Hero and Trascendence: The intolerable Image of Freedom

Abstract

The aim of this article is to define the religious meaning of the main forms of the heroic. To do so, it is essential to explain it in the context of moral skepticism surrounding the phenomenon of the hero. Some authors such as Bröckling propose to “dismantle” the heroic as a matter of urgency. This attitude is signaling a social emergency under the sign of suspicion of any mode of inequality that threatens theegalitarian achievements of modern democracy. Thus the discourses that discredit any form of heroism become more virulent insofar as “heroisms” manifest a moral inequality (although it is also interpreted in relation to other ranks: gender, social, religious, economic...). This indicates that the very recognition of the “hero” implies agreeing on “something”. In spite of this de- heroizing current, the heroic impulse -not exempt from problems and threats- is still in force. In contrast, from psychology, authors such as Franco and Zimbardo propose incorporating the heroic attitude into everyday life, considering each person as a potential hero. In the field of media culture, especially in fiction, there is great resistance tothe hero’s disappearance. On the one hand, the fact that fiction continues to show some forms of leadership, exemplary paradigms or heroic figures can be interpreted as a sign of a longing or a lack. But, on the other hand, if fiction improves nature or perfects it, according to Aristotle, the constant presenceof the heroic in representation may be indicative of its necessity. Factors such as the professionalization ofcertain jobs or the sophistication of administration and legislation impose new frontiers on the appearance of the hero, understood in its supernatural, transcendent, sacrificial and religious dimensions. In order to present these ideas, three forms of the heroic and their possible religious roots are distinguished: the mythical, the cultural and the moral.