Heroism

City Journal wonders if you needn't do something heroic to be a hero.

I'm not sure how sympathetic I am to his examples. Nevertheless, it reminds me of a very recent post here: "[M]any a reverent Christian prays fervently for forgiveness for the sins he can't seem to avoid: failing in virtue does not keep him from justification through faith. Striving and failing is acknowledged to be part of the moral life, and even the pathetic sinner may be beloved of God; whereas failing at virtue is vice, and you can't be a virtuous man without in fact exercising the virtues (at least most of the time and to a greater or lesser degree)."

3 comments:

douglas said...

"I'm not sure how sympathetic I am to his examples."

If by that you mean he's too harsh on Rushdie and Giuliani, for example, I think I agree.

I also think that heroism almost *has* to involve a conquering of yourself (your fears) to achieve heroic action, even in the performance of a selfless act. Does there have to be selflessness in the act to qualify? Yes, I think so. Does that mean it has to involve another person directly? Perhaps not- Rushdie's stand for free speech didn't involve helping anyone else directly- but I think that's not to say it wasn't important for a lot of people. Notice how little coverage his attack got- in this day where how much 'free' speech we should have is questioned.

I don't think he's wrong to question how we use the idea of "heroism" today, at all.

I suppose it would have been clearer if he'd used clearer examples.

Anonymous said...

When a police officer is called "hero" on TV because she gave CPR to an infant, or cleared food from the baby's throat so he stopped choking, then yes, we have a problem defining heroism down. However if heroism is sticking with a moral stand even though you know very well it could cause your death, then yes, Rushdie is a hero.

LittleRed1

Joel Leggett said...

Thank you for sharing that article. FWIW, I think the author was spot on regarding Rushdie. While gratuitous, transgressive artistic expressions never justify violence against the artist, neither does such artistic expressions qualify one as a hero.

The term "hero" is so frequently misused that I appreciate efforts to resist the word's continued dilution. My local post office has a sign that proclaims "Heroes work here!" Apparently, being a postal employee qualifies one as a hero.

Heroism requires more than just personal development. The concept either requires real sacrifice that significantly goes above and beyond what is expected of everyone else in service of a greater cause or it's meaningless flattery, nothing more than a self-congratulatory cliché to massage the ego.