4 ms·

This is why humanity invented the Hero. We recognize that irrational selflessness can be extremely beneficial for society. The more heroes we have, the less cor

by mola 7y ago

This is why humanity invented the Hero. We recognize that irrational selflessness can be extremely beneficial for society. The more heroes we have, the less corrupt the system, the stakes of corruption would be lower and the price of heroism should decrease, thus society at large and these selfless heros will probably benefit together.

mola 7y ago
So we could call this guy stupid, or hail him as a hero. In which society would you like you and your children to live in, the one where heroes are acknowledged or the one they are dismissed as dumb and irrational? Mind you, calling someone a hero cost you next to nothing in utility so I think the choice is a no brainier.
- thomasll 7y ago
  I'm getting flashbacks to numerous "Vulcans Vs Humans" debates I had with friends in my halcyon days...
  - mola 7y ago
    Vulcans are not real, we have no proof such a society could survive.
- magduf 7y ago
  >In which society would you like you and your children to live in, the one where heroes are acknowledged or the one they are dismissed as dumb and irrational? I would like to live in the former, but you have to face reality: we do not live in such a society, we live in one where heroes like him will only be murdered, and no one will really care as it'll be forgotten quickly.
  - GVIrish 7y ago
    Sergei Magnitsky brought light to Russia corruption and paid with his life. But because of his sacrifice, the United States, UK, Canada, and others implemented the Magnitsky Act which allows for the sanctioning of individuals involved in human rights abuses. It shuts the sanctioned individuals out of banking systems and prevents their entry to the country with a ratified Magnitsky Act. More and more countries are implementing their own version of this law. People who expose corruption don't always live to see the day their efforts make a difference. But the bad guys don't always win either.
- Fnoord 7y ago
  > Mind you, calling someone a hero cost you next to nothing in utility so I think the choice is a no brainier. People who express their homosexuality in Russia face repercussions. Someone who opposes racism such as black face in The Netherlands gets repercussions. Someone who leaks a video of war crimes faces repercussions. Expressing your support for these people likely has repercussions as well. They might not be opaque, but think about something as being put on a list (hello Tor Tails) or being bullied as two examples of repercussions. I mean, murder is just one. There's one thing worse than murdering me, btw. Murdering my offspring, my child. In North Korea they got that one covered. Your whole family will suffer if/when you (attempted to) fled/flee. In our more civilized societies the repercussions are (much) less severe, but I don't believe there are none.
  - mola 7y ago
    I was assuming OP is not from Russia where stakes of corruption are higher and the price for heroism is death.
    - chmod775 7y ago
      If there wasn't a risk of a high price to be paid by the heroic individual, it wouldn't be very heroic. Also a friendly reminder that, for instance, Edward Snowden is hiding in Russia of all places from a possible death penalty. Capital punishment for an ultimataly selfless act, motivated by his moral code and love for a country that very much would like to see him gone for good.
adrr 7y ago
There is significant and maybe a majority of people who have flexible morality. CA-50 re-elected a congressmen who was under indicted for corruption and theft of campaign funds. A CIA whistleblower is in hiding and career military officer in under protection for reporting or testifying about corruption at the white house. Hero only exists if a significant majority of society has capability to distinguish right from wrong. Otherwise it will get rolled up into partisan politics and tribalism.
- vorpalhex 7y ago
  > Hero only exists if a significant majority of society has capability to distinguish right from wrong Galileo comes to mind as someone persecuted during their time but later considered a hero. There's no shortage of other examples.
- shdhdjwidjrhe 7y ago
  >CIA whistleblower So we're giving the benefit of the doubt to members of the most notoriously cut throat agency in the American government now?
friendlybus 7y ago
Heroes are characterized by extreme competence at something. Some people dedicate that to doing good because they believe it to be valuable for it's own sake. Selflessness just gets you walked over. Being good is both an individual positive for the hero and a collective gain for the people.
- ekhjarta 7y ago
  Being a hero does not require extreme competence. It requires courage to stand up for what you believe even at great personal risk or cost and a moral compass pointed in the right direction.
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  I think the main attribute of a hero is courage.
  - friendlybus 7y ago
    It is part of it too, but the courageous hero without competence ends up dead. Roman legionaries used to joke heroes are the people they kill. The minimizing of vulnerability in an extreme situation combined with ability to overcome it and the courage to do so defines a heroic struggle. The caregiver is the foil, the maximizing of vulnerability around others and the social integration of such is the classic back and forth. A scene in a A Bridge Too Far (ww2) shows an implementation of it. A soldier has a near-dead friend in his arms that he knows is alive, he dodged live rounds to keep his friend from a group of Germans in a forest clearing. He arrives at a MASH style base camp and seeks treatment from a doctor. The doctor is overworked and prejudges the friend to be dead, indicating that he should be left with the row of dead soldiers he was unable to save. The soldier demands treatment and when it is repeatedly rejected he pulls a gun on the doctor, threatening to kill him. The doctor eventually relents, treats the friend finding him alive. The soldier puts away his gun and capitulates to the punishment incoming to him for breaking the rules, the doctor reports him to the MP and manufactures a slap-on-the-wrist for the soldier. The doctor after having been exposed to near death and allowed the soldier to remain apart of the social system asks him "would you have shot me?". The soldier pauses and silently salutes. That story would never have happened if it were not for the hero's ability to survive in a hostile environment and achieve his goal of returning alive with his friend, courage or not. The friend would never have lived if the doctor had not risked being vulnerable to having another death on his hands because of an arrogant soldier. They both gave that friend a chance at creating something of enduring value from successful missions in the future and an everyday life for the friend himself.

by mola 7y ago

mola 7y ago

So we could call this guy stupid, or hail him as a hero. In which society would you like you and your children to live in, the one where heroes are acknowledged or the one they are dismissed as dumb and irrational? Mind you, calling someone a hero cost you next to nothing in utility so I think the choice is a no brainier.

thomasll 7y ago
I'm getting flashbacks to numerous "Vulcans Vs Humans" debates I had with friends in my halcyon days...
- mola 7y ago
  Vulcans are not real, we have no proof such a society could survive.
magduf 7y ago
>In which society would you like you and your children to live in, the one where heroes are acknowledged or the one they are dismissed as dumb and irrational? I would like to live in the former, but you have to face reality: we do not live in such a society, we live in one where heroes like him will only be murdered, and no one will really care as it'll be forgotten quickly.
- GVIrish 7y ago
  Sergei Magnitsky brought light to Russia corruption and paid with his life. But because of his sacrifice, the United States, UK, Canada, and others implemented the Magnitsky Act which allows for the sanctioning of individuals involved in human rights abuses. It shuts the sanctioned individuals out of banking systems and prevents their entry to the country with a ratified Magnitsky Act. More and more countries are implementing their own version of this law. People who expose corruption don't always live to see the day their efforts make a difference. But the bad guys don't always win either.
Fnoord 7y ago
> Mind you, calling someone a hero cost you next to nothing in utility so I think the choice is a no brainier. People who express their homosexuality in Russia face repercussions. Someone who opposes racism such as black face in The Netherlands gets repercussions. Someone who leaks a video of war crimes faces repercussions. Expressing your support for these people likely has repercussions as well. They might not be opaque, but think about something as being put on a list (hello Tor Tails) or being bullied as two examples of repercussions. I mean, murder is just one. There's one thing worse than murdering me, btw. Murdering my offspring, my child. In North Korea they got that one covered. Your whole family will suffer if/when you (attempted to) fled/flee. In our more civilized societies the repercussions are (much) less severe, but I don't believe there are none.
- mola 7y ago
  I was assuming OP is not from Russia where stakes of corruption are higher and the price for heroism is death.
  - chmod775 7y ago
    If there wasn't a risk of a high price to be paid by the heroic individual, it wouldn't be very heroic. Also a friendly reminder that, for instance, Edward Snowden is hiding in Russia of all places from a possible death penalty. Capital punishment for an ultimataly selfless act, motivated by his moral code and love for a country that very much would like to see him gone for good.

adrr 7y ago

There is significant and maybe a majority of people who have flexible morality. CA-50 re-elected a congressmen who was under indicted for corruption and theft of campaign funds. A CIA whistleblower is in hiding and career military officer in under protection for reporting or testifying about corruption at the white house. Hero only exists if a significant majority of society has capability to distinguish right from wrong. Otherwise it will get rolled up into partisan politics and tribalism.

vorpalhex 7y ago
> Hero only exists if a significant majority of society has capability to distinguish right from wrong Galileo comes to mind as someone persecuted during their time but later considered a hero. There's no shortage of other examples.
shdhdjwidjrhe 7y ago
>CIA whistleblower So we're giving the benefit of the doubt to members of the most notoriously cut throat agency in the American government now?

friendlybus 7y ago

Heroes are characterized by extreme competence at something. Some people dedicate that to doing good because they believe it to be valuable for it's own sake. Selflessness just gets you walked over. Being good is both an individual positive for the hero and a collective gain for the people.

ekhjarta 7y ago
Being a hero does not require extreme competence. It requires courage to stand up for what you believe even at great personal risk or cost and a moral compass pointed in the right direction.
Ididntdothis 7y ago
I think the main attribute of a hero is courage.
- friendlybus 7y ago
  It is part of it too, but the courageous hero without competence ends up dead. Roman legionaries used to joke heroes are the people they kill. The minimizing of vulnerability in an extreme situation combined with ability to overcome it and the courage to do so defines a heroic struggle. The caregiver is the foil, the maximizing of vulnerability around others and the social integration of such is the classic back and forth. A scene in a A Bridge Too Far (ww2) shows an implementation of it. A soldier has a near-dead friend in his arms that he knows is alive, he dodged live rounds to keep his friend from a group of Germans in a forest clearing. He arrives at a MASH style base camp and seeks treatment from a doctor. The doctor is overworked and prejudges the friend to be dead, indicating that he should be left with the row of dead soldiers he was unable to save. The soldier demands treatment and when it is repeatedly rejected he pulls a gun on the doctor, threatening to kill him. The doctor eventually relents, treats the friend finding him alive. The soldier puts away his gun and capitulates to the punishment incoming to him for breaking the rules, the doctor reports him to the MP and manufactures a slap-on-the-wrist for the soldier. The doctor after having been exposed to near death and allowed the soldier to remain apart of the social system asks him "would you have shot me?". The soldier pauses and silently salutes. That story would never have happened if it were not for the hero's ability to survive in a hostile environment and achieve his goal of returning alive with his friend, courage or not. The friend would never have lived if the doctor had not risked being vulnerable to having another death on his hands because of an arrogant soldier. They both gave that friend a chance at creating something of enduring value from successful missions in the future and an everyday life for the friend himself.