A Hero?

By now Jet Blue flight attendant Steven Slater has become widely known for his actions toward a passenger. Though details are somewhat sketchy it appears that Slater got upset about her carry-on luggage, used foul language toward her and other passengers, then activated an emergency escape chute and left the plane, taking along some beer.

What I find disturbing about this is that many are making Mr. Slater into a hero. While his actions may or may not have had some justification, I see nothing heroic about them. I believe there are three requirements for heroes:

First, the hero must face a bad situation, one out of the ordinary and requiring appropriate action. That may have been the case though there are conflicting reports. If a passenger was really causing trouble that may have created such a situation. Mr. Slater may have been in such a situation but that alone is not enough to justify calling him a hero. People regularly face such situations. Some become heroes, others fail miserably. The situation provides the opportunity for heroism but does not make heroism automatic.

Second, the hero must take appropriate action beyond what a normal human would do. He must risk himself or otherwise go well out of what most of us would find to be a natural reaction to that situation. In this Mr. Slater fails miserably. His actions were nothing more than a tantrum, an animal-like reaction. Any two-year-old can throw a tantrum.

Third, his action must be effective in helping others or resolving the problem. Again Mr. Slater fails. His actions did nothing to make anything better. In fact he disturbed other passengers, cost his employer a large sum of money, and may have made prosecution of the passenger difficult or impossible. If that passenger was causing major problems she could have been prosecuted on federal charges of interference with a flight crew. Mr. Slater confused things to the point that effective prosecution may not be possible. He did not make things better but instead made them worse.

Just because someone does something we'd like to do does not make that action heroic. Nor should we encourage such intemperate actions by lionizing people like Mr. Slater.

How often are such people made into heroes when they are not? I don't know but I do know that it happens. Several years ago a snowboarder got lost on the route from the Timberline Ski Area on Mount Hood down to Government camp. He did act rather sensibly after becoming lost, dug a snow cave and took care of himself. However it would have been much better had he simply acted responsibly and either not taken that route or first prepared himself by learning how to navigate in the conditions he would face. Instead he caused many searchers to have to go look for him, disrupting their lives and costing the county in overtime for sheriff's deputies.

What was the result? He was treated as a hero and several businesses even gave him some nice, new snowboarding and outdoor gear. He was rewarded for his mistake. We cannot know if his treatment as a hero had anything to do with this next, but during the next three weeks two other snowboarders got in trouble taking the same route he took and getting lost in the same way.

There are real heroes in this world and they deserve our respect. However we should be careful to avoid treating people as heroes when they just do something stupid. Let's not encourage bad or dumb behavior.

This and That

Hot air rises. That might explain some of the people who hold high political office, and even some business leaders.

It's discouraging to think of how many people laugh at what they regard as blind faith in religion. Yet many of those same people blindly accept politically correct ideas such as the nonsense that men and women have identical thought patterns. Such people even forced the resignation of a Harvard president who had the temerity to suggest looking at science instead of blindly accepting the politically correct belief.

As the football season starts we'll again hear commentators referring to “skill positions.” What they mean by that is the publicity positions, positions such as quarterback or running back that get lots of attention. Every position, from offensive center to defensive linebacker is a skill position.

If you improve something enough you will eventually break it. That common engineering saying applies elsewhere as well, including in government.

If the opposite of pro is con, what is the opposite of progress?

I drove by a golf course the other day. Grass all neatly manicured and sprayed for every conceivable pest. Water and sand traps carefully planned. Other vegetation likewise carefully planned and manicured. Then on the radio I heard an advertisement about how wonderful golf is because golfers get to experience Nature.

The Obama family spent months deciding which breed of dog to get for a White House pet. That is more time than the president wants to allow congress to decide on things like health care and energy policy, bills that run to thousands of pages and will have serious effects on the whole country.

Some claim that a clever saying proves nothing, but even that clever saying is wrong. A clever saying proves that someone came up with a clever saying.

It's amazing how many people laugh at the idea of an omniscient creator, then act like government officials are not only omniscient but automatically moral enough not to misuse their powers.

What can you find in most camping stores? The most modern sleeping bags and packable mattresses. Tents made of the latest materials. High tech water purifiers. Global Positioning System devices. The newest camp stoves. It's interesting how much technology it takes nowadays to get back to nature.

It's rather interesting how many “consumer advocates” want to prevent consumers from acquiring what they prefer to acquire at the prices they are willing to pay.

What a difference it would make if “community organizers” would organize people to clean up their neighborhoods, get educated, and get jobs instead of organizing them to demand tax-funded benefits.

Much has been said about the greed of banks and credit card companies. Yes they are greedy but let him who is without sin cast the first stone. What about the greed of people who bought things they didn't need with money they didn't have using loans they could not repay?

If common sense is so common, please explain why men have to wear dark wool suits in the summer and why women have to wear shoes apparently designed by the Marquis de Sade.

A businessman who sells something people want at a price they are willing to pay is regarded as selfish. Meanwhile a politician who takes people's money in taxes and spends it on something most don't want may be called a statesman. What's wrong here?

Extrapolating can lead to common human errors. Racism exists in our society, even racist cops. However that does not mean that every white cop who stops a black driver for speeding is racist.

Our society rewards heroes, people who rescue others. That is all well and good, but what do we do for the people who prevent problems so that rescue is not needed?