Nope. Hero kinda precludes not being a child rapist. No “seperating the art from the artist” on that one. Then he’s just some piece of shit who had some war victories.
Ehh… If you want to proclaim your hero is the rapist of a 10 year old girl feel free I guess?
There’s a difference between the morally gray of acts committed in war, and the rape of a 10 year old girl. Which was morally reprehensible even in the perspective of 1700’s Russian society.
He’s not my personal hero at all, never heard of the dude.
Just saying that a horrible piece of shit can still do heroic things, even if awful deeds outshine them. I’d say that those heroic deeds by definition makes them a hero, even if it’s only in a narrow context as “American naval warfare”.
I’d say that those heroic deeds by definition makes them a hero, even if it’s only in a narrow context as “American naval warfare”.
Again, no one is forcing you to call a child rapist a hero… It’s a pretty wild move imo.
By your own definition…is Hitler also a hero?
I think maybe it’s important when mantling someone with the title of “hero” that we weigh the positive and the negative aspects of their contributions, otherwise it can get awkward.
Edit: also, you may have me confused with a different user. I didn’t say he was a hero, that was dagwoodiii a bit upthread, and I suspect he was just copy/pasting some other reference, not his personal moral evaluation of the life of John Paul Jones.
don’t know of any heroic deeds that Hitler did. Do you?
My definition of hero includes general morality… If we adopt your definition of just being brave or inspirational, then you would be hypocritical not too. He was a combat veteran who eventually went on to be the leader of his country. By your definition that’s not heroic?
didn’t say he was a hero, that was dagwoodiii a bit upthread
“I’d say that those heroic deeds by definition makes them a hero, even if it’s only in a narrow context as “American naval warfare”.”
Both things can be true. Heroes are not always (maybe rarely) good people. Especially so for war heroes.
Nope. Hero kinda precludes not being a child rapist. No “seperating the art from the artist” on that one. Then he’s just some piece of shit who had some war victories.
Ehh… If you want to proclaim your hero is the rapist of a 10 year old girl feel free I guess?
There’s a difference between the morally gray of acts committed in war, and the rape of a 10 year old girl. Which was morally reprehensible even in the perspective of 1700’s Russian society.
He’s not my personal hero at all, never heard of the dude.
Just saying that a horrible piece of shit can still do heroic things, even if awful deeds outshine them. I’d say that those heroic deeds by definition makes them a hero, even if it’s only in a narrow context as “American naval warfare”.
Again, no one is forcing you to call a child rapist a hero… It’s a pretty wild move imo.
By your own definition…is Hitler also a hero?
I think maybe it’s important when mantling someone with the title of “hero” that we weigh the positive and the negative aspects of their contributions, otherwise it can get awkward.
I don’t know of any heroic deeds that Hitler did.
Do you?
Edit: also, you may have me confused with a different user. I didn’t say he was a hero, that was dagwoodiii a bit upthread, and I suspect he was just copy/pasting some other reference, not his personal moral evaluation of the life of John Paul Jones.
My definition of hero includes general morality… If we adopt your definition of just being brave or inspirational, then you would be hypocritical not too. He was a combat veteran who eventually went on to be the leader of his country. By your definition that’s not heroic?
“I’d say that those heroic deeds by definition makes them a hero, even if it’s only in a narrow context as “American naval warfare”.”
I’d say there’s more heroism than being brave or inspirational, but eh. This conversation is clearly going nowhere — have a great weekend.