How do you Define Heroism?

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Hey,


how do you define Heroism. Do you think Someone landing on a grenade to protect his fellow soliders should get a medal of honor? Should someone who gave up his life to protect another family's life be called a hero??

should be intersting debate,your views??

[Ice]

Hey,


how do you define Heroism. Do you think Someone landing on a grenade to protect his fellow soliders should get a medal of honor? Should someone who gave up his life to protect another family's life be called a hero??

should be intersting debate,your views??

Yes and yes.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/heroism

Heroism-
heroic conduct; courageous action: Pat's returning into the burning building was true heroism.



Hero-
1.a man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.

My view of a hero is anyone who does selfless acts that usually require a great deal of danger to help others or the greater good.

[Lemur]

Not to be a spoilsport, but didn't we have a 4- or 5-page thread about just this subject recently?

[Mithrandir]

Yes, and should it end up the same way I'll be as lenient as a brick...again.

[doc_bean]

Yes, and should it end up the same way I'll be as lenient as a brick...again.

My hero !

[Rodion Romanovich]

Well I suppose all agree that if someone does something that is both in accordance to traditional ethical rules, and that has good consequences, he is a hero.

But if someone does something by the rules, following political correctness, but it turns out to have bad consequences - is he a hero? Or if someone does something against the ethical rules, but with good consequences - is he a hero? This makes the hero discussion closely related to the traditional discussion of rule ethics vs consequence ethics. The most interesting questions in that discussion are:
1. if you would kill [insert your most hated dictator here] when he's been in power long enough to prove that he wants some kind of massmurder, you would be guilty of slaying. But it could save millions of people to do it. Would it be correct to do it or not? Most here seem to agree that it would be correct to do it.
2. if killing plenty of persons would result in a better life for the survivors, would it be acceptable to kill those persons? For example "those persons" would typically refer to death penalty victims, or for someone like Lenin/Stalin it could be all anti-communists. Many ideologies which are today deemed as extremely evil have answered yes to this question.
3. is someone who acts against all rules, takes a huge risk, and turns out successful, a hero or a criminal or neutral?
4. is someone who follows the rules but is unlucky and creates horrible consequences a hero, a criminal, or a neutral?
5. should it depend on luck whether you're considered a hero or not, or on what you tried to do?
6. PR or a power position can often make someone take credit for something that was really the work of someone below him in the hierarchy, someone hidden and forgotten.
7. should we really try to be heroes at all? Isn't the desire to become a hero just a desire for power and influence, or sex and admiration from the opposite sex? Shouldn't we instead have it as our aim to achieve moral neutrality, of being neither good nor bad? Because many persons attempting to become heroes end up becoming not heroes but horrible villains.

[Rodion Romanovich]

Since I have no edit button I post my edit here:
insert a 3b too:
3b. someone acts against all rules, but does it in a way where he beforehand made a correct and realistic estimate of the consequences, and doesn't take risks. He turns out successful. Is he a hero or a criminal or a netural?

[Scurvy]

heroism = stupidity, anyone who risks there own life to save others surely isn't thinking too straight at the time - i honestly don't think i ever would, but i still admire them for it, its odd, because i kind of like and dislike heroism at the same time.....

if a brave action saves lives, then it is probably a heroic action, ie, by putting youself in great danger for the benefit of others, its an act of heroism, i would also argue that a failed attempt of the same action is equally heroic... you dont have to be successful to be a hero, but it helps

[Patriarch of Constantinople]

My definition of Heroism:

Someone who makes an act of courage out of good will, even though they didn't have to.

The soldier DIDN'T have to throw himself on a grenade to protect his fellow soldiers, but he did it out of good will, trying to keep his other teammates alive. Thats heroism to me.

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

jumping on one to save prsioners of War is not

I would regard this as more heroic than attempting to save your squad-mates.

[KukriKhan]

My definition of Heroism:

Someone who makes an act of courage out of good will, even though they didn't have to.

The soldier DIDN'T have to throw himself on a grenade to protect his fellow soldiers, but he did it out of good will, trying to keep his other teammates alive. Thats heroism to me.

That nailed it. The "didn't have to,... but did" bit is the essential element, I think. Yelling: "Grenade" to alert other nearby people satisfies the requirement of doing one's duty; even our negative Nova Scotian will admit that, I'm sure. Smothering the boomski with one's own body in a split-second decision, although arguably inefficient, we must assume a charitable motive.

p.s. Since the 1800's, US doctrine has been the 4 S's in handling prisoners in the field: Search, Silence Safeguard, and Speed. GI's are held responsible for the safe transport of prisoners, regardless of their previous combatant status.

[Kanamori]

Heroism means beating some fear that a person feels. People have different fears, therefore it changes from person to person. I don't really think that all people are scared of jumping onto a grenade to save their buddies, and you don't have to call that heroism in order to think highly of the self sacrifice that they made.

[Somebody Else]

They have that phrase... 'above and beyond the call of duty'. If that applies to an action, there's a pretty good chance of it being classed as heroic.

Essentially, heroism is putting oneself in harm's way, in order to accomplish some higher objective. The harm can be physical, or mental...

Now, the 'higher objective' changes in this subjective world we live in - these days, saving the life of another is pretty much the only deed that satisfies, whereas there was once a time when one's honour was sufficient to drive one to such an act. And for some people, another's life is not important, it seems.

[lars573]

Hey,


how do you define Heroism. Do you think Someone landing on a grenade to protect his fellow soliders should get a medal of honor? Should someone who gave up his life to protect another family's life be called a hero??

No and no. IMO you shouldn't reward concious stupidity. Which is what throwing yourself on a grenade falls under.

[Motep]

I am not even going to read this. Its pointless, it has been completely debated to no effect. It will lead itself into another unpleasant arguement. Waste of time.

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

Here comes Lars, to save the day!

It looks as if BHC's fairly obvious motivation for starting this thread has played out.

[Motep]

Here comes Lars, to save the day!

It looks as if BHC's fairly obvious motivation for starting this thread has played out.

Curse you King Warman!!

[Patriarch of Constantinople]

No and no. IMO you shouldn't reward concious stupidity. Which is what throwing yourself on a grenade falls under.

Stupidity maybe, but really, if you survived the grenade and your squad died and you got help later, wouldn't you feel guilty that you let them die? A squad is a group of people who work together as one, teamwork and helping each other out. Thinking about yourself in a time a whole squad will die is just selfish.

[Ice]

Stupidity maybe, but really, if you survived the grenade and your squad died and you got help later, wouldn't you feel guilty that you let them die? A squad is a group of people who work together as one, teamwork and helping each other out. Thinking about yourself in a time a whole squad will die is just selfish.

You'd think so, but I really doubt Lars would. I just hope to God if I ever have to serve/do serve, that I won't have someone like Lars watching my back.

[Banquo's Ghost]

You'd think so, but I really doubt Lars would. I just hope to God if I ever have to serve/do serve, that I won't have someone like Lars watching my back.

You'd be surprised. In combat, many things change.

I'd much prefer to have a guy like Lars around, knowing clearly what he was and wasn't prepared to do. Much better than someone who's all mouth and trousers.

The former will probably do just what he said, and so is a known quantity. One can make decisions based on that honesty. And I have known a couple of men with his viewpoint that when the bullets were flying, excelled expectations in courage.

The latter man may either get you all killed by trying to be a hero or discover that combat is actually quite frightening and do the barest minimum necessary to keep himself alive. The man who swore to you that he'd cover your back might just be high-tailing it.

Until one has been there, it is really quite difficult to know which way you will go. And sometimes, the stress of battle can affect the mind so that the personality one had come to rely on changes. I once saw one of the bravest men I ever knew suddenly give up and sit weeping in the middle of the road. The incident that set this off was pretty minor compared to many we had gone through.

I still consider him one of the bravest men I ever knew - perhaps even more so because of his sudden humanity.

[Scurvy]

You'd be surprised. In combat, many things change.

I'd much prefer to have a guy like Lars around, knowing clearly what he was and wasn't prepared to do. Much better than someone who's all mouth and trousers.

The former will probably do just what he said, and so is a known quantity. One can make decisions based on that honesty. And I have known a couple of men with his viewpoint that when the bullets were flying, excelled expectations in courage.

exactly... (phrased much better than i ever could )

[Ronin]

Stupidity maybe, but really, if you survived the grenade and your squad died and you got help later, wouldn't you feel guilty that you let them die? A squad is a group of people who work together as one, teamwork and helping each other out. Thinking about yourself in a time a whole squad will die is just selfish.

if you survived the grenade and the rest of the squad had not that just means you were lucky and they were not....I would be sad that my team mates had died but I certainly wouldn´t wish I had died in their place.

[Grey_Fox]

A hero is a person who chooses to place himself in danger for the greater good.

[Banquo's Ghost]

A hero is a person who chooses to place himself in danger for the greater good.

With the caveat "as seen by a specific community which feels served by that greater good".

Islamic suicide bombers are seen as heroes by their community, for example.