3 ms·

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.

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.

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.