Morality of Language

[Montalban]

Recently I saw a documentary on the English author George Eliot (pen name).

She ran off to the continent with a married man. The narrator of the story stated that in doing this she showed great 'courage' and 'conviction' because it was against the mores of the Victorian era. The narrator stated these traits as if they were positive, in this circumstance.

I thought that she showed lack of convictions in that she so easily gave in to her passions... and she ran away from England, anyway.

It seems to me, from a relgious point of view, there was no 'courage' shown.

 

[Lloyd]

Well, it's not exactly a glorious martyrdom but nonetheless abandoning one's family, friends, and one's own good name for the sake of something greater is to a large extent at the heart of all great religions, particularly Christianity. So yes. I'd say that she was courageous though not exactly for the most noble purpose.

 

[jimbob]

montalban. you've got a point

 

[Melody]

I have to agree with Montalban. Websters defines courage as "mental or moral strength to venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty." I reserve the word "courage" for people like Harriet Tubman, Helen Keller, Rosa Parks, the people who hid Jews from the Germans during World War II...just to name a few.


It's not a word I'd use to describe a selfish woman who throws off all restraint and self-control to run off with a married man. Did she stop to consider what would happen to an abandoned wife in an era where women had little choices for supporting themselves?

Nope...courage is not a word I'd use here.