I partially agree with your initial statement. I think precise definitions are only helpful in certain contexts. In general they might not be necessary or even

I partially agree with your initial statement. I think precise definitions are only helpful in certain contexts. In general they might not be necessary or even useful, but precision is useful when you're trying to examine your own beliefs and the beliefs of others. Consider this: the soldier being willing to defend against an enemy when he doesn't fear death isn't necessarily displaying courage. This particular soldier could have a death wish for all we know. If I posed this scenario, then maybe you'd dive a little deeper and say something like "Most people are afraid to die, so if you were a soldier that didn't want to die, and you choose to defend your post when confronted by an enemy that can kill you, that would make you courageous." By probing for specifics, we learn a property of courage. We might say something like "Courage is the ability to act against the compulsions of fear." Whether that's satisfactory or not is another issue, but it allows us to have a better understanding of what we're seeing in the world. It gives us a better example of acts of courage versus acts of overconfidence, inebriation or apathy. The downside to this definition is, if someone approached me in public and asked me to defined courage; if I used this definition, I would probably need to follow it with an example.