An interesting thing, the idea of noble love and of noble death; heroes are noble in death and the average man is noble in love. But are the two not contradictions of human nature? Contradictions of the very logic we live out lives by?

I believe they are.

A hero will gladly give up his life to save a multitude of people that he “loves.” He would consider his own life meaningless to save the tens or thousands of lives that he believes more deserve to live, in their totality, than his one simple but glorious life.

However, the man who loves a single person will not simply give up his life to save his beloved. He would risk his life to save hers, not just throw his away. Because he will think that it would be worth the risk of his failing and having at least tried, than to become a martyr to not trying.

So the question is, which of these men, the hero, or the lover, has the true concept of what life is worth? The hero, who will simply give up his life when the enemy threatens his people unless he complies? Or the lover, who believes that any life after having tried to save his beloved is better than the noble death of simply surrendering his life in return for hers? Which of these is the correct measure of human life, and how could we say the other is wrong?

Does the hero love his people less if he gives himself up for them? Would the lover be wrong to not just give up his life to ensure the life of his beloved even though he only might have been able to save her?

The love of many to the love of one. Which is more powerful in human nature, and which is more noble are impossible questions to answer. Perhaps the lover is selfish in wanting to live for his beloved in the hopes of saving her. Perhaps the hero is a lesser man for willingly giving up his able-ness to save the less-able lives of his people. Perhaps, perhaps, but shall we ever know?

Send questions/comments to:
RavenSky713@hotmail.com