Is there a difference between a daring hero and a reckless fool?

[Dr.Drake]

@aesop

Bolding mine. And this may be getting into nitpick territory but in my opinion it’s precisely the fact that heroes *are *ordinary people that makes them heroic. They suddenly find themselves thrust into extraordinary (and overwhelmingly adverse) circumstances by chance, then prevail.

That’s why I dislike doling out the “hero” label so liberally (since 9/11) to firefighters, policemen, soldiers, etc. I grant all the previous are dedicated, selfless, commendable, etc. But they are in harm’s way by dint of their choice of occupation, not by unforeseeable circumstances.

And there are of course plenty of examples of true heroism even among these occupations. But to call everyone who ever put on a uniform a hero (as we seem to do anymore) cheapens the honor for those who truly deserve it.

I agree with part of this: I loathe splashing the “hero” label about liberally, covering entire occupations. But that is in part because I believe a hero is someone who goes beyond the capabilities, at least the practical capabilities, of ordinary people. That’s why we admire heroism. I know I have many sterling qualities, but I don’t think I have it in me to be a hero: that combination of bravery, selflessness, and often physical ability is pretty rare, never mind the opportunity.

[Quartz]

Heroes risk themselves; fools put others at risk.

[drachillix]

@Der_Trihs

Success (“If it’s stupid and it works, it isn’t stupid”), whether or not the goal was worth the risk, whether or not there were less risky options available, and whether they were risking others or just themselves are all factors.

I believe in the movie platoon there was a comment along the same line as the OP.

“Whats the differentce between bravery and stupidity”

the reply

“Timing.”

[TriPolar]

There’s no difference except perception.

[madmonk28]

Competence