1) We’re disagreeing about the referent of “courage.” You reserve it for “the ultimate willingness to act…to preserve the beliefs of a polity or society without forethought to personal consequences.” My use is much more mundane – so the third-grader that stands up to the bully is acting courageously – the same kind of act to a different degree. This disagreement is a semantical one.

2) We’re disagreeing about what makes people morally worthy. My position is that there’s no need for a person to contemplate an action for that action to be morally worthy. Thus, whether a person is “willing” in some deep meaning of willing is not the issue – it’s the action, pure and simple. This is a metaethical disagreement.

3) We’re disagreeing about how we become more virtuous. My position is that we become more virtuous through practice and habit rather than some complete out of the blue action. This is a disagreement about the teaching of character.

Now, if you’re right about (1), then (2) and (3) may need some revision. (3) is the clearer case, for if you can only become more courageous (virtuous) through extreme actions, you’ll have to be either really lucky or unlucky to be able to become more courageous because it’ll require your socio-historical positioning such that you have the ability to put yourself on the line in a grand way. On this account, a very small portion of humanity will ever have the chance to be cowardly or courageous – and that seems counterintuitive to me.

Regarding self-serving motives: there comes a point where an individual needs to have her needs taken care of, and sometimes the only way they can do that is to learn how to be courage enough to take herself seriously enough and begin acting as if she were serious. I think it’s a measure of wisdom when people start figuring out when their needs are not being served by “the common good” and figure out a way to take care of those needs without necessarily stalling “the common good.” We need not get into the trap of ethical egoism – my interests are the only ones that really matter – but we do need to recognize that our interests do matter.

So my advice about telling the Boss no is in the context of someone who’s flourishing is seriously compromised by the way they are allowing themselves to be treated rather than the context of someone just looking out to serve themselves.

But where I disagree is that courage’s only reference is for actions that require ultimate sacrifice or a willingness to die or be harmed. Furthermore, the constant act of putting yourself out there for causes you believe are important makes it such that you’re not as cowardly in other situations that require more sacrifice.

Am I saying that the courage from blogging translates to courage in combat, stressful situations, or against tyranny? Not a direct translation – that requires other virtues to be at play – but it has made you used to being someone who stands for something or at least has made you used to the idea that your voice and actions count for something.

Thanks for joining the conversation!

Quiet Rebel Writer’s last blog post..Roundup: 7 Freelancing and Creativity Links