Lessons in Bravery from The Anatomy of Courage, Pt. 1 by Mark Hatmaker

 

In 1945 a slender volume titled; The Anatomy of Courage by Charles McMoran Wilson was released. It was an update of his prior volume, The Mind of War.

McMoran was a medical doctor who saw much frontline service in WWI which led to a series of lectures regarding his observations on cowardice, bravery, and troop resilience-these lectures make up the volume The Mind of War.

McMoran was privy to more such close hand human observations in the Second World War which led to the revised title which is an expanded version of The Mind of War.

The volumes are a goldmine to the student of courage as they are not mere surmise or cold clinical observations of college students in campus experiments or bold baseless assertions [“You know what I would do if I was in battle!”] Such studies are well-nigh worthless, akin to watching someone’s masturbation technique to evaluate their potential as a lover with a real-live partner.

These are analytical observations by a trained scientific mind who was hip-deep in the muck, mire and blood of what he depicts.

It is for this “skin-in-the-game” reason that the volume is on many a command officers reading shelf, including being a core volume in the Marine Commandant’s Professional Reading Lists.

With that background out of the way, let us jump into key observations from this wise volume that may go a long way to helping to prepare our own characters for courage, and also provide signs and tactics as to what may lead to a breakdown in our own courage and also illuminate behaviors that may be less than ideal in selecting for a team or tribe if one has to wade into the literal thick of things.

As with all truly useful material, let us keep in mind, the lens need always be turned inward. We are not to read/watch consume such things to be mere inert matter, we are not to turn hard-won wisdom into trite trivia.

We are at our best when we use such material to better ourselves. Reading and reciting trivia is easy. And lazy.

Also easy and lazy? Using our trivia to point fingers at others and saying, “He is brave, she is not. You know what’s wrong with the kids these days?”

What is hard? Looking at the self, illuminating faults, and doing the work to correct where and what we can.

To McMoran!

“Moral courage is higher and rarer in quality than physical courage. It embraces all courage, and physical courage flows from it. We are all faced with decisions requiring moral courage in our daily lives, even at home – disciplining and teaching our children for example. It is applicable in business, in law, within institutions such as schools and hospitals. It takes moral courage to stand up against the crowd, to assist a victim of bullying or to reveal negligence where others would prefer it to remain hidden. Moral courage implies the belief that what you are doing or saying is right, and are willing to follow through your conviction regardless of personal popularity or favour. So easy to expound, so demanding to achieve. In my experience a person of high moral courage will seldom fail to demonstrate an equally distinguished level of physical courage.”

Right out of the gate, we are tipped to a theme; McMoran’s observations insist that the Man of Character in the small sphere and less deadly affairs of quotidian life are the building blocks out of which great heroism is made.

In essence, we can train for courage day-in and day-out by seeking to be sticklers for holding to a moral code. No matter how large or small the act, McMoran insists that we build ourselves via these accretions rather than “saving up to be awesome at some unspecified unproven later date.”

We prove ourselves minute-to-minute. We also reveal ourselves minute to minute.

He states that if we can’t hold the moral line in the small, if we have no time for the so-called “small” courtesies of life, why should we expect more of such a man when stakes are higher?

To McMoran.

“Every animal experiences fear, indeed it is part of its defensive warning system and the human being is no exception. Prolonged exposure to fear leads to stress, which accumulates and causes the breakdown of a person’s normal performance.”

That observation is a key one in this work—prolonged exposure can break the strongest of souls. The task of husbanding energies is no small thing.

We can easily imagine that endless weeks in a foxhole or trench can lead to fatigue [mental and physical] and time to recoup resources is the height of wisdom.

But what about us everyday non dire straits folks? What wisdom is here for us?

Let’s have another look at sentence number two: “Prolonged exposure to fear leads to stress, which accumulates and causes the breakdown of a person’s normal performance.”

Prolonged exposure to fear/stress leads to breakdowns in performance. Now, we would be doing the highest disservice to the good men and women who fight to compare our daily “stresses” to theirs and that to claim that we need a “break” or else we’re “gonna snap.” Such statements should be embarrassing.

Yes, breaks, vacations, long weekends are manna for all of us, but to reduce “stresses” that over time lead to a character and performance deficit is often a task of reinterpretation.

Calling my daily bout with traffic or having to “Work on that project with Steve” stressful, is, well, a bit silly, a bit juvenile.

Re-labeling standard life events as stressors allows the mind to slip into the jargon of “stressors.” These are unavoidable—traffic is, there are always Steves in the world, but, honestly, are they in any shape or form “stressful”?

Are not most of what we call “stressful” events in life preferable to foxholes and cancer diagnoses?

If they fall on the “Yeah, it ain’t that dire” side of things, McMoran advises that it is wiser to reconfigure our outlook to such things than it is to train the self to see the minor truck of life as stressful.

Our small acts are our character writ large.

Boil over in traffic? Yeah, this guy will be calm cool and collected under fire.

Every act is a training ground—if we can’t exhibit sang froid in situations where literally nothing is at stake, well, … we might be training for a courage/character deficit.

On to a fascinating observation from McMoran.

“If each one of us has a bank of courage, some have a significant credit balance, others little or nothing; but in war we are all able to make the balance last longer if we have discipline, patriotism, training and faith. Intelligent people are more readily subject to fear, because in a battle they have a vivid appreciation of what is happening all around them, and of the threat that danger poses to them and their unit. An intelligent person has to make a positive effort to control himself, and may well break down because of his temperament and imagination. On the other hand, an unimaginative person, who fails to fully appreciate the significance of a threat, may achieve deeds that appear to be brave but are less so, simply because he lacks imagination. Courage is an individual’s exercise of mind over fear through self-discipline.”

Here, McMoran makes a distinction that runs throughout the pages—recklessness is not courage. It may be a foolhardiness based in an alternate deficit. Such recklessness can be entertaining and has its place, but McMoran is not asking for us to become unthinking dolts who take risks simply because.

He writes his words for the thinking person who is completely aware of such risks. In his estimation, the thinking person will likely feel more fear than the unthinking. In that regard, if the thinking person acts courageously in spite of a realistic assessment of outcomes, well, this person is exhibiting more courage than the merely reckless.

I will repeat that last sentence as it holds hope for all who desire courage but feel that they may internally lack such an attribute.

“Courage is an individual’s exercise of mind over fear through self-discipline.”

One more from McMoran and we’ll close out part one. Be advised that his use of the word “race” refers to “nationalities.” In his parlance, “race” is used to describe the French, German, Belgian, English etc. His use of “race” is more akin to cultural character of a people.

“My faith is that the martial spirit of a race is in a measure a crucial test of its virility, and that a man of character in peace is a man of courage in war.”

In Part 2 we will continue to delve into this imminently useful work and begin to move into tangible tactics to train for courage.

[For more Rough& Tumble history, Indigenous Ability hacks, and for pragmatic applications of old school tactics historically accurate and viciously verified see our RAW/Black BoxSubscription Service.]

Or our brand-spankin’ new podcast The Rough and Tumble Raconteur available on all platforms.

Stenciled on My Library Wall