The Objectivist take on Pat Tillman's "sacrifice"

From Pat Tillman: Fighting For His Self-Interest
by Joseph Kellard (May 29, 2004)

One must ask: why is Tillman's decision to fight anti-American terrorists to protect the freedoms and the country he loved not regarded as being in his personal interests? Why is his decision to put his life on the line in this war of self-defense considered "serving" his country's but not his own interests?

The main personal interest Tillman "sacrificed" by joining the army, according to every commentator, was the multimillion-dollar football contract he turned down. But Tillman valued, above all, his life and America, and that is precisely what made this decision selfish, not sacrificial. A sacrifice is an act in which an individual gives up a value for a lesser value or non-value. Tillman understood at some level that fighting the terrorists was of supreme, life-sustaining importance; that all other values will no longer exist if the terrorists win the war; that there will be no more football for him to play or millions for him to earned if they end his and our lives. Tillman thus put his life on the line in the war on terrorism, not because doing so was "the supreme sacrifice," but because he knew that life is the supreme value on which all lesser ones depend. He fought to preserve every rational value that was selfishly dear to him -- including all the achievements he attained -- and by extension his fellow Americans would benefit just the same.

"Sacrifice" is a dirty word to Objectivists, and I understand their reasoning which is well laid-out in this passage, particulary the sentence I've highlighted. Most people understand it to be a sacrifice when someone acts on a higher level value in their hierarchy, necessitating the foregoing of an action on a lower level value. This is in part because most people don't ever consider how their values are interrelated. Getting money is not worth much if the society, economy or country backing it is destroyed, or if the people with whom you want to share your wealth are killed.

This does not destroy a rational definition of heroism, which should be defined as acting steadfastly in support of your values in their proper hierarchy.