What is a Hero?

[laccoff_mawning]

You're conflating matters of factual reality with matters of literally analysis.

Aren't you assuming that heroism isn't part of factual reality? I'm stating heroism is objective. That means I believe it exists outside mere human suggestion, obviously.

We observe heroism in real life; acts of dedication and acts of self-sacrifice. The main diifference between the real world and the novels is the scale. I'll repeat that: we observe heroism in factual reality as well as in literature. So why on earth should I stop analysing heroism in the same way as other real phenomena? if you want me to stop considering heroism as a real thing, go outside and check if the police force and the firefighters still exist. Go outside and tell me the WW2 soldiers who died to protect their families aren't a part of factual reality.

Now lets talk about stories for a second. Stories convey ideas from an author to an audience, correct? Then heroism is an idea from an author. Ok, so where did this idea of heroism come from? Did an author make it up and it gain traction, or did the author observe it in some way/shape/form first?

If an author made it up off the top of his head, then fair play. But Authors generally aren't original in concepts, are they? They generally take concepts from other stories, or observations from real life, and then write them into the story- possibly exaggerating for effect.

Well, if the first author of a heroic story took inspiration of heroism from real life, then that implies heroism exists outside stories alone. we now reach the same conclusion as before: that heroism is something that exists in real life and an author decided to convey his feelings about it into some written work.

If said first author didn't, however, then we still have to ask the question why the idea of heroism picked up traction in the first place. So how do we think this purely abstract concept of heroism picked up traction? What did it add to stories that an audience liked? It can't be a happy ending, or a promise of a better world, because those endings can happen without a heroic character. As such, it must be something about the actions of the character itself that the audience liked.

well that logic implies theres something inherent in humans (how it got there doesn't matter at this point in the argument- it's existence is enough for the argument to hold for now) that finds heroism valuble. But that again pushes the idea of heroism outside literature only.

 

[Thraben]

I'm stating heroism is objective. That means I believe it exists outside mere human suggestion, obviously.

Again, this debating existing at all without rigorous consensus of all credible participants (including me an you) proves it is subjective. That's what subjective means.

So why on earth should I stop analysing heroism in the same way as other real phenomena?

Because we aren't debating real phenomena. We're debating fiction.

Stories convey ideas from an author to an audience, correct? Then heroism is an idea from an author. Ok, so where did this idea of heroism come from? Did an author make it up and it gain traction, or did the author observe it in some way/shape/form first?

I don't really feel the need to go into anthropology and sociology to debate why the concept of fictional heroes developed, mostly because IT STILL ISN'T RELEVANT TO THIS DISCUSSION.

Well, if the first author of a heroic story took inspiration of heroism from real life, then that implies heroism exists outside stories alone. we now reach the same conclusion as before: that heroism is something that exists in real life and an author decided to convey his feelings about it into some written work.

Yes, heroism exists outside of stories. It's subjective out there too. Basic knowledge of what different cultures considered heroic at different points in time prove that. What's your point?

If said first author didn't, however, then we still have to ask the question why the idea of heroism picked up traction in the first place. So how do we think this purely abstract concept of heroism picked up traction? What did it add to stories that an audience liked?

Again, that's a sociology and anthropology question, and not what we're supposed to be debating.

well that logic implies theres something inherent in humans (how it got there doesn't matter at this point in the argument- it's existence is enough for the argument to hold for now) that finds heroism valuble.

Umm... Yes? That doesn't make heroism objective though, it just means multiple different contradictory definitions of heroism can and do exist. What's your point?

Overall you've made it painfully obvious you aren't here to actually debate anything at all, nor do you really understand either the original video's arguments or my own. And as such, goodbye.

 

[Tsuru]

cough10