Someone wrongs us and our first instinct is to assume malice. “They knew what they were doing. They chose to be selfish, rude, and dishonest. They deserve whatever comes next.”

Before reaching for anger, though, why not try reaching for understanding instead?

What did this person think they were doing? What did they believe was the right course of action? What were they mistaking for good?

Marcus ran an empire. He dealt with scheming courtiers, ungrateful generals, and likely every variety of human selfishness we can imagine. He wasn't unaware of how people behave, he simply noticed that most bad behaviour comes from confused thinking, not from evil intent. People chase the wrong things (pleasure, status, or revenge for example) because they've mistaken those things for genuine goods. Their reasoning is faulty. Their character is underdeveloped. And so they trespass.

The Stoic response to this isn't to excuse the behaviour, but to understand its source. When we understand its source, the anger tends to soften on its own. Not because the wrong was acceptable, but because we can see the person behind it more clearly, and they look less like a villain and more like someone struggling with the same confused impressions we all struggle with.

Marcus goes further still, though: he reminds himself that both he and the person who wronged him will, within a short time, be dead. Whatever offence occurred will be forgotten by everyone. This doesn't make it unimportant but it does make rage seem like a questionable use of the time we have left.

Today's suggestion: The next time someone irritates or wrongs you, before reacting, try asking: "What do they think they're doing, and why do they think it's right?"

We don't have to agree with their reasoning, but we should try to see it. If not for any other reason than it can make us less angry people in the long-term.