[ExI] Heroism without self-sacrifice

[Lee Corbin]

Request for clarification, please.

Perhaps this has been answered, but I don't recall precisely.

What is "self-sacrifice", exactly, as meant in this thread?

I thought that it was the notion of giving up one's life for
a greater cause, and doing so knowingly and deliberately.

I can imagine giving up one's children (as Abraham was
about to do), or one's limbs (as even animals will sometimes
do, e.g. chewing a leg off to escape a trap), and that while
these are sacrifices, they're not "self-sacrifices". 

Otherwise, the giving up of anything that one holds to be
very valuable (e.g. money for political campaigns) runs
the risk of being deemed self-sacrifice.

Anyone have a problem with this so far? Thanks a lot!

                *                *               *

Now, men in war who throw themselves on a grenade to
save their fellows can well be considered heros, but to be
sure, this does include self-sacrifice. 

On the other hand, "Heroism without self-sacrifice" seemed
to me, and still appear to me, to be just that. So what is
heroism? Sorry if the following definition repeats a lot of
what has been said

    A hero is an individual of elevated moral stature and superior
    ability who pursues his goals indefatigably in the face of
    powerful antagonist(s). Because of his unbreached devotion to the
    good, no matter the opposition, a hero attains spiritual grandeur,
    even in he fails to achieve practical victory. Notice then the
    four components of heroism: moral greatness, ability or prowess,
    action in the face of opposition, and triumph in at least a
    spiritual, if not a physical, form.

    Of these, the hero's moral stature is unquestionably the most
    fundamental. An uncompromising commitment to morality is the
    foundation of heroism. Although the point can be stated simply--the
    hero is a "good guy"--its reasons are philosophical and apply to
    all instances of the concept.    [ -Mike Mentzer ]

This is taken from an otherwise dubious web page at
http://www.mikementzer.com/heroism.html, where,
despite the sole usage of "him, his" above, the author
is a great Ayn Rand fan, and uses her as one of his
chief examples.

I completely agree with the four characteristics that Mike
lists as components:  

    moral greatness
    ability or prowess
    action in the face of opposition
    and triumph in at least a spiritual, if not a physical, form.

Even the last is okay, you see, even if the person dies (unintentionally),
because a fallen fire-fighter can well be considered to be heroic,
if his or her efforts involved the other three.  Let's please not stretch
the meanings of words to a clearly delineated class such as this.
It's an abuse of language, for example, to describe a father as
heroic who raised eight children all by himself after his wife's death.

Lee