Of Ethics & Morality

Not a single sane mind in this world could escape from the neccessity of asking the question of ," What should I do?" in his daily encounters. If there is one who can, I can't imagine. He would be an automaton and as lifeless as a robot or a zombie whose actions are formed by merely automatic presets and as absentmindly as it can gets. Life, is consists of actions taken, should be taken, whether you want it or not, that would be ultimately determine what becomes of you. We don't call it a life, if without actions, just as a story without set of events.


" What should I do?"


That phrase implies that man is a creature of choices, particularly volitional choices. Apart from that, it shows that we are creatures who seek values, something to keep and to gain in our course of life. Or else why should we ask that question? To keep and to seek values in order to what? The answer is in order to live. From this, the concept of value is formed.


From that question, there are numbers of other questions could be derived if one care to ask.

" Why do I want to do it?"
" How should I do it?"
" Is it good or bad?"

But, being a volitional creature, shouldn't he just save himself from all these encumberments by saying : just do it. Right? So why bother?


Well, these are the questions that were constantly asked by philosophers and conscientiously discussed under the subject known as ethics. One might as well ask why do we need ethics, after all?

To answer that, we must ask the preliminary question, " What is ethics?"


I am speaking from my views of Objectivism, where I learn ethics and primarily philosophy from, and which I hold as true. Ethics or morality is a code of values to guide man's choices and actions -the choices and actions that determine the purpose and the course of his life. As to why man need ethics, it serves as a guideline, as a system which he refers to in taking a course of any action, that is properly constructed for him to achieve his goal whether it is an immediate one or for futher future.


What then? Where would we rely this guidelines upon? On what standard?


As an Objectivist, we put that our moral standard is what pertaining to 'life' itself. It is based on the premise that life is an end in itself. Hence, to derive from that concept of 'life', what would be considered as good, is what proper to life and vice versa.


Another thought come to surface, "How do one determine what is proper and what is not?". The answer is reason and reality. A man can choose whether he wants to take the task of thinking and bear responsibility of it or not. If he does, he needs his steady and focus consciousness all the time for his own life's sake, bearing in his mind that every step taken has consequences. Good or not? Reality will tell. While, if he doesn't, he will surrender his mind before the battle even begin and let it dictated by other's, which ultimately will cost him his life.


Our rational mind is the sole weapon given to us for our survival on earth. A rational man will use his reasoning capacity to its limit in defining his actions, his purposes and what he desires to gain. Although this doesn't guarentee him to be infallible and omnipotent, but so long as man hold his rational mind as his spear in the battle, he will realize if he's done a mistake, a miscalculations, and try to correct it by his own will. On the contrary, the irrational is the impossible. To believe in something nonsensory, non-rational, non-definable and supernatural source of knowledge is to put oneself in a chaos of contradictions that will end up in a perpetual surrender to the unknowable whimsical power.


Above all, why do we intent to keep our path straight, protecting our loved ones, and struggling day after day, in a pursuit of what? What is the purpose of this sort of conduct?


While man's life is the standard of values, his own life serves as the ethical purpose of every individual man. The purpose of living a life proper to a rational being -belongs to every individual man, and the life he has to live is his own.This means that our lives are selfishly ours to conduct and to lead. We, have to choose ourselves the purpose of it, the actions and the goals that we desire to achieve.


As I've said earlier, ethics is a code of values to guide man's choices and actions -the choices and actions that determine the purpose and the course of his life. So, what are the values that man should seek to gain in his life, as a rational being?


Value is that which one acts to gain or keep, while, virtue is the act by which one gains or keeps it. Correspondingly, there are three major values and respectively their virtues which eventually leads to one's ultimate value : his own life.

1. Reason - Rationality.
2. Purpose - Productiveness.
3.  Self Esteem - Pride.

Rationality means the recognition and acceptance of reason as his only source of knowledge, one's only judge of values and one's only guide to action. If one understand what this implies, which means that to be a rational man is to give full commitment to the reality of one's own existence, one will not fail to deduce from that fact that this will bring him to another corollary set of virtues : Independence, Intergrity, and Justice.


Independece means one's acceptance of the responsibility of forming one's own judgement and of living by the work of one's own  mind.

Intergrity means one must never sacrifice one's convictions to the opinions or wishes of others.

As a result, one must never seek or grant the unearned and undeserved, neither in matter nor in spirit which is Justice.


The second of the three values is Purpose with its derivative virtue : Productiveness. Productiveness is the recognition of the fact that productive work is the process by which man's mind sustains his life, the process that sets man free of the necessity to adjust himself to his background but gives him the power to adjust his background to himself. Productiveness will not function effectively and productively without man's highest attributes of his character : creative ability, ambitiousness, self-assertive and refusal to bear uncontested disaster. Thus, a man with purpose will focus his mind on exercising his abilities to the fullest with the notion that his productive work is the central purpose of his life.


And the last value and virtue to be touched here is Pride - Self-Esteem. Pride aka "moral ambitiousness" means that one must earn the right to hold oneself as one's own highest value by achieving one's own moral perfection. This is rather difficult, as to achieve that level of high self-esteem, one must not, and never failed to practice virtues one knows to be rational and never accepting any unearned guilt. Had he earned any of it that resulted from his flaws, he shouldn't leave it uncorrected. By this Pride, a man can assure himself that his life is worth sustaining because this is what makes him a man, a self-made soul.


Ethis is an enormous subject which I couldn't cover in one sitting. This is merely a simplification and the essentials that I think serve as the basics and preliminary ideas on this subject should one decided to pursue it any further.


As a conclusion, the Objectivist holds the basic principle of their ethics is that life is an end in itself so does man, is an end in himself and he has to live for his own sake. To live for his own sake means that the achievement of his own happiness is man's highest moral purpose.





p/s - Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one's values. As John Galt says, "Happiness is a state of non-contradictory joy -a joy without penalty or guilt, a joy that does not clash with any of your values and does not work for your own destruction.... Happiness is possible only to a rational man, the man who desires nothing but rational goals, seeks nothing but rational values and finds his joy in nothing but rational actions."

It's philosophy, not politics

It's philosophy, not politics. Many people thought that politics is what governs and defines how should we conduct our lives in a society. We regard politics as the primary absolute, as something unchallenged and should be accepted as it is without any preliminary derivatives. Well folks, it is not. We have been spending our lifetime seeking for solutions in an endless loop which apparently lead us nowhere, without care to ask the crucial questions. We have been obfuscated by the the beliefs that to change a condition of a society is to change its political views. It's a half-truth statement, anyhow.


Have you ever asked, from what politics is based on?


Politics is a social application of a knowledge that is superior and more imperative in this context. It is philosophy, a subject that has been ignored by our society completely at present. It is a science that will reveal to us the malaise which our people is suffering from. Mental and physical malaise. It is philosophy that one should indulge oneself in pursuit of truth. Philosophy is the base, metaphysical base from which politics is derived upon. Its metaphysical premise is what determine which lines of ethics a man would choose, and subsequently how he would exercise it in a bigger social scale, thus politics.


So people, it is not a wonder, when endless political disputes in our nation is a flunk in solving our daily miseries. We will incessantly argues upon which political parties should rule, without a cognizance that it will be just another civil war, fighting for the same cause.


Try to question what are the philosophical views of the political parties in our country hold and fight for, and you'll be shocked that their basic premises are the same. The base which is so impotent and wimp, couldnt bear to stand a single instance if examined prudentially and challenged with reasons and logic. Go find the answer.

Revolutionary Road

Revolutionary Road (2008) 

After having to learn about art, should I say, in a somewhat proper and conceptual manner rather than my vague, poorly defined ambiguties before, I decided that I should experiment this knowledge and put it into practice. As I was recollecting my memories about the movies that I've watched, this singular movie strikes me to have some qualities that leaves me unsettled. 

It is not like, of all interesting movies that Ive watched, why should I choose this one over the other? I think it is rather because there is something in the movie, the content and some values that are not given directly to the audience, that need one to focus oneself, and think. This gives me the feeling that is still there, just like when I first time finished watching it. Unlike some other stories that fails neither to provoke you nor to stay for a little while longer in your head, even before you stepped out of the cinema.

Revolutionay Road (2008) is a film based on a novel written by Richard Yates, first published in 1961 and keeps under the same title and it is directed by Sam Mendes. It was starred by two enormous names that have been celebrated since their first collaboration, Titanic. Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet. Pior to this writing, I've been reading on some critics and interpretations given by others, well, I agree to some and I shall here as well present my own thoughts.

This movie, I would say, is an anti-suburban malaise story, and it depicts the misery that inculcated in that style of living, but mind you that it is more than meets the eye. To someone who've watched it, he could tell how critical their mental state are and this is what makes this movie a more distinctive one, when all their pathopsychological and unchallenged subconscious are brought into professed words where they cannot hide from but to face the ugliness of it. 

It was not easy for me at first to grasp the hidden content and what it was trying to potray. Although every feelings and thoughts, well, most of them are confessed and thrown out to each other, yet it is deeper still, to know and understand the essence of each character in the story. So I made myself to read the original screenplay written by Justin Haythe in order to shed some insights towards the characters. Im judging the story solely on the movie and the screenplay as I haven't read the novel yet, but a movie is a movie and a novel is a novel. They are different piece of art that should be treated seperately. Also I will not be touching much about the cinematography and acting but focus more on the metaphysical account.

In Act 1,  we are already shown the bitterness in their relationship, when, after a disastrous play in a school audition, which April Wheeler was starring in it, they enganged in an intense rows at the shoulder of Route 12 outside their car. Well, everything started when April was pregnant for the first time. She was not ready to have a baby and took this event as a mistake, and later decided they should live in a suburban area in a somewhat decent house, have a family and settle down. This particular idea dreads April and it haunts her ever since. She didnt realize this until it was too late. 

Confused with what she wanted to be or should be, which is said eventually at the end of the screenplay,

"So maybe you're right. All I know is that I need to find out who I am."

together with an unsure and undecisive husband, Frank Wheeler, who is also a sweet-talker that always managed to convince in persuading April to believe otherwise, she resorts to surrender and performs self-induced abortion with a tube syringe and hot water on herself which eventually puts an end to her life.

I find it particularly challenging in discerning the essence of the characters as they are so complex and their inner conflicts are very complicated. This shows, however, how tremendous Leo and Kate in delivering their performances. I would say that April is much more superior in terms of valuing her life and trying to find a purpose for it, in contrast to his husband who is satisfied with that kind of life, the work he actually hates and content with idea of having family and kids and wanting no more of his life. Even after April's unrelenting attempts to wake him up from the delusion of a happy life, by suggesting them to move to Paris so that they could have time to find their purposes and set their life straight once again, away from the "hopeless emptiness", Frank personally thinks that every thing is quite all right with him. This is somewhat similar to the mentalities of most of our people at present. That comfy and secure feelings regardless they are happy or not with their life. Here, I admire April in having to think about what a man should be, instead of who they are, as she said in the movie,

" Look at us, we've bought into the same, ridiculous delusion, this idea that you have to resign from life, and settle down the moment you have children. And we've been punishing each other for it."

And later,

"Its what you are that has been stifled, its what you are that's been denied, in this kind of life."

"Whats that?"

"You're the most beautiful and wonderful thing in the world, you're a man."

But unfortunately, it was just April alone who think as such. And poor her, she was not strong enough to break this ridiculous conventionalities alone. 

While the story is at its peak, the appearance of John Givings, son of the Givings, starred by Christopher Fitzgerald is a fine touch from the writer. Although John was said to have mental problems and was sent to an insane asylum, his presence seems to justify the condition and the notions of the couple. John's role here, together with his "impersonal" character, speaks the yet still unspoken things that circulates between April and Frank. I have to say Christopher Fitzgerald did a great job in playing this extremely unique character. I love the dialogue of him with the Wheelers,

"Did you get cold feet? Decide you like it here in the hopeless emptiness after all?

Later,

"Big man you got here, April. But maybe you deserve each other. You must give him a hard time if making babies is the only way he feels like a man." 

"Yeah sorry, If anybody's got something to be sorry about, it's me. But I'll tell you one thing I'm not sorry about..."

"Im glad im not going to be that baby." 

Another point which is unique regarding this story is how deliberately well the writer suggests to us, of the conditions of every relationship presents in it. Take Shep and Milly, friends of the Wheeler. At various instances we could see on their faces how they are faking and hiding their true feelings for the sake of getting along with each other, pretending to be happy. We could see how Shep reacts every time in the presence of the Wheelers, how he looks at April as if he's the one who should be in Frank's position and later he confesses to April after they had sex in the car that he loves her and it is all that he ever wanted. 

The way the director ended up the story was marvelous. Tired of all-whining and twisting words of his old and corpulent wife, Mr Givings slowly turns the volume of his hearing device down letting her talk to herself dumbly. I guess after April's death, her dilemmas were felt by every person in the story and they knew theyre doomed by the fact that it's all to late for them to make a change.

A Jungle of Ignoramus

Some say that the world is okay and nothing is wrong with it. They say it is fine enough to be liveable that we should not be worried about.


How could you say that?


You know that poverty is a condition which is dreadful and distasteful to live by, yet in pursuit of wealth and a successful life, you cannot help but to feel guilty about it in separate numbers of occasions? At least by your facial expressions, you apologize for seeking happiness.


You know honesty and being a truthful person is a virtue, yet at times when you are tempted to tell the truth but dismiss it, telling yourself that it is not compatible with the public and it is better not to stir discomfort among people.


Every now and then, political ideas, views, and movements are successing one after another yet the condition of living and what's more, people's mental state, remains as it is.


When you are at the start of your business and trying to sell your new product to your so-called bestfriends, they will start bargaining, waving their badges of friendship as if its a discount coupon until there is nothing for you to profit from. And you eventually resort to sell and introduce your business to some strangers as you feel more appreciated and taken seriously rather than with your close friends and family?


Each time you pass a beggar, they will give you that pitiful look, as if you are responsible for what had happened to them and it is your fault again if you dont do anything to help them, and you, dubiously starting to feel guilty if you dont throw a penny on their dirty hand.


Why, at a hot up of an issue, you move in your sit, repositioning yourself while you clearly indifferent to the ambiguity of the words given by the reporter and start sharing the assurance of a pretention with a friend beside you, knowing deep inside that you are in a conspiracy of evading the sole truth of that issue.


You realize the fact that your life depends on you, you are the only one who would shape and determine its outcome, and you alone responsible for your life. But you are confused with the notion that the more you sacrifice yourself, the more virtous person you will become.


A creative man is driven by the desire to achieve, not by the desire to beat others. Why then, do you feel threatened by the presence of someone as competent as you? To the extent that you will try by any means to bring them down?


Why a highly intellectual man, who makes a breakthrough in his field of physical science, finds that his personal life is not as enlightening as his intellectual pursuit? He merely marries a woman and have kids with her out of conventional practices.


Why the harder you work, the more injustice are done towards you? They say you have the abilities that are not given to others. So you should give your portions to the unlucky and ungifted. You know that your productivity and ability are your means to earn a living, but you never cared to ask, by what means do they earn their livings?


After all these mess and you still being indifferent,pretending that what I am saying are nothing but a worthless rows of illusions, you can undress yourself go join your goldfish in the bowl and wait for someone else to feed you. Im sure you will prefer it that way.

The Sins of the Elderly

While i was checking up on this title that i chose for my usage in this writing,in the internet, lest somebody else had used it and perhaps talked about the same thing as mine, I came across an article that was exactly it.I hesitated at first,should i change the title? But, it was not for long,when i made myself to click on the link and read about it. Apparently,the author was not saying about "sins" literally but some health-related problems when one arrived at his old age. Visual and memory impairments,muscle weakness and other ilnesses. This ,somewhat, gave me a relief because what I am about to say is not some health-related ilness but "sins" in its literal sense and a foremost one, the moral-related illness.


I find that this discourse has a very close relation to my dispositions as I personally experience the sickness of these "sins" towards me throughout my life and it is ubiquitous.Since i was a kid,I had had this thought where I questioned to myself on how adults act,think and on what base do they use to dictate us. Is there any definite concept or a system which could make me understand the way they behave and maybe by understanding it beforehand,in a hope that the quicker I learn and think like an adult, the better person I will become. To my frustration, I found that most of their advices and the so called wise words are consist of nothing but untraceable repetitions of someone else's words regardless they understand it and come to terms to any of the word they say.


There are not many who could give me what I really need to face the reality of life. Something that I could grasp its root and hold it for the rest of my life. Every now and then I find contradictions and non absolutes that make me doubt of their words and do nothing but to discard them. What I need are not percepts but concepts,someone who can help me build and construct my concepts properly as my kit for survival. I can be an independent man. What did I resort to? I take it that I have to find my own way, myself.


Like I said earlier,my concern in this entry regards morality. Morality is an abstract, not concrete,conceptual code of values and principles. Here, three keywords one has to take into considerations in order to understand morality. Abstract, concepts and values. For those who have no idea as to what is abstract and what is concrete, this is not the place where you would find the answer. I will not discuss it here. Without morality, a person would have a difficult time in determining every actions he has to take in a given circumstance. However,to regard every single information as a new thing without any intergration is impossible to man, because we are equipped with a conceptual thinking. Thus,the issue arises is not whether one possess or not a concept, but rather how one organize and sculpture it.


Hence, this brings us to the question of what is a concept?


 A concept is a mental intergration of two or more units which are isolated by a process of abstraction and united by a specific definition. From our first moment of confrontation with the world, our mind takes in information which it perceives through our senses, incorporates it in different slots depending on the specific characteristics and builds the
concept wider and wider as we continue our lives.


There are two items which conceptual thinking consist of, or rather its method of formation. Cognitive and normative abstractions. Cognitive province deals with the identification of the facts of reality, while, normative abstractions is an evaluating system of it that will help a man to adjudicate the proper course of actions he should take based on the calculations of values. Thus, the first kind of abstraction forms what is known as epistemology of science and the latter, of ethics, morality and of art.


A child, whose lacking of a proper metaphysical and well-prescribed philosophical system, will only depends on his sense of life as it is a pre-conceptual equivalent to metaphysics. During his development into a full adult, he will learn to systemize and organize his knowledge of the world aided by both the abstractions. Sadly enough, in today's world, not only his cognitive faculty is assisted to some minimal extent,and yet no help is offered to him on how he should manage his normative abstraction save many attempts to cripple and stunt its growth.


Why do I say this?  


Look at our conventional morality, how its concrete-bound method of thinking blocks a man to think of what kind of man he ought to be and why. Some consists of incomprehensible rules, others are depressing prohibitions. It doesnt concern with the formation of a child's character. "Dont make friend with him", "You have to go to Miss Lina's wedding", "You have to listen to Mr Ben". There was a time, while resting on my couch, thinking about this misery of unfathomable set of rules and duties, I came with a thought, that, maybe people didnt know how to see things abstractly, every thing was taken concretely, thus it resulted in many misunderstandings and contradictions. I was unsure of this notion but I kept it in my mind until i found a validation of it in one of Ayn Rand's writing.


Go and try to ask any adults (parents,teachers,relatives etc) , when they are trying to dictate you. See that they will be arrested when been thrown with the questions of how's and why's. What they could only say is " That's how life is" without any further explanations. Its such a shame spectacle when an adult who claim to know what life and reality is, and belittle us by saying that we are 'lacking of experience', could not tell and show us a well-defined and comprehensible conceptions that are clear from contradictions and confusions. This is one of the biggest sin of the elderly, the demolition of child's normative abstractions.


As a final recourse, a child would take the other alternative, which is amoral resignation, after unaccountable numbers of exhaustion of not given the chance to form his own thinking and abstractions, he develops one of the destructive emotions that dominates him : fear. From a child's fear, fear of others especially adults, you can see later on in his life, growing as an adult, he is afraid, afraid of being a man, of independence, of responsibilities and of loneliness. He is used to repress his values and neglect what to him is important and eventually gives up. He gives up to put effort on valuing and judging. Aren't we always hear people say, "Dont judge!", "Stop being judgemental", "This is a non-judgemental circle". To avoid judgement is to surrender your mind to any unfathomable abyssal clouds.


Don't be shocked to find a wimpy person whose face bares no sparks of lifeness, only lines of emptiness, who stands in front of you yet fails to give you any suggestions to his existence and his sense of life. His personality and ultimately his mind is of full of others. He is others. There is no he. He doesnt exist.


Im particularly indignant to phrases like " You still young, you dont know what life is like", "We are older and experienced, you should listen to us", "Wait till you grow up and see". Apart from parents and relatives, these words were used out loud by our teachers at school, trying to inculcate in our mind that the older the better, youngsters should listen to them albeit your mind tells you some thing else. I just wanted to ask, of whose life you are talking about? Mine or yours? Do we experience the same thing? If not, then, how can you claim that you know what is the outcome of others' lives?  Till now, most of their advices ceased to work for me. Where now, when you said earlier that your advices would be used till our old age? Two or three years and my mind can already invalidate it. Or maybe i have arrived my 'old age' and i have to form a new concept? This is such a joke.


What are these adults trying to do is to extinguish the fire out from inside us, to wipe the sparks away from our burning eyes. An ambitious kid who talks about what or who he wanted to be, regardless its a cowboy, a superhero or a detective, were slapped by the notion that says "Its such a waste of time", "You dont have to be like that, this is just enough", "Live an ordinary life". He will cringe and defeatably drop his virtous ambition down, believing that a life like what he dreamt of, not only impossible but ridiculous.


A memory which is still fresh in my head, when two or three years ago, I was looking for my professor to ask him some crucial questions regarding my subject. I was so eager at that time and I heartily intented to bring this subject to a deeper understanding. As i was asking her the questions, she barred me with her saying, "It is enough to know this, you dont need to know more". I dont know what is more evil than this. Honestly, this crushed me down badly and it was when I started to believe and depend on myself only.


Addressing all the adults out there, mothers, fathers, teachers, seniors,  witness this!
What kind of sins that have you done to us? To the new generation?


For those who thinks there is still time for you to recheck your value-premises from scratch, from the start, dont doubt any longer. Your life depends on it. Dont let yourself astray until the fire gone out into a hopeless whitehead oldman who can do nothing about himself but expecting a sweet delicious heaven awaits him afterlife.

Hero

​

Bill : "Now, a staple of the superhero mythology is, there's the superhero and there's the alter ego. Batman is actually Bruce Wayne, Spider-Man is actually Peter Parker. When that character wakes up in the morning, he's Peter Parker. He has to put on a costume to become Spider-Man. And it is in that characteristic Superman stands alone. Superman didn't become Superman. Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he's Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red "S", that's the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears - the glasses, the business suit - that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent. He's weak... he's unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race. Sorta like Beatrix Kiddo and Mrs. Tommy Plimpton."

Who do you regard as a hero in your life? Your dad, your mom, a friend or a boss in your company? If so, what are the constitutions that elevate a person to this elite status? Each hero symbolizes a virtue. How do you recognize those elements in them? These are all the critical questions one would be intrigued in discussing about heroism. And most important of all, i will try to expound what moral treason that has crushed heroism when it at its pinnacle of excellency.

​

No matter how a person wants to defy the superheroes as to their existential issues, one cannot escape the fact that one feels the admiration and inspiration towards an unyielding figure who fights for a value and stands firm by it. A hero,by definition which i find adequate " is an individual of elevated moral stature and superior ability who pursues his goals indefatigability in the face of powerful antagonist(s)."

As the definition implies, it consequently results in several breakups of components which we could identify heroism,notedly ; moral greatness, ability or prowess, action in the face of opposition and triumph in at least a spiritual, if not a physical, form.


It is worth mentioning that, the last component of heroism stated that triumph in at least a spiritual form. A hero is a champion of values and of virtues regardless of what becoming of him. Whether he succeed in its physical application or not. This misconception is once and for all has to be corrected. Lets take some examples of men who we regard as heros but failed in their quest. Henry Cameron, a character in the Fountainhead, who once erected a substantial skyscraper while the neighboring buildings were still deluded by hodgepodges of ancient mimicry. His design was so crude and quintessence in its form that a birdbrain will avoid their eyes and gives loathful remarks while a rational mind sees what his building symbolized. Yet, his greatest building were never erected and he dies a drunkard.

What should we say about this? Is he not a hero? Dies a drunkard?

He is a man who elevates architecture in its very sense, who sees that a building is like an embodiment of man's purpose and values,who fights unnoticed for man's unlimited potentials when he erected Dana Building. He is,in fact, a hero in architectural world and universally in human province.

Every nation will fall without a proper,well-defined philosophical base. So as heroism. Heroism in its essence, requires an exeptional level of abstraction, a soul that understand his motives and a clear mind in which his metaphysical value-judgement take place. You see, in this context, a soul-body dichotomy fails miserably. What do you think,if you see a man, who possess a great physique yet all of his actions were motivated by bodily whims and unruly desires? Without a rational philosophical system, he is just a man with a prominent muscular body encapsulated an empty soul.

On the contrary, an outstanding mind without any practicalities cannot be considered a hero. A hero is a man of ability. He is a practical man. Take Mycroft Holmes, who serves a good exemplary in this setting. No one denies how terrific his mind solving the very complex murder in a finger-counting. Yet, a hero doesnt depends on others to achieve his values. He is a doer. He is a self generated person who doesnt wait for others and abdicate the necessities to pursue his goals.

Yesterday we were visiting a friend of my parents who was now a successful businessman. During his leisure times,he practices a kind of martial arts that is used in one of the TMNT's character,Donatello, called Bo/staff. He incorporates the philosophy of the martial in his business pursuits. He told me a wise word which i dont fully agree in its theoritical sense but practically it is true. He said that to succeed, one must be opposed,which it is not a must, without oppositions denotes that we are weak,we have nothing to stand for and when there is no sense of challenge, we will live in a sweet comfy life, renouncing there is further goal to pursue. 

A hero is a man of elite status. He attains a moral stature which no ordinary man possess and stands by it truthfully. This is the distinctive feature between an ordinary and a hero. An ordinary man will hesitate, unclear about his motives,clouded by his surroundings, afraid to make people around him uncomfortable.

A status of of art in a given society reflects the dominant philosophical system in it. The discussion brings us to a topic of moral treason, which hits heroism destructively. Ethical systems result from metaphysical foundations. So as our actions,based on the ethics which consecutively derived from what we hold as our view of life. When a society holds reason as an absolute, that our rational mind is the only tool for survival, we will see men seek for the best in them. Hence, it will produce a set of virtues namely independence,productiveness,and pride resulting from a self esteem and purposeful mind.

Why then should we apologise when we witness or experience greatness? 

Observe this in our daily life, when we see a wealthy and successful businessman,we feel the admiration and longing for that status as it is what a productive mind supposed to reach, yet we feel guilty towards feeling it. Let alone to be that man.

Why? Why do we apologise to greatness?

This is the moral treason that destroys heroism. It is even evident in superheroes movies where the conception of being a hero is a sin. Its better to be ordinary.People feel pity towards a hero for being an exceptional and the hero himself wishes he could be just like an ordinary people. Paradoxical enough, a creator of superheroes elevates and at the same time seeks to destroy them.

The superman monolgue that i quoted from the character Bill,in Kill Bill 2 by Quentin Tarantino earlier serves a perfect form of damnation to this irrational culture. The red-blue suit of Superman is not his costume. That is him,his original clothes. The weak and indecisiveness of Clark Kent is what Superman has to wear to face the society. It is a form of apology,isnt it? From what sources this moral treason? The answer is, altruism.


Do you consider yourself a hero according to this exposition? Or do you want to be one? Find the hero in you.