In my latest for the Guardian, I parse recent incidents in New York and Boston that call into question the meaning of heroism. We should realize that a hero is defined by what someone does, not by who he is.
Discover more from Media Nation
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
Larz
I agreed with you, Dan, until I looked up the word in Webster’s: 2. a person who, in the opinion of others, has heroic qualities or has performed a heroic act and is regarded as a model or ideal.I have always considered a hero to be someone who put his/her own life at risk in an attempt to save the life of another or achieve a noble goal. But the dictionary speaks more of the quality of character, and others’ perception of that character, rather than a test of the deed performed.Could we be probing too deeply into the spirit of heroism? With apologies to Descartes, “I think (you) are a hero, therefore (you) are.”Larz
Rob
I read this article today on the Guardian site. It’s the best and most sensible article I’ve seen on the site.