Art said:
Your argument as I understand it is; McCain is a hero because he put himself in harm's way by joining the military and all members of the military are heroes but all US POWs are members of the military ergo all POWs are heroes.
Where's the mischaracterization you accuse me of?
If I misunderstood you and if simply joining the military is not the reason why you see McCain as a hero then would you explain what action he performed which, in your mind, is heroic.
I thought I'd already said these things but I may have been unclear, I apologize: I do not think that all prisoners are heroes and I do not think that all members of the military are heroes.
I think that someone who intentionally places themselves at risk of a certain level of harm (I haven't specified a particular level of risk or harm yet... that might be tricky to quantify) for the sake of a cause they believe to be primarily of benefit to other people can be called a hero. So I think that not all members of the military, but those who take part out of an honest sense of duty, solidarity with their countrymen, or otherwise the "someone has to do it" principle (while genuinely believing the war is a necessary effort) and willingly enter a situation like combat, field medical corps, spying, or blockade running for example, would qualify. On both sides of the conflict.
It's probably even less easy to quantify but I should think that firemen and police officers are often in an equivalent situation. Certainly when they're directly rescuing someone while putting themselves in harm's way, at least.
And I'm sure there are many other occupations and situations that fit the bill too.
In general, we're really just saying that someone has been selfless and valorous in an admirable way, right? At a certain level of self-risk. Like I said above, the case of Charles Lindbergh has always confounded me a bit. They definitely call him a hero all over the place but the trans-Atlantic flight doesn't seem quite selfless enough. Perhaps the definition has changed over the years.
(Or, perhaps my definition is incorrect or inadequate; that's certainly a possibility too.)
Oh, and another thing is it seems to me that the definition of what a hero is would need to be a matter of intrinsic factors - the qualities of the person, the qualities of the action, and the reasons they took the action, rather than extrinsic or contextual things.
⚛