Originally posted by inimalist
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 inimalist
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.
I really see no heroism in being a soldier, at all. They may be sacrificing their lives, but they're just as likely going to be sacrificing the lives of others, who really have no stake in whether you are well off or not. If they do something really beyond the call of duty, then they meet a prerequisite for heroism (in fact, that's what the whole "medal of honor" system is designed to recognize). I would be doubtful of the heroism of someone who kills civilians. Not to mention, there is the aspect of choice; while soldiers are no longer drafted, there is a definite socio-economic impact that "forces" many people into the army.
Its important to note that that isn't the only prerequisite for me, though. Intention plays an important role as well.
Yeah, I think a hero is someone doing something heroic when it is not a usual circumstance.
It would be heroic for a doctor to enter a burning building, pull out a burn victim, and offer first aid.
It would be heroic for a soldier to return to the line of fire to save 3 fallen comrades after the order to "withdraw" had been given...but he would have to save 2 lives in order for that to be heroic or else that is just dumb/disobeying orders.
There was also that one dude from Canada that took over an entire town, by himself, took out the local Gestapo HQ, freed people, etc. Forgot that dude's name but that wasn't all he did. That guy is probably one of the most badass dudes ever to live.
Originally posted by King Kandy
What would you think of someone, for instance, conscripted to be an army surgeon in WWI?
so, if they are conscripted, but ended up spending the War in Britain tending to those injured on the front or doing physical exams for new recruits, ok, I'm with you, not that heroic.
Someone who is in the trenches, dealing with the gangreen that is eating people's feet while they are fighting, and all that other stuff that makes trech warfare so appealing, sure. I'm totally down with calling that person a hero, regardless of whether they want to be there or not.
Are they as heroic as someone who gave up a lucrative practice, volintarily, to help on the front, no.
Originally posted by King Kandy
Do you think that choice/motive or action is more important for determining heroism?
I can't say I've thought about it much before this instant... I can see it depending hugely on context. Though, in the end, I think it boils down to action, though, to me, the act of becomming a soldier or doctor is the heroic action, not necessarily the idea of going "above and beyond" the normal call of duty.
for instance, while I think scientists are respectable and needed, I don't see them as heroic, even if they do research on deadly diseases or whatever. The scientists that cure aids? sure, heroes.
I don't know that I could explain that in terms of logic though, maybe it isn't consistent, but this is a totally subjective evaluation of things, so 😛
Originally posted by King Kandy
This is where we part ways, then. I don't believe that there is a profession that is more "heroic" than any other profession, because I see heroism as a quality of going beyond what was required in your station in life; that is, someone who is "exceedingly" good can qualify as a hero. I don't view the life saving of doctors as meeting this qualification, because they are simply fulfilling the duty of their job. If they really go beyond what is called of them and solve cases that would be given up as impossible, then they may be considered as heroes.I really see no heroism in being a soldier, at all. They may be sacrificing their lives, but they're just as likely going to be sacrificing the lives of others, who really have no stake in whether you are well off or not. If they do something really beyond the call of duty, then they meet a prerequisite for heroism (in fact, that's what the whole "medal of honor" system is designed to recognize). I would be doubtful of the heroism of someone who kills civilians. Not to mention, there is the aspect of choice; while soldiers are no longer drafted, there is a definite socio-economic impact that "forces" many people into the army.
Its important to note that that isn't the only prerequisite for me, though. Intention plays an important role as well.
huh
obviously there is no right or wrong answer here, I suppose I just have a more, inclusive?, definition of hero. people can do things, above and beyond, to make them more heroic, or at least, more worth our praise.
For instance, I certainly don't think every soldier deserves a medal just for being a soldier. Though, I do think, just by the nature of them deciding to put themselves in the position they do, they are acting heroic.
there is the socio-economic aspect, and if you want to do a case-by-case analysis of each soldier, sure, not everyone one of them would be a "hero" in my eyes, but the OP seems more about the concept of "soldier" in general, which to me, is a heroic occupation.
Originally posted by Mindship
Anyone who risks his/her life to save or fight for others is a hero.
🙂 preach on brotha man
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
I just can not agree, man. I really don't see how some red neck who joins the army because he wants to "shoot up some sand ******* and get some pussy on the side" is "heroic" for doing so.
well, yes, and if you showed me an example of that individual, sure, they are less heroic than the concept of "soldier" that the OP is asking about.
I personally don't think all soldiers are like that. Our army, for instance, is lacking on the redneck front from what I've seen.
Originally posted by RE: Blaxicanb/c guys like Bush redefined what it is to be a hero:
I just can not agree, man. I really don't see how some red neck who joins the army because he wants to "shoot up some sand ******* and get some pussy on the side" is "heroic" for doing so.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_CsNAB1sCKNg/SkQkGSueW7I/AAAAAAAAExo/gM9-igldTMU/s400/Bush+Hero.jpg
not a hero:
http://www.buildingself-esteem.com/images/gandi.jpg
Without going into the morality of the war itself and even considering that soldiers make no decisions and are just given orders, I don't think serving in the military and following orders is enough to make anyone a hero, though they might behave heroically in the service and thus become actual heroes.
The few who refused orders to fight a war they thought was immoral while knowing they'd get get thrown in jail on the other hand, I'd call those ones heroes
Originally posted by inimalistSo then you do agree that it's the motivation behind an act that defines wither a person is heroic or not, not the act itself.
well, yes, and if you showed me an example of that individual, sure, they are less heroic than the concept of "soldier" that the OP is asking about.I personally don't think all soldiers are like that. Our army, for instance, is lacking on the redneck front from what I've seen.
As long as we're on the same page, here.
Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
So then you do agree that it's the motivation behind an act that defines wither a person is heroic or not, not the act itself.As long as we're on the same page, here.
sort of, I think its more of an opt out thing, in that, I would consider a soldier a hero until I found out something terrible about them
Originally posted by RE: BlaxicanIn this instance I would agree, which is why I avoided specific references in my comment. It's like the police officer who sodomizes someone in custody with a broomstick. These are morons in hero's clothing.
I just can not agree, man. I really don't see how some red neck who joins the army because he wants to "shoot up some sand ******* and get some pussy on the side" is "heroic" for doing so.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVX-cUJGdxs
(skip the first minute)
