On the Heroic: What is a hero?

Invert Nexus said:

Exactly. The original question was whether you would consider the man a hero. His own opinion is not under question.
Click to expand...

I have stated that there is a context or condition whereby this man would be a hero. I have laid out the criteria. The only question that remains is whether or not he has acknowledged absurdity. If yes, he becomes the absurd hero. If no, he's just another face in the crowd.

If he meets the criteria, yes. I don't have that detail, though.

The absurd hero meets the standard of your dictionary definition #1.
 
Tess:
I have laid out the criteria
Click to expand...
No you haven't.

A dead Algerian has. I find you, once again, digesting someone else's work.

Furthermore, Sisyphus was not heroic in the mere acknowlegement of the 'absurd' - anyone can do this- but in his confiscation of that uselessness. The descent does not in any form undermine the ascent, the compulsion on both ends being equal.

That is the interpretation in my own words, you book swallowing little halfling, of the existential hero.


Nexus:
Uhmm.....
Click to expand...
I meant Siphylus.

Yet, the cripple does not do it to survive. He's quite capable of surviving without exerting the slightest effort on his own behalf due to the various government and societal organizations which exist to care for him. These organizations are even utilized by the healthy who wish to parasitize rather than struggle each day like the rest of us. Some (cough cough coolskill cough cough) deem this parasitism a form of heroism. Sticking it to the man or whatnot. (Another topic altogether of course)
The poing being that the cripple does not perform these actions to survive. He does them for higher reasons. For pride. For self respect. And, in some cases, in order to be an example to others who are similarly afflicted. Who are faced with the choice of festering in their own invalidity or to rise up and strive to make a place in the world just like the rest of us.

They do it by choice.

Their's the difference.
Click to expand...

Am I blind or just a cold hack of ice??
I don't see a fucking difference!!

Welfare's only a pink slip away. Any one of you can choose to check out of the race now.
You can choose to liquidate all your assets, your skill, your mind, those healthy, hard working hands putting food on the table, your money, job, home and car and claim Welfare.
You can choose your own handicap.

In what way would this be different than a paraplegic choosing home care and disabiltiy money?
The both of you are subject to the overwhelming demands of staying alive, the same objectives fueling a cockrach's scampering when the lights are turned on as staying alive is his duty.

Whitewolf's as mistaken as you in commending anyone for doing that which is obligated. She's no more worthy of respect for going to work than she is for eating when hungry.

Who the fuck would praise anyone for eating when hungry????!!
 
Welfare's only a pink slip away. Any one of you can choose to check out of the race now.
Click to expand...

It's a bit more difficult than that to get welfare these days, I believe. And, not only that, but I dare you to find a welfare program that will wipe your ass for you and hand feed you.

The both of you are subject to the overwhelming demands of staying alive, the same objectives fueling a cockrach's scampering when the lights are turned on as staying alive is his duty.
Click to expand...

Again, the cripple is not just staying alive. He could stay alive quite well without having to lift a finger. Rather, he is working for more than survival.
The cripple's motives are noble and heroic. Especially when seen in the light of the example he sets for others who might also live a life of parasitic ease rather than becoming a productive citizen.

I'd like you to explain to me how the definitions of hero I've provided above do not apply as I've shown.

Who the fuck would praise anyone for eating when hungry????!!
Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, if your statement about the ease of welfare is true, then anyone who stays off the welfare in lieu of a self-supporting lifestyle is also worthy of the hero label as they would also stand as an example to others to live a more noble existence than the tapeworm.
 
I dare you to find a welfare program that will wipe your ass for you and hand feed you.
Click to expand...

Easy: WIC

Free food and toilet paper.

Again, the cripple is not just staying alive. He could stay alive quite well without having to lift a finger. Rather, he is working for more than survival.
The cripple's motives are noble and heroic. Especially when seen in the light of the example he sets for others who might also live a life of parasitic ease rather than becoming a productive citizen.
Click to expand...

My grandmother went to her grave washing her own asshole, know why?
Someone else doing it was humiliating.

I will not generalize on motive here- neither you nor anyone here knows why anyone of our disabled population chooses to live the lives they do.

Motive here is irrelevant. That a torso from Chicago chose to get pregnant and give birth despite warnings either to set an example to other torsos or becuase she, like, reaaaaaaaaaallly wanted children is irrelevant.
That she chooses to work for either one of said reasons, too, is irrelevant.

What is revelant, however, is this habit of .......knighting....the weaker of two men for achieving the same goals demaned of both.

I'd like you to explain to me how the definitions of hero I've provided above do not apply as I've shown.
Click to expand...

You didn't.
The dictionary did.
 
Look, Nexie, we can all give up, curl up and die off. Other than that, there are different job options that offer different work schedules. Let's not explore this side of the issue here, because there are too many what-ifs.

A man is defined by his actions, not by his mere intentions. His intentions are irrelevant. Whether he does something by choice or not is irrelevant. The actions of the man in the scenario are what you listed at first. It does not matter whether he is a cripple or not because it is his actions alone that matter. Is Beethoven more of a genius merely because he lost his ability to hear by the end of his life? No, Beethoven is a genius because you simply enjoy his music that much.
 
Further on the classical hero:

invert_nexus said:
They also killed a lot of people
Click to expand...

YEA!! Those healthy, strong, willful men with small [marble] penises killed a lot of people! What on earth happened to the Hero's image in today's society.... =(
 
Not to throw my own top hat in, but invert: the two qualities you assign the example to heroism on sound a bit like a cop out: "one who has heroic qualities". But what are they? On the other elements - Greek god, sandwitch, bread for aforesaid sandwitch.

I'd call such a fellow above the par. But is it heroic? In the classical sense, no. For that one needs to be out slaying dragons or gorgons; or even a corrupt usurping king. In the common...and, forgive me, sometimes seemingly more banal usage...I suppose one might call him a hero.
 
Gendanken,

Easy: WIC

Free food and toilet paper.
Click to expand...

Are you doing this on purpose? Free food does not equal hand feeding. Toilet paper does not equal a nurse wiping your ass.

My grandmother went to her grave washing her own asshole, know why?
Someone else doing it was humiliating.
Click to expand...

People who suffer traumatic and life changing accidents are prone to depression and surrender if not suicide. A healthy and vital man loses his legs and he is prone to give up. What's the point? His life is over.

Or how about the guy who got his face bitten off by a bear? Now that guy should really kill himself. But he doesn't.

The humiliation of having to live as an invalid is a terrible thing. You admit it in your above quote.

Now, it should be apparent that an amputee is not going to just get up and go to work the day after his amputation. He has to struggle from day one and spend months having his ass wipied before he can learn to do it himself. Then he has to instill in himself the will to continue to care for himself day after day despite the hardship which he must suffer.

I've seen you in terror over having a wisdom tooth pulled. Imagine having no legs.

I will not generalize on motive here- neither you nor anyone here knows why anyone of our disabled population chooses to live the lives they do.

Motive here is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's entirely irrelevant, especially as you keep bringing it up but dismiss it when I attempt to. However, as per definition 2, it's how you're perceived in the eyes of others that makes you a hero.

The whole inspiration and example thing, you know?

What is revelant, however, is this habit of .......knighting....the weaker of two men for achieving the same goals demaned of both.
Click to expand...

The two men have different obstacles which to overcome.

I'd say that the man who doesn't have to struggle to cross the room to get to the bathroom is the weaker of the two based solely on that single criteria. If all we have to go on with the two men is the information given in the opening post plus the fact that one man is paraplegic while the other is not, then I'd definitely have to say that the cripple is not the weaker man.

You didn't.
The dictionary did.
Click to expand...

Oh, come on.
You're going to try to use the same old "you're a pseudo" argument on me for using the dictionary for a definition? Should I emulate Dr. Johnson and make my own then? Would that satisfy you? Would I then be heroic?


Whitewolf,

Whether he does something by choice or not is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think choice is one of the most important things in a human's makeup. It is what elevates us. What allows us to transcend the animal.

We choose.

Sisyphus (however the fuck you spell it) chose to push that stupid boulder up the hill every damned day. That's what made him a hero.

The actions of the man in the scenario are what you listed at first. It does not matter whether he is a cripple or not because it is his actions alone that matter.
Click to expand...

Yes, but once you realize that the man's every move is a struggle, then the scenario takes on a whole new light. You have to re-examine every move he makes with the knowledge that none of these moves are trivial as they would be to a healthy man.

It is his actions that matter. And the context in which those actions are performed.

Is Beethoven more of a genius merely because he lost his ability to hear by the end of his life? No, Beethoven is a genius because you simply enjoy his music that much.
Click to expand...

Actually, I would say that Beethoven's ability to finish his symphony while being absolutely stone deaf is an excellent indicator of his musical genius. How could it not? Only if the symphony were horrible. Which it's not.

YEA!! Those healthy, strong, willful men with small [marble] penises killed a lot of people! What on earth happened to the Hero's image in today's society....
Click to expand...

Ok. The cripple's job is genocide. Does that make him a hero?
 
Geoff,

In the common...and, forgive me, sometimes seemingly more banal usage...I suppose one might call him a hero.
Click to expand...

Man, you are a pushover.
You agree with me then.
He's a hero.
Now, let's convince the others and maybe we'll be heroes?
 
Actually, I wouldn't say that he is. For you see, I detest the modern era, desiring nothing more than a return to coattails, top hats and banging the indentured Irish maid in the study to the laughing of walrus-moustachioed men with canes. Also hard drinking.

The common usage, sir, is too common. Good day to you, sir!
 
How did he become so horribly crippled in the first place, please? Did he crash a stolen car? Did he douse a burning child? It might be important. I hope he crashed a stolen car, it would serve him jolly well right. And that's probably why he can't get welfare.

He sounds a bit more dogged and stubborn than actually heroic. (Although what is heroic, except lots of little acts of doggedness and stubbornness all chained together?) Maybe he just got bored with the welfare thing - being spoon-fed - and fancied a bit more of a challenge. Boredom's a great motivator.

Saving that child, though. That makes him a hero in my eyes.

I'm undecided.
 
Also: does he work in arms sales?
Also: does he have any pets and how does he treat them, please?

Too many gaps.
 
invert_nexus said:
A debate rages which I put forth to the good people of Sciforums to ponder.

A scenario:

A man wakes every morning at 5 a.m. He goes to the bathroom. Shits. Showers. Shaves. Puts on his clothes. Makes breakfast. Gets in his car and goes to work. Spends 8 hours in his cubicle. Comes home. Makes a light dinner. Watches some tv. Reads. Masturbates. Goes to bed.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.​

Some would claim that this man is a hero.

Would you?

Why or why not?

Note: There is a piece of hidden lore here. Be wary of your response for you see through the glass darkly.
Click to expand...

We cannot say whether this man is a hero or not, since we do not know his motives for his actions.

They could well be heroic deeds. And they could not be.

Depends all on circumstances, motive, application, culture.
 
invert_nexus said:
Are you doing this on purpose? Free food does not equal hand feeding. Toilet paper does not equal a nurse wiping your ass.
Click to expand...

No, but if he is disabled he is eligible to get a nurse who will do these for him; however, as I was taught in a health aid class, the disabled prefer to be treated like normal people as much as possible. Again, there are too many variables here, and it's irrelevant, so let's not discuss this side of the issue. I think we ought to stick specifically to what was given to us in the scenario and assuming as little as possible.

invert_nexus said:
People who suffer traumatic and life changing accidents are prone to depression and surrender if not suicide. A healthy and vital man loses his legs and he is prone to give up. What's the point? His life is over.

Or how about the guy who got his face bitten off by a bear? Now that guy should really kill himself. But he doesn't.
Click to expand...

You know, in Zola's Germinal, there's this scene where the husband of that cheating whore looks out the window, thinks of the hungry men and women, and considers how little their suffering is. They can have any girl they want, any time they want; while he, despite being well-fed, suffers because his wife won't return his love. Zola's sympathy is with the poor, but I can't agree with him. I say, let's not compare people's suffering. We all suffer and let's not tally who is in more pain.

invert_nexus said:
I disagree. I think choice is one of the most important things in a human's makeup. It is what elevates us. What allows us to transcend the animal.

We choose.

Sisyphus (however the fuck you spell it) chose to push that stupid boulder up the hill every damned day. That's what made him a hero.
Click to expand...

What's a true choice? The Germans who helped Jews during WWII didn't feel they were choosing; they felt they were obligated to save these lives. Again, too many variables and it's absolutely irrelevant; let's leave this out.

invert_nexus said:
It is his actions that matter.
Click to expand...

Thank you.

invert_nexus said:
And the context in which those actions are performed.
Click to expand...

No.

invert_nexus said:
How could it not? Only if the symphony were horrible.
Click to expand...

Aha. So if a stone-deaf persona attempted to write music and failed, he does not deserve a place in history; where as if a stone-deaf persona succeeded, he does deserve admiration. Therefore, hearing or lack thereof is negligible here; what matters is solely the persona's talent. Likewise, for history, it ought not matter whether the paper-pusher is healthy or not; what matters are his actions and their outcome.

invert_nexus said:
Ok. The cripple's job is genocide. Does that make him a hero?
Click to expand...

Don't be a whiny child, you know exactly what I meant. In those days, a man had to do something great, something others couldn't do, in order to be an example to his fellow men. Nowadays, it's enough to merely be a cripple paper-pusher.
 
Last edited:
spuriousmonkey said:
We cannot say whether this man is a hero or not, since we do not know his motives for his actions.

They could well be heroic deeds. And they could not be.

Depends all on circumstances, motive, application, culture.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The specifics mean everything.
 
Gendanken said:

No you haven't.

A dead Algerian has. I find you, once again, digesting someone else's work.
Click to expand...

Over in the corner, princess. I think you missed one.

Furthermore, Sisyphus was not heroic in the mere acknowlegement of the 'absurd' - anyone can do this- but in his confiscation of that uselessness. The descent does not in any form undermine the ascent, the compulsion on both ends being equal.

That is the interpretation in my own words, you book swallowing little halfling, of the existential hero.
Click to expand...

You are correct. I feel that issue is covered in the topic's criteria:

Invert Nexus said:
A man wakes every morning at 5 a.m. He goes to the bathroom. Shits. Showers. Shaves. Puts on his clothes. Makes breakfast. Gets in his car and goes to work. Spends 8 hours in his cubicle. Comes home. Makes a light dinner. Watches some tv. Reads. Masturbates. Goes to bed.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.
Click to expand...

In continuing his routine (e.g., "Repeat"), the man continues to push the boulder up the hill and walk back after it. The only question is whether or not he acknowledges his absurdity as he does.

I mean, I agree with your point, but you're picking some silly nits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top