Is Doing Nice Things Heroic?

Goodness is essential. Heroism is exceptional. Confusing the two does more harm than good.

Short answer:

No.

Longer answer:

Nope.

Heroic action is, according to our founder, Phil Zimbardo, “taking action on behalf of others in need, or for a moral cause, aware of the risks and without expectation of gain.”

We often celebrate “everyday heroism” - a phrase that invites us to look for courage in ordinary places. And it’s true. Heroism isn’t reserved for those in capes or headlines. It lives closer to the ground. But everyday doesn’t = every day. Everyday means common. Every day means daily. Daily goodness is not everyday heroism.

But Matt, you mean guy, why can’t we compliment people who are doing good things? We can. In many ways. Calling them a hero doesn’t need to be one of them. We can praise them, applaud them, call them good people, call them altruistic, give them a gold star. We don’t need to change the definition of heroic to make people feel good about doing good. We have many tools for that.

And yes, I’m aware that English is famously elastic. Awful and literal can mean the opposite as I wrote recently. But sometimes there’s a really useful and specific word that should just stay that way. That’s my hill.

Doing good and being good, however, are useful as practice for heroic action.

Phil Zimbardo and I started using the terms hero-in-waiting and hero-in-training more than ten years ago. I think I started with in-waiting and he started with in-training. My version leant into the idea that anyone could be a hero if they acted in the right place and the right time. His focused on the idea that people could practice to be ready for those same situations. Both focused on deliberate goodness through actions.

From the lens of the Heroic Imagination Project, where we study and teach the psychology and practice of courageous action, heroism has a sharper edge. It’s not about decency. It’s about risk, sacrifice, and the deliberate choice to act on behalf of others despite those costs.

Let’s take a look at some of the arguments that come my way.

Being kind or just often means giving something up - time, energy, ego - which makes it heroic.

While everyday goodness may involve effort or discomfort, sacrifice alone doesn’t make an act heroic. Heroism involves stepping beyond the expected. It’s doing good that stands out, not because it’s habitual, but because it defies norms, comfort, or safety. A parent being patient may be admirable, but it’s not necessarily heroic unless they do so in extraordinary circumstances. And no, helping explain the total surface area of three dimensional shapes doesn’t count as extraordinary. I checked.

Doing good daily is exhausting and requires moral stamina, which is a form of heroism.

Moral stamina is admirable, but again, heroism isn’t defined by difficulty alone. It’s defined by the moral choice to act courageously on behalf of others, despite clear risk or cost. Most people experience fatigue in daily life - from parenting to commuting and emptying the dishwasher (my kid tells me) - but that doesn’t elevate their routine actions to heroism. Heroism is about moral elevation, not just moral endurance.

Repeated good can change lives, even if each act seems small. That kind of sustained impact is heroic.

Impact doesn’t define heroism. Intention and context do that. A long-term volunteer may transform a community, but heroism requires that those acts involve real risk, courage, or self-sacrifice beyond what’s expected. A Hero Round Table speaker once started with his talk with, “All teachers are heroes!” and received an enormous round of applause. A teacher may change many lives and that’s noble. I know a lot of teachers. But they aren’t automatically heroes unless they do so despite personal risk or systemic resistance.

Even small good deeds can carry hidden costs: burnout, social pressure, financial strain. That’s heroic.

The presence of risk isn’t enough - heroism requires that risk to be consciously accepted in service of others. If the cost is unintended or incidental, it doesn’t elevate the act to heroism. Heroism involves choosing to face sacrifice or danger with the deliberate aim of helping others, not just enduring side effects of being a good person.

Heroism isn’t always flashy. It can be quiet, consistent, and deeply moral.

Heroism absolutely doesn’t need to be dramatic and most of the time it isn’t. But it does need to be exceptional. If everyone’s doing it, it’s not heroism; it’s goodness. We dilute the meaning of heroism when we treat expected decency as something extraordinary (and do a disservice to society). Heroism must remain a moral outlier, not just a moral baseline.

---

If we call all goodness heroic, we lose the ability to recognise what real moral courage looks like. Heroism should remain a moral outlier - something rare, disruptive, and brave. Something that, by its very nature, reminds us what we’re capable of when we’re willing to lose something for someone else.

That doesn’t mean ordinary goodness isn’t valuable. It’s essential. The world depends on daily decency. But if we hand out the title “hero” too freely, we risk forgetting why heroism matters at all.

At the Heroic Imagination Project, we don’t tell people they’re heroes for being nice. We train people to prepare for heroic moments - the ones where silence is easier, fear is louder, and the outcome is uncertain.

We believe everyone has the potential to act heroically. But that potential must be awakened, trained, and tested. Because real heroism, even if it’s quiet, always carries a cost.

~ Matt