3 ms·

I don't understand how this isn't accurate. Even with your definition: A. Not a person. B. Not courageous because they have no idea what they are doing. C

I don't understand how this isn't accurate. Even with your definition: A. Not a person. B. Not courageous because they have no idea what they are doing. C. Noble qualities aren't in evidence because all the rats know is that the sniff a field and get treats.

Luc 5y ago
That’s a wilfully unsophisticated view of language though.
- ALittleLight 5y ago
  In what way? I'm considering the qualities of a hero from the given definition and arguing that they don't apply to bomb defusing rats and it's therefore wrong to call them heroes. I can't imagine how that's unsophisticated.
  - BoorishBears 5y ago
    You failed to heed the meaning of the term "or" (!) Doesn't that alone disqualify your rebuttal?
    - ALittleLight 5y ago
      Wait... I "failed to heed" the word "or", but you get to ignore the word "person"?
      - BoorishBears 5y ago
        When 2/3rds of an argument is countered by not ignoring the term "or" I tend ask you fix that first? Especially when that remaining 1/3rd is just you taking an unsophisticated approach to the concept of anthropomorphization...
        ALittleLight 5y ago
        I think it's pretty clear the given definition doesn't apply here. While I do enjoy debating semantics, I don't see that you actually have any argument here, so I'm just going to leave it at that.
        herodoturtle 5y ago
        This chain of comments right here is one of the reasons I do so love HN. A technical debate on the semantics of heroic rats. Plus it actually helped improve my English! Cheers :-)
        codyb 5y ago
        Can’t you just go with Merriam Webster’s fourth definition under hero “an object of extreme devotion or admiration”. Although the synonyms section cracked me up cause it definitely took me a second Synonyms “Cuban sandwich, grinder, hoagie (also hoagy), Italian sandwich, po’boy, …”
        ALittleLight 5y ago
        I don't see any evidence that the rats are the object of extreme devotion or admiration. The featured rat did its job well for five years and is now retiring with a modest celebration. If there were some evidence of extreme devotion or admiration, for example maybe the locals celebrate this rat, know its name, call this one for especially challenging fields, erect statues to it, etc - then I'd agree that a specific rat could be heroic by this definition. As is, the rats seem to be doing a not particularly challenging or dangerous job in exchange for payment. One rat is retiring after a successful career - which is laudable, but not so much so that it qualifies for extreme devotion or admiration. In general, I like to push back on cheapening words like "hero" so that we can use them for better effect when they actually fit. I also don't think teachers, hospital workers, police, soldiers, etc are heroes though some people sometimes call them such. Individuals in those professions might be, but the general classes are not, nor are bomb defusing rats.
        5y ago

Luc 5y ago

That’s a wilfully unsophisticated view of language though.

ALittleLight 5y ago
In what way? I'm considering the qualities of a hero from the given definition and arguing that they don't apply to bomb defusing rats and it's therefore wrong to call them heroes. I can't imagine how that's unsophisticated.
- BoorishBears 5y ago
  You failed to heed the meaning of the term "or" (!) Doesn't that alone disqualify your rebuttal?
  - ALittleLight 5y ago
    Wait... I "failed to heed" the word "or", but you get to ignore the word "person"?
    - BoorishBears 5y ago
      When 2/3rds of an argument is countered by not ignoring the term "or" I tend ask you fix that first? Especially when that remaining 1/3rd is just you taking an unsophisticated approach to the concept of anthropomorphization...
      - ALittleLight 5y ago
        I think it's pretty clear the given definition doesn't apply here. While I do enjoy debating semantics, I don't see that you actually have any argument here, so I'm just going to leave it at that.
        herodoturtle 5y ago
        This chain of comments right here is one of the reasons I do so love HN. A technical debate on the semantics of heroic rats. Plus it actually helped improve my English! Cheers :-)
        codyb 5y ago
        Can’t you just go with Merriam Webster’s fourth definition under hero “an object of extreme devotion or admiration”. Although the synonyms section cracked me up cause it definitely took me a second Synonyms “Cuban sandwich, grinder, hoagie (also hoagy), Italian sandwich, po’boy, …”
        ALittleLight 5y ago
        I don't see any evidence that the rats are the object of extreme devotion or admiration. The featured rat did its job well for five years and is now retiring with a modest celebration. If there were some evidence of extreme devotion or admiration, for example maybe the locals celebrate this rat, know its name, call this one for especially challenging fields, erect statues to it, etc - then I'd agree that a specific rat could be heroic by this definition. As is, the rats seem to be doing a not particularly challenging or dangerous job in exchange for payment. One rat is retiring after a successful career - which is laudable, but not so much so that it qualifies for extreme devotion or admiration. In general, I like to push back on cheapening words like "hero" so that we can use them for better effect when they actually fit. I also don't think teachers, hospital workers, police, soldiers, etc are heroes though some people sometimes call them such. Individuals in those professions might be, but the general classes are not, nor are bomb defusing rats.
        5y ago