Are soldiers 'heroes'

Originally posted by King Castle
" Bruce Lee, Superman, Spiderman, these are not heroes. They do not exist and they do not know you.

your mother, your father your Aunts, uncles your Guardians who raised you who work hard to provide for you keep you save these are heroes.

Doctors, nurses, policemen. ppl who willingly put on a uniform every day knowing they could die doing the right thing. they deserve your respect and admiration not some movie star."

How often do doctors and nurses die doing the right thing?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
How often do doctors and nurses die doing the right thing?

No, a soldier is not a hero simply because of their profession... they have to prove themselves as individuals just like anyone else.

would you apply that to firefighters and doctors as well?

is someone who works the ER not a hero until they perform some incredible life saving surgery, or do we consider them heroic for taking up that occupation in the first place?

I lean to the latter for sure

Originally posted by Free_Speech
I don't mean the allied soldiers of WW2.....I mean the soldiers who fought a war looking for weapons of mass destruction and walk with impunity into Afghanistan and Pakistan etc.

In the U.K. we get told they are heroes all the time. Do you think they are?

Blackwater

i would if they did something heroic..

being in a different profession doesnt disqualify some one of being able to perform a selfless act.

Originally posted by inimalist
would you apply that to firefighters and doctors as well?

is someone who works the ER not a hero until they perform some incredible life saving surgery, or do we consider them heroic for taking up that occupation in the first place?

I lean to the latter for sure

Originally posted by King Kandy
I would apply that to anyone. What if you're drafted into the army to become a soldier? Surely the fact that you were forced into it doesn't qualify you for automatic inclusion into the "hero" category. What if you become a doctor only because you want to make gobs of money? I wouldn't judge someone purely on their achievements, but also their conduct and motivation. Their profession barely enters into it, imo.

I'd agree in terms of the draft, but other than that, what do I care if someone only wants money?

If they still provide a service, like saving lives, why should it matter what their motivation is?

Originally posted by inimalist
I'd agree in terms of the draft, but other than that, what do I care if someone only wants money?

If they still provide a service, like saving lives, why should it matter what their motivation is?

Like you said, they are providing a simple service; It may be a difference in definition here, but I would consider a hero to be someone who goes beyond the call of duty, not simply fulfilling the requirements of their occupation.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Well, I don't see the consistency of your perspective then. If you agree with me about the draft, aren't you implicitly placing a role on motivation in what defines heroism?

its the choice. If we drafted doctors, I wouldnt see it as nearly as commendable of a position.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Like you said, they are providing a simple service; It may be a difference in definition here, but I would consider a hero to be someone who goes beyond the call of duty, not simply fulfilling the requirements of their occupation.

no, it totally is an issue of how we define things

so, what if we paid firefighters 1 000 000 annually, do you think this would reduce how heroic they are because some people might do it for the money?

b/c you can do the right thing for completely differrent reasons some being completely opposite of morality but self interest... nothing heroic about that.

a man who is given a uniform and rifle knowing he is goin to fight and more then likely kill some one who is ill equipped and will likely die protecting his country is not heroic. especially when the odds are overwhelmingly stacked in your favor.

joining the military to protect your home, family country and national/religious identity is one thing.. joining to kill peopl b/c you want to kill some one isnt.

a criminal can be brave and risk his life doing the wrong and illegal or ill moral thing that doesnt make him a hero.

a plastic surgeon who went to school not to save life's but to earn money taking those who can afford them is not heroic or noble.

i use to tell my friends as a joke when we would play hypothetical game when they ask if i would risk my life saving them if they were wounded. i would answer, yes.

i would put you over my shoulder and haul you the hell out of the fire fight. using you as my shield to protect my back as i made a tactical retreat..

kidding aside if he were to live, their is nothing heroic about my motivation for doing the right thing..

its like politicians the public can have an image about you it doesnt mean that is what you are behind close doors

Originally posted by inimalist
If they still provide a service, like saving lives, why should it matter what their motivation is?

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
If this is all it takes to be a "hero", then everyone with a job is one.

how so?

Originally posted by inimalist
its the choice. If we drafted doctors, I wouldnt see it as nearly as commendable of a position.

Originally posted by inimalist
no, it totally is an issue of how we define things

so, what if we paid firefighters 1 000 000 annually, do you think this would reduce how heroic they are because some people might do it for the money?

Originally posted by inimalist
how so?

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Cuz all jobs provide a service in some way. I wouldn't call the patrolling police officer a hero anymore than I would a stockboy at Walmart. But if that patrolman rescued a hostage at gunpoint, or if that stockboy carried people out of a burning building, I'd call them heroes. People putting themselves directly on death's doorstep for the good of others are heroic. That's why I'll always consider firemen to be on (on average) more heroic than a soldier--both for the muddy political background, and the number of occurrences.

Originally posted by inimalist
If they still provide a service, like saving lives, why should it matter what their motivation is?

I probably couldn't give you a solid heuristic about what I do or do not consider heroic, but in what you quoted, the quality of saving the lives of others was something I listed.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Right. Its interesting that we agree on this, but see it from two different angles; for me, the way choice factors in is its impact on motivation. Someone with no choice also does not have a motivation befitting the hero title. For you, it seems, choice itself has a standing in the determination process independent of the aspect of motive.

for sure. now, as far as choice goes, someone who becomes a surgeon of some type, and works in an ER or has a decent practice somewhere, they are much more heroic than, say, someone who dedicates their life to vaginal plastic surgery in rich 40 somethings

Originally posted by King Kandy
I don't think it would reduce how heroic "they" are. I don't view heroism as having anything to do with profession or the group, it is entirely based on the actions of the individual. I would question the heroism of the specific firefighters who DO do it because of the money, but the fact that some people have that motivation doesn't change my respect for those who's motive is more altruistic.

no, I'm with you, someone who does something out of altruism deserves more regard than someone who does it for personal benefit, I just don't see selfishness as entirely negating the "good" of what someone does. I'd say, in a perfect world, it would be the doctors, firemen, teachers, people who do things I consider heroic, that are paid the incredible sums of money, thus drawing more people in through selfishness.

To me though, a lot of it is that initial choice that someone makes. Someone joins the army, that is the heroism right there, they have decided to sacrifice their time and potentially life for mine. I think requiring them to do something beyond that is a little short sighted. The person who fails trying to do something heroic is still a hero.

Originally posted by inimalist
I probably couldn't give you a solid heuristic about what I do or do not consider heroic, but in what you quoted, the quality of saving the lives of others was something I listed.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
I would add that the threat of personal injury or death being a cost of saving another's life is required to be called a hero.

so you don't consider ER doctors to be heroes?

Originally posted by inimalist
so you don't consider ER doctors to be heroes?

Well... unless they know their patient is going to kill them once they're recovered. But that's treading in to House.