Defining Courage: A Philosophical Journey Through the Great Books

Courage, at its core, is often understood as the ability to confront fear, pain, danger, uncertainty, or intimidation. Yet, a deeper philosophical inquiry, drawing from the wellspring of the Great Books of the Western World, reveals its far more complex and nuanced definition. This article delves into the historical evolution of this profound virtue, examining its intricate relationship with emotion, and distinguishing it from its related vices, offering a comprehensive exploration of what it truly means to be courageous.

The Ancient Roots: Plato's Socratic Inquiry into Courage

Our philosophical quest for the definition of courage must begin with the ancient Greeks, particularly with Plato and his mentor, Socrates. In Plato's dialogue Laches, Socrates engages two esteemed generals in a pursuit of courage's essence, only to find it remarkably elusive.

Initially, Laches suggests courage is "standing firm in the ranks and not running away." Socrates, ever the dialectician, quickly points out the inadequacy of this definition, noting that some courageous acts involve tactical retreat or even pursuit. He pushes for a universal quality that applies not only to soldiers but also to sailors, politicians, and even those facing illness or poverty.

The dialogue progresses to consider courage as a kind of "wise endurance" or "knowledge of what is to be feared and what is not to be feared." This Socratic perspective introduces a crucial intellectual component: true courage is not mere recklessness, but an informed apprehension of danger, guided by wisdom. Without this rational understanding, an action might appear brave but is, in fact, merely foolhardy.

Aristotle's Golden Mean: Courage as a Virtue Between Extremes

Aristotle, in his Nicomachean Ethics, provides perhaps the most influential and enduring definition of courage by positioning it firmly within his doctrine of the Golden Mean. For Aristotle, courage is a virtue, a disposition lying between two vices:

  • Excess (Rashness): The person who fears nothing, or fears too little, is rash. They rush into danger without proper consideration, often leading to harm or failure. This is not true courage, but a defect of character.
  • Deficiency (Cowardice): The person who fears too much, or fears what they ought not to fear, is a coward. They shrink from necessary action, failing to confront danger when honor or duty demands it.

Aristotle defines the courageous person as one who "endures and fears what he should and for the right purpose and in the right manner and at the right time." This emphasizes the rational and volitional aspects of courage. It's not the absence of emotion (fear), but the proper management and response to it. The truly courageous individual feels fear, but acts rightly despite it.

(Image: A classical Greek marble bust of Aristotle, with a thoughtful, composed expression, symbolizing the rational pursuit of virtue and the golden mean.)

Aristotle further clarifies the definition of courage by distinguishing it from other states that might resemble it:

State Resembling Courage Description
True Courage Rationality, choice, and acting rightly despite fear. The virtue lies in judging correctly and acting with appropriate firmness. Acknowledges fear but acts in line with reason.
Rashness Acting without due consideration of danger. This is an excess of confidence or a deficiency of fear. It often leads to self-harm or harm to others and is not virtuous.
Cowardice Acting with excessive fear or shrinking from necessary action. This is a deficiency of confidence or an excess of fear. It prevents one from fulfilling duties or acting honorably.
Fearlessness Lack of proper apprehension of danger. While sometimes useful, it can be a vice if it stems from ignorance or insensitivity rather than rational assessment. Not the same as courage, which feels fear but masters it.

The Indispensable Role of Emotion in Courage

The definition of courage cannot be fully grasped without acknowledging the profound role of emotion, particularly fear. As Aristotle noted, the courageous person is not someone who feels no fear, but rather someone who feels fear appropriately and acts rightly in the face of it.

Fear is the raw material upon which courage operates. If there were no danger or potential for harm, there would be no need for courage. The emotion of fear signals a threat, triggering our natural instinct for self-preservation. True courage is the mastery of this instinct, the decision to transcend it for a greater good, a moral imperative, or a rational objective.

Consider the Stoics, whose philosophy, though distinct from Aristotle's, also features prominently in the Great Books. While they advocated for apatheia – freedom from passions – they did not suggest a complete absence of emotion. Rather, they sought to control the assent to impressions that lead to destructive emotions. For a Stoic, courage would be a rational judgment to face adversity, understanding that external events are beyond one's control, but one's response is not. The emotion of fear might arise, but it would not be given dominion over reason.

Expanding the Definition: Beyond Physical Bravery

While ancient philosophers often discussed courage in the context of battle, the definition of this virtue extends far beyond physical bravery. Throughout the Great Books, we find implicit and explicit discussions of other forms of courage:

  • Moral Courage: The strength to stand up for what is right, even when it is unpopular, difficult, or dangerous to do so. This involves facing social disapproval, ostracization, or professional repercussions.
  • Intellectual Courage: The willingness to question deeply held beliefs, to pursue truth wherever it may lead, and to admit one's own ignorance, even when it challenges one's worldview or the prevailing dogma.
  • Existential Courage: The resolve to face the inherent anxieties of human existence – death, meaninglessness, freedom, and isolation – and to create meaning and purpose in a world that offers no inherent guarantees. This form of courage is explored by thinkers like Kierkegaard, who grappled with faith and despair, and later by existentialists who emphasized individual responsibility in the face of an absurd universe.

These varied manifestations underscore that courage is fundamentally about confronting what we perceive as a threat, whether that threat is physical, social, intellectual, or existential. It is the active choice to engage with difficulty rather than to retreat from it.

Conclusion: The Enduring Relevance of a Complex Virtue

The definition of courage has been a cornerstone of philosophical inquiry for millennia, and for good reason. From Plato's Socratic dialogues to Aristotle's ethical treatises and the reflections of later Stoic and existentialist thinkers, the Great Books reveal a consistent thread: courage is more than just a gut reaction; it is a complex virtue rooted in rational choice, a proper understanding of fear, and a commitment to act rightly in the face of adversity.

It is not the absence of emotion, but the mastery over it. It is not recklessness, but calculated resolve. As we navigate the complexities of modern life, the ancient wisdom on courage remains profoundly relevant, urging us to cultivate this essential virtue in all its forms – physical, moral, intellectual, and existential – to live lives of integrity and purpose.

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: "Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics Courage Explained"

Video by: The School of Life

💡 Want different videos? Search YouTube for: "Plato Laches Summary Philosophy Fear"

Share this post