4 ms·

So going deep into a hostile territory, at night, near a foreign military compound, using unproven equipment with little fuel reserves against a dangerous, arme

So going deep into a hostile territory, at night, near a foreign military compound, using unproven equipment with little fuel reserves against a dangerous, armed a forsworn enemy is not heroic? I'd like to see your definition of A-level hero.

ForHackernews 12y ago
That's an interesting question: http://www.radiolab.org/story/104009-i-need-a-hero/ http://www.radiolab.org/story/104009-i-need-a-hero/ http://www.npr.org/2011/03/10/134387637/heroic-acts-to-protect-the-word-hero http://www.npr.org/2011/03/10/134387637/heroic-acts-to-prote... I think to be truly heroic, an action has to involve putting yourself in harm's way selflessly, to save somebody else. By that standard, killing your enemy--who's already got it in for you--isn't heroic, it's just strongly motivated self-interest. Even moreso if it's literally your job and you're being paid to do it. I would say the members of Seal Team Six are brave, courageous warriors, but they aren't necessarily heroes.
coldtea 12y ago
All soldiers go into "hostile territory -- often at night. Not all are heroes, unless we stretch the definition much. And I seriously doubt the "unproven equipment" (or the "little fuel reserves"). It was a mission with a bunch of (armed, I give you that) guys in a hideaway against an elite team from a superpower. >I'd like to see your definition of A-level hero. Well, the people who got off the boats in Normandy are A-level heroes. Or people like the Red Baron. Or those that went on their own volition to fight for the liberty of another people in a foreign country, like 1936 Spain, with sparse guns and makeshift camps against a properly armed fascist regime with foreign state support. If I'm allowed a movie metaphor, a hero is more "Wild Bunch" or "The Magnificent Seven" than some kind of elite calvary, charging in armed to the teath and killing everything in sight.

ForHackernews 12y ago

That's an interesting question: http://www.radiolab.org/story/104009-i-need-a-hero/ http://www.radiolab.org/story/104009-i-need-a-hero/ http://www.npr.org/2011/03/10/134387637/heroic-acts-to-protect-the-word-hero http://www.npr.org/2011/03/10/134387637/heroic-acts-to-prote... I think to be truly heroic, an action has to involve putting yourself in harm's way selflessly, to save somebody else. By that standard, killing your enemy--who's already got it in for you--isn't heroic, it's just strongly motivated self-interest. Even moreso if it's literally your job and you're being paid to do it. I would say the members of Seal Team Six are brave, courageous warriors, but they aren't necessarily heroes.

coldtea 12y ago

All soldiers go into "hostile territory -- often at night. Not all are heroes, unless we stretch the definition much. And I seriously doubt the "unproven equipment" (or the "little fuel reserves"). It was a mission with a bunch of (armed, I give you that) guys in a hideaway against an elite team from a superpower. >I'd like to see your definition of A-level hero. Well, the people who got off the boats in Normandy are A-level heroes. Or people like the Red Baron. Or those that went on their own volition to fight for the liberty of another people in a foreign country, like 1936 Spain, with sparse guns and makeshift camps against a properly armed fascist regime with foreign state support. If I'm allowed a movie metaphor, a hero is more "Wild Bunch" or "The Magnificent Seven" than some kind of elite calvary, charging in armed to the teath and killing everything in sight.