] |
[[Category:Rage (emotion)]] |
||
Latest revision as of 17:51, 15 May 2024
| Hostility | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Two people in a heated argument in New York City | |
| Specialty | Psychiatry |
| Part of a series on |
| Emotions |
|---|
  |
Hostility is seen as a form of emotionally charged aggressive behavior. In everyday speech, it is more commonly used as a synonym for anger and aggression.
It appears in several psychological theories. For instance it is a facet of neuroticism in the NEO PI, and forms part of personal construct psychology, developed by George Kelly.
Hostility/hospitality
[edit]For hunter gatherers, every stranger from outside the small tribal group was a potential source of hostility.[1] Similarly, in archaic Greece, every community was in a state of hostility, latent or overt, with every other community - something only gradually tempered by the rights and duties of hospitality.[2]
Tensions between the two poles of hostility and hospitality remain a potent force in the 21st century world.[3]
Us/them
[edit]Robert Sapolsky argues that the tendency to form in-groups and out-groups of Us and Them, and to direct hostility at the latter, is inherent in humans.[4] He also explores the possibility raised by Samuel Bowles that intra-group hostility is reduced when greater hostility is directed at Thems,[5] something exploited by insecure leaders when they mobilise external conflicts so as to reduce in-group hostility towards themselves.[6]
Non-verbal indicators
[edit]Automatic mental functioning suggests that among universal human indicators of hostility are the grinding or gnashing of teeth, the clenching and shaking of fists, and grimacing.[7] Desmond Morris would add stamping and thumping.[8]
The Haka represents a ritualised set of such non-verbal signs of hostility.[9]
Kelly's model
[edit]In psychological terms, George Kelly considered hostility as the attempt to extort validating evidence from the environment to confirm types of social prediction, constructs, that have failed.[10] Instead of reconstructing their constructs to meet disconfirmations with better predictions, the hostile person attempts to force or coerce the world to fit their view, even if this is a forlorn hope, and even if it entails emotional expenditure and/or harm to self or others.[11]
In this sense hostility is a form of psychological extortion - an attempt to force reality to produce the desired feedback,[12] even by acting out in bullying by individuals and groups in various social contexts, in order that preconceptions become ever more widely validated. Kelly's theory of cognitive hostility thus forms a parallel to Leon Festinger's view that there is an inherent impulse to reduce cognitive dissonance.[13]
While challenging reality can be a useful part of life, and persistence in the face of failure can be a valuable trait (for instance in invention or discovery [citation needed]), in the case of hostility it is argued that evidence is not being accurately assessed but rather forced into a Procrustean mould in order to maintain one's belief systems and avoid having one's identity challenged.[14] Instead it is claimed that hostility shows evidence of suppression or denial, and is "deleted" from awareness - unfavorable evidence which might suggest that a prior belief is flawed is to various degrees ignored and willfully avoided.[15]
See also
[edit]- Antisocial personality disorder
- Death drive
- Narcissism of small differences
- Righteous indignation
- Cook–Medley hostility scale
References
[edit]- ^ J Diamond, The World Until Yesterday (Penguin 2013) p. 50 and p. 290
- ^ M I Finley, The World of Odysseus (Pelican 1967) p. 113-4 and p. 116-7
- ^ K Thorpe ed., Hospitality and Hostility in the Multilingual Global Village (2014) p. 2-7
- ^ R Sapolsky, Behave (London 2018) Ch 11 384-424
- ^ R Sapolsky, Behave (London 2018) p. 45
- ^ E Smith, Social Psychology (Hove 2007) p. 493
- ^ D Maclean, The Triune Brain in Evolution (London 1990) p. 460
- ^ D Morris, The Naked Ape Trilogy (London 1988) p. 109
- ^ R Sapolsky, Behave (London 2018) p. 17
- ^ D Lester, Theories of Personality (1995) p. 52
- ^ D Lester, Theories of Personality (1995) p. 52-4
- ^ G Claxton, Live and Learn (Bristol 1984) p. 132 and p. 250
- ^ D Lester, Theories of Personality (1995) p. 76
- ^ D Lester, Theories of Personality (1995) p. 52-3
- ^ G Claxton, Live and Learn (Bristol 1984) p. 14 and p. 19
