Is Jobs a hero?

[Riceball]

https://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3497104.html

An interesting perspective on things. Not so much the juxtaposition of an iPad and a shipping container (that should get you to check out the link), but the perspective of inventors/capitalists/entreprenuers.

Thought this would be a good discussion to have.

NB: The IPA is Australia's most right-eous think tank (eous added to elicit laughs from people like me and SD )

[Perpetual Change]

As much as I hate to say something negative in the wake of someone's death, I've been pretty irked by the blind hyperbole that seems to be coming from everyone these days about Jobs. On one hand, you have people protesting in the streets about corporate greed and economic justice. On the other, you have (many of the same people) deifying a billionaire who charged astronomical amounts for products which were cheaply made by outsourced labor and who, as far as I know, never gave a single penny to charity and whose company never supported a single philanthropic organization.  In a time when people seem to be less and less impressed with elites, you have a text book example of a capitalist who just doesn't give a fuck about anyone being heralded as the leader of a generation or somethingorother.

I guess, in the end, people are judged more by what they did then what they didn't do. Jobs made something a lot of people wanted, and because of that he's going to be remembered.

[Super Dude]

NB: The IPA is Australia's most right-eous think tank (eous added to elicit laughs from people like me and SD )

Yes, thanks for that.

I honestly don't know what to think, for essentially the same reasons stated by PC. I guess if I could give one statement in defense of Jobs, it'd be just the fact of the computer itself and the technology he did make. Yes all the things PC said factor in, but also think about how Apple technology has in its own way "shaped the revolution," so to speak (at least in my opinion). I almost feel like the previous decade was the period in which burgeoning Apple technology, together with the emergence of Web 2.0, were what made possible the hyperconnected world we live in today. Maybe I'm overthinking things, but I think y'all get what I'm getting at.

[7StringedBeast]

As much as I hate to say something negative in the wake of someone's death, I've been pretty irked by the blind hyperbole that seems to be coming from everyone these days about Jobs. On one hand, you have people protesting in the streets about corporate greed and economic justice. On the other, you have (many of the same people) deifying a billionaire who charged astronomical amounts for products which were cheaply made by outsourced labor and who, as far as I know, never gave a single penny to charity and whose company never supported a single philanthropic organization.  In a time when people seem to be less and less impressed with elites, you have a text book example of a capitalist who just doesn't give a fuck about anyone being heralded as the leader of a generation or somethingorother.

I guess, in the end, people are judged more by what they did then what they didn't do. Jobs made something a lot of people wanted, and because of that he's going to be remembered.

That's a really interesting point that you made there.  People protesting huge corporations, yet are still in love with Steve Jobs, a super rich CEO.  But you know, he was cool and made the iPod happen so we can forgive him and not lump him in with every other self made millionaire in the country.

To answer the question of the OP, no he is not a hero.  He was an innovator and hard working guy.  Came out with some cool products, but I severely disagree with the way he ran the company and how Apple has operated over the past 10 years or so. 

[PraXis]

He was absolutely a hero, and I'm no apple fanboy in the least. He was a brilliant businessman and designer and his products revolutionized digital media. Not only that, but it inspired other companies to compete (the beauty of capitalism) and he had to keep innovating, and so did the competitors, and the consumers keep winning.

[7StringedBeast]

A hero though?  I don't know about your definition of heroes, but Steve Jobs would not fall under hero in my definition. 

[PraXis]

A hero though?  I don't know about your definition of heroes, but Steve Jobs would not fall under hero in my definition.

A hero to his company and shareholders, definitely. Apple was nothing before the ipod... then that money was invested to develop the iphone.. which gave RIM and Palm a run for their money. He was also a nice guy, from what I read, and not a jerk.

[BlobVanDam]

A hero though?  I don't know about your definition of heroes, but Steve Jobs would not fall under hero in my definition. 

Nor mine. The word hero has been watered down enough already. He did nothing heroic. He ran a company that released products people like. People may idolize him for that, and respect him greatly, but that is not what a hero is.

[Scheavo]

I suppose his Will could redeem him, but from what I've hard, the man did nothing for charity. Nothing. I find that rather horrible considering how wealthy the man was.

[Riceball]

Ok, if we narrow it down a bit and say hero = worthy of admiration; is he a 'hero'?

I really like the comparison used in the article; the dudes who invented the standardised shipping container pretty much set off the globalisation fire which has created the conditions for success of companies like Apple, General Motors, Walmart etc - yet they get basically no posthumous recognition.

I mean, obviously Jobs gets a lot of media attention because he created a whole lot of media attention himself, thats not the point, its more about the way that his legacy is being viewed - in light of the fact that he was, at the end of the day, a guy who had a good idea, sold it well and made mad bank.

But does that alone make him worthy of more admiration, being a capitalist like the guys who had a good idea, sold it well and (presumably) made mad bank on the shipping container idea? Thats what I can't quite reconcile.

[7thHanyou]

I tend to dislike ascribing the label "hero" to people, but the man knew how to invest his money and cultivate his ideas.  Doing so led to a number of extremely useful innovations that have advanced the world at large.

Maybe he's not a hero, but does it matter?  Why should we care?  And why is it necessary to add all kinds of qualifiers to positive assessments of what he accomplished?

[Riceball]

Thats what I was trying to say in the first part of my post; the label hero is a bit arbitrary - its more about whether he is worthy of that, IDK, "extra" admiration that he is getting.

[7thHanyou]

Having a good idea and knowing how to market it was a great step for mass technological advancement.  He deserves credit for that.  Why not?

[Riceball]

I think you are missing the point of what I'm saying; I'm not saying he doesn't deserve it, that's neither here nor there, my line of inquiry is:

...the fact that he was, at the end of the day, a guy who had a good idea, sold it well and made mad bank. But does that alone make him worthy of more admiration, being a capitalist like the guys (the shipping container pioneers discussed in the article) who had a good idea, sold it well and (presumably) made mad bank?

I'm not doubting that he had a big impact on the world, no credible question there, but its more that he is being revered as some kind of deity when in reality he was a successful businessman and marketer; like many who have come before him.

[rumborak]

Later, hero (male) and heroine (female) came to refer to characters who, in the face of danger and adversity or from a position of weakness, display courage and the will for self sacrifice—that is, heroism—for some greater good of all humanity. This definition originally referred to martial courage or excellence but extended to more general moral excellence.

That's from Wikipedia, and it's pretty much my definition of "hero" too. I don't see Steve Jobs in this, at all. At least not without horrendously watering down the notions of self-sacrifice (≠ hard work) or "greater good of all humanity" (≠ increasing shareholder earnings).

rumborak

[Progmetty]

hmmm do you guys remember when "Cool" started having other meanings than temperature status? Around 30 years after that "Hero" started meaning "Unique".
Geez

[7StringedBeast]

They don't make college courses revolving around the discussion of the word cool though haha but they definitely do have classes revolving around the word hero.

[emindead]

I say yes because today my definition of hero is synonym of "entrepreneur".

[Perpetual Change]

I say yes because today my definition of hero is synonym of "entrepreneur".

Your personal definition doesn't really matter. Hero is not a synonym for "entrepreneur". 

[Riceball]

I'm a hero beacuse I invented double-sided cheese on toast. People now pay me royalties every time they make it.

True story.

[Ħ]

Hard to say if he's a hero.  He's not a hero of mine, personally.  But I could see elements that would make him a hero to others, though.

[Progmetty]

Here's a thought; is Thomas Edison a hero? When he died there were still people in the world living without electric light bulbs and sometimes nor were they interested in them. He couldn't have been a hero to these people at all. They would probably be bitch about the attention his death is getting if they had internet heh
And Edison was a hungry businessman the founder of General Electric.. THE corporation of all corporations and possibly the first sex capitalism ever had
Hero though? Definitely imo.

[rumborak]

You guys have weird concepts of what a hero is. It's like you're using the term in order to glorify the person of your choice.

rumborak

[Perpetual Change]

Pay attention, rumby. People are changing definitions in order to justify why someone they like should be given a title he doesn't really deserve if we're using words properly, aka with any real meaning. So this thread is pretty much a case-study in how hyperbolic language develops.

[BlobVanDam]

You guys have weird concepts of what a hero is. It's like you're using the term in order to glorify the person of your choice.

rumborak

Call me crazy, but I classify a hero as someone who actually did something heroic, or did something for the sole benefit of others without any regard or benefit to themselves.
Making a company hugely successful is a fantastic achievement no doubt, but it doesn't make someone a hero. And that's not to take anything away from Jobs, because it's enough of a lifetime achievement in its own right, but it doesn't make him a hero to me by any stretch of the word as I know it.

[rumborak]

To me personally firemen aren't heroes either I have to say. Their work is dangerous and of inestimable value to society, but it's not heroic. IMHO. It's still a job, and mind you they won't enter a burning building if they think they might die in the process.
In my definition, a hero commits his heroic act at a complete disregard for his own well-being, because he views the outcome to be infinitely important. A tragic miscalculation of the danger involved (as in 9/11) doesn't make it heroic. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be honored for their sacrifice, just not be called heroes.

rumborak

[rumborak]

Pay attention, rumby. People are changing definitions in order to justify why someone they like should be given a title he doesn't really deserve if we're using words properly, aka with any real meaning. So this thread is pretty much a case-study in how hyperbolic language develops.

Interesting linguistically indeed. The term "sir" evolved the same way, where people attributed the positive aspects of knights to the general population.

rumborak

[7StringedBeast]

I think anyone who runs into a burning building to save someone's life is pretty heroic.

[livehard]

To me personally firemen aren't heroes either I have to say. Their work is dangerous and of inestimable value to society, but it's not heroic. IMHO. It's still a job, and mind you they won't enter a burning building if they think they might die in the process.
In my definition, a hero commits his heroic act at a complete disregard for his own well-being, because he views the outcome to be infinitely important. A tragic miscalculation of the danger involved (as in 9/11) doesn't make it heroic. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be honored for their sacrifice, just not be called heroes.

rumborak

What do you mean by miscalculation of danger? A lot of those people knew those buildings may come down.

There were definitely hero's in 9/11...

[kirksnosehair]

To me personally firemen aren't heroes either I have to say. Their work is dangerous and of inestimable value to society, but it's not heroic. IMHO. It's still a job, and mind you they won't enter a burning building if they think they might die in the process.
In my definition, a hero commits his heroic act at a complete disregard for his own well-being, because he views the outcome to be infinitely important. A tragic miscalculation of the danger involved (as in 9/11) doesn't make it heroic. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be honored for their sacrifice, just not be called heroes.

rumborak

What do you mean by miscalculation of danger? A lot of those people knew those buildings may come down.

There were definitely hero's in 9/11...

I'm going to have to agree with livehard on this one.  To me, firefighters are pretty much the definition of "heroes."   Come on, these are people who run IN to burning buildings while everyone else is running OUT of them.

[kirksnosehair]

No offense to Steve Jobs, but he's not a hero.  Not even close.

[antigoon]

I could see how he might be a personal hero to someone. Generally, though? No.

[livehard]

To me personally firemen aren't heroes either I have to say. Their work is dangerous and of inestimable value to society, but it's not heroic. IMHO. It's still a job, and mind you they won't enter a burning building if they think they might die in the process.
In my definition, a hero commits his heroic act at a complete disregard for his own well-being, because he views the outcome to be infinitely important. A tragic miscalculation of the danger involved (as in 9/11) doesn't make it heroic. Doesn't mean they shouldn't be honored for their sacrifice, just not be called heroes.

rumborak

What do you mean by miscalculation of danger? A lot of those people knew those buildings may come down.

There were definitely hero's in 9/11...

I'm going to have to agree with livehard on this one.  To me, firefighters are pretty much the definition of "heroes."   Come on, these are people who run IN to burning buildings while everyone else is running OUT of them.

Ya if you know you're going to die, but still, with that knowledge think "how can I help people not die?"  ya thats pretty heroic.

[Fiery Winds]

Don't call Steve Jobs a hero. Do you know who the real heroes are? The guys who wake up every morning and go into their normal jobs and get a distress call from the commissioner and take off their glasses and change into capes and fly around, fighting crime. Those are the real heroes.

[Perpetual Change]

Who's saying 9/11 firefighters aren't heroes?