DIE brave

Is it better to die a brave man or to live as a weak one

  • Total voters
    16
Oniw17 said:
To die brave doesn't hurt, to live weak does.
Click to expand...

how so, as I said in my post, if you can live comfortably with your decisons, you can live a happy life.

How does dieing brave not hurt? Soldiers do not hurt emotionally when faced with death? Or physically?
 
Living weak is a long term pain, like a deep burn, I could never live comfortably with the decision to live weak. Every night I would reflect, and it would reverberate in my head until I went crazy, or changed it. Dieing brave, however, only hurts once, like getting cut. I'd rather get cut than burnt.
 
Oniw17 said:
Living weak is a long term pain, like a deep burn, I could never live comfortably with the decision to live weak. Every night I would reflect, and it would reverberate in my head until I went crazy, or changed it. Dieing brave, however, only hurts once, like getting cut. I'd rather get cut than burnt.
Click to expand...

cut with result of ceasing to exist and miss out on seeing your kids grow up or burned and live to see them?
 
Yes. If it was at present, I don't have any kids, so no regrets. Even if had kids, I would be content knowing that because of the hardship I would cause them, they would be more conditioned for everything else in life.
 
all brave men.... feel and know fear.

its what you do about that fear, that determines whether you are brave or cowardly.

weakness.... is not the issue. weakness can have many forms.

and even a crippled little girl in a wheel chair, can be very brave.

-MT
 
A life without honour ceases to be life. Being a worm is no existence at all. If life is about living well, and the only way to live well is to die, then death is the choice most befitting.

"It is better to die on your feet then live on your knees."
 
Of those who voted to die brave, I wonder how many would die brave if actually given the choice.
 
Oniw17 said:
Living weak is a long term pain, like a deep burn, I could never live comfortably with the decision to live weak. Every night I would reflect, and it would reverberate in my head until I went crazy, or changed it. Dieing brave, however, only hurts once, like getting cut. I'd rather get cut than burnt.
Click to expand...

Give me a break, smart people survive by any means necessary.
 
Theoryofrelativity said:
Is it better to die a brave man or to live as a weak one?

http://www.usgennet.org/usa/topic/preservation/books/exempt.htm

I refer you to this link for some thought provoking poetry

Meanwhile dieing brave, how good does this feel after death? it does not. There is no feeling. You are oblivious to your contribution.

Living 'weak', you are alive, if you can live with your decisions you can enjoy the natural remainder of your days.

Most here would prefer no doubt to die brave, why, what instinct drives this trait?
Click to expand...

What instinct?

The idea that we are great.

Of course death tends to indicate otherwise since we all go like a retinal after image in a fire works display (do you know the full name of your great grandmother?) - although to be remembered after your death for acts of bravery are not always so grand

There is one 800 year old tomb in current afghanistan - it is the tomb of one of the first early moghuls kings spreading into india - next to it is a smaller one of a captured indian king - there is a rope hanging down from the ceiling and the local villagers hang on to the rope to stamp their feet on the grave of the indian king.

The story is that the indian king was a brilliant marksmen, but when he was captured by the moghuls he was blinded and kept as light entertainment - despite being blind the indian king could hit a target if told the direction and distance of it - anyway one day the king brought the marksmen king out for display to entertain some guests - on of whom spoke in a dialect to indicate the direction and distance of the king in poetry - the marksmen promptly piereced his captor.
(and suffered the consequences that sees his tomb still stamped on by th e locals 800 years later - although generally a hell for a king is heaven if he attains it by subduing his competitors)
 
John99 said:
Give me a break, smart people survive by any means necessary.
Click to expand...
The question has nothing to do with being smart or stupid. It has more to do with being thick-headed or faultering. Dishonest people will survive by any means necessary, exploiting others and compromising their own veiws on life along the way.
 
Is it better to die a brave man or to live as a weak one
Click to expand...

In terms of what? Ethics? That is, the brave man is more ethical than the weak man? If so, why? What if one if born weak and it's predetermined from the beginning? And the same for the brave man.

How about the weak man that does an act we all call "brave" but it really wasn't so? For example: the weak man runs into the a burning building to save his neighbor's dog. He only did it because it keeps the rabbit's out of his garden and doubts any other dogs would do the same without tearing it up. Is that brave? It was an act not for his neighbor, but for his own selfish act.

I think it could be argued that all "brave" acts are, for the most part, selfish. Materialistic selfishness or not.

In my opinion the question is flawed. A third option should be "Irrelevent" or something along that line.
 
Prince_James said:
"It is better to die on your feet then live on your knees."
Click to expand...
Great quote! Of course boldly rushing in and throwing your life away is not always the best course. The choice one must make is whether one can live with oneself if one survives due to cowardice.

In reservior dogs, Mr Pink survives because he was smart enough to hide during the Mexican standoff. I would have no problem living with myself after that. On the other hand, you see a little girl trapped on a plane that's about to explode. You know there's probably not enough time to effect a rescue and escape. Do you make the attempt anyway? Can you live with the image of the little girl you might have saved being consumed by flames? Many would rush in a such a situation. Protecting women and children is hard wired into our systems.
 
Madanthonywayne:

"Great quote!"

It really is, yes.

"Of course boldly rushing in and throwing your life away is not always the best course. The choice one must make is whether one can live with oneself if one survives due to cowardice.

In reservior dogs, Mr Pink survives because he was smart enough to hide during the Mexican standoff. I would have no problem living with myself after that. On the other hand, you see a little girl trapped on a plane that's about to explode. You know there's probably not enough time to effect a rescue and escape. Do you make the attempt anyway? Can you live with the image of the little girl you might have saved being consumed by flames? Many would rush in a such a situation. Protecting women and children is hard wired into our systems. "

It is here that bravery must be tempered with wisdom, yes. There is a time to fight, and a time to not. Mr. Pink not involving himself in a hopeless Mexican standoff is a great example of when it would be imprudent to interfere. On the other hand, you are correct, a time such as saving that girl from the burning wreck might well be justified.

I would frame it this way: When death is the only course proper, take it. When death is not necessary for the proper course, do not take it. If unsure, choose death. For it is far less an error to die for something not worth dying for, then to live when death was proper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top