Quantcast
Channel: Neuroautomaton » Bizarre beliefs that make us tick
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 2

Bizarre beliefs that make us tick: Heroism

0
0

Credit: Max Slevogt [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

In Homer’s classic myth the Iliad, the great hero Achilles, half-man and half-god, is called to war by the kings of Greece as they endeavor to conquer the neighbouring city-state of Troy. The pressure on Achilles is immense: he is a great warrior and virtually invulnerable–save for a small mark on his heel– and the Fates’ have predicted that without him the Greeks will lose the war. But Achilles’ duty leaves him with a grave dilemma: with his assistance the Greeks will succeed in battle, but in so doing Achilles’ own life will be lost. Whether due to hubris or a sense of duty, Achilles willingly accedes and joins his cousins on the war march, thereby sacrificing himself for the glory (or pettiness) of the Greek nation.

This notion of self-sacrifice is the intrinsic feature of the modern hero. It is the act of placing the interests of another over one’s own, particularly when loss of life is imminent, which so strongly sparks our sense of human heroism. Scientists generally prefer the term “altruism“, a form of selfless action, which is often seen as one of the fundamental and indelible features of human nature and a core determinant of social and societal success.

Another strand of thought, first popularized by Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan, argues that human nature is not altruistic, but that altruism emerges out of a social contract whereby individuals recognize the personal value of assisting others. In this sense, heroism and sacrifice are simply features of our selfish nature re-directed for mutually beneficial ends.

Of course, assuming that “self-interest” alone drives heroism would make it difficult to explain why some people will risk their lives in wars of conquest for little reward, or why others would jump in front of a bus to save the child of a stranger. Possibly a better explanation than either is to recognize that human interests can be directed variously by immediate desires, by abstract beliefs and by deeply ingrained social demands (whether due to social training or due to human “nature”). The acts of a hero probably do not come from careful, deliberative thought or innate, hard-wired instincts, but rather emerge from a cacophony of influences and pressures.

But if so, what does this say about the virtue and self-sacrifice of a hero? Is heroism driven by artifice, self-deceit or a desire for recognition and fame? Or does the hero truthfully embrace the purist ideal of human goodness we so often imagine them to display?

It should be apparent for those readers familiar with the Iliad that I have presented a white-washed version of this myth. Achilles’ actions were not inherently those of self-sacrifice, but as Homer painstakingly documents, the descendants of those very human emotions: vanity, anger, vengeance.

In contrast, our modern heroes often lack the grimy sheen that tends paint the mythical champions of antiquity. This makes for one of the troubles with modern heroism, which is just how easily our images of the hero, carefully fitted into shining examples of human beneficence and morality, can come crashing down when we recognize the hero as little more than another person enshrouded in trappings of adoration.

I was thinking about this idea when reflecting on recent criticisms of modern heroes. It has been noted that Jane Goodall, whose extensive work supporting wildlife conservation has earned her international acclaim, has regretfully signed her name to specious propaganda in order to garner support for her cause. Likewise Mother Teresa, wildly regarded as the epitome of self-sacrifice, may have acted not to heal the suffering of the poor, but to express that suffering, possibly denying pain relief and adequate medical care to those in need in order to meet this ideal.

The question here is not whether the accusations made above are accurate or misleading: it is to ask how such outsized expectations should arise–for those whom we have never met, never taken even a moment to known or understand–that such simple revelations might bring the images of these individuals crashing down. What gives this blow its force is not the inherent wrongness of the act, but the outsized expectations created by a fictitious view of human nature.

This tale of the fallen hero has become something of a modern parable–a warning against the perilous vanity of success, but also an opportunity for resolution and redemption. I would argue that it is this feature of modern heroism, this idealistic belief that the fallen hero must be redeemed, which is itself most dangerous. Heroes do not fail in order to be raised anew. They fail because heroism, pure self-sacrifice, is not a condition of human nature, it is an ideal we have constructed to serve human ends and so cannot be reached by any mere mortal (nor even any mythical demi-god).

When we recognize this and pay attention not to the elegant and principled story behind the man or woman, but to the true reasons for human action, then we do a greater service to the sacrifices that we all make. This may be easier said than done, as it is far less demanding to venerate a hero than it is to appreciate the reality of human experience for what it is.


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 2

Latest Images

Trending Articles





Latest Images