Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Having courage is a humanuniverse living experience that is common to all humans. Individuals experience courage in one way or another at different times. Hence, it is imperative to understand having courage from various standpoints. To explore the different perspectives on the phenomenon of courage, the scholar dwelled with printed material across the disciplines of theology, psychology, philosophy, sociology, social work, education, business, and nursing. Two themes were crafted from the literature as (a) courage is steadfastness in the midst of fear and (b) unfaltering commitment to the cherished.

Keywords

courage humanbecoming nursing unfaltering

Over the years, scholars and laypeople have extensively written on the concept of courage without a consensus meaning. For instance, the conversation among Socrates, Laches, and Nicias on the definition of courage ended in a stalemate (Umphrey, 2011; Zavaliy & Aristidou, 2014). Since the meaning of courage is constantly evolving, it is imperative to understand how courage is viewed today. Therefore, this integrative review focuses on the conceptual foreknowings of courage. According to Parse (2016), “Foreknowings are what is known and believed about the universal humanuniverse living experiences from the literature and other sources chosen by the scholar” (p. 273). In capturing the meaning of the concept of courage, the scholar here crafted two thematic descriptions with the foreknowings. Courage as a universal humanuniverse living experience was explored from relevant literature across the disciplines of nursing, psychology, philosophy, theology, business, social work, education, and sociology. The search was done using related concepts of courage, including courage, bravery, and boldness. The literature was accessed using the following databases: the cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO, ProQuest Dissertation and Thesis Global, Humanities Source, Business Source Ultimate, Philosopher’s Index With Full Text, and SocINDEX With Full Text. In the discipline of nursing, many authors focused on moral courage and conceptualized it as adhering to professional ethics and values to protect the rights of patients (Bickhoff et al., 2016; Gallagher, 2011; Hawkins & Morse, 2014; Lachman, 2007; Mohadeseh et al., 2021; Murray, 2010). Lachman (2007) emphasized commitment to that which is right while defining moral courage. According to Lachman, moral courage is “the individual’s capacity to overcome fear and stand up for his or her core value” (p. 131). It is boldly identifying with what an individual considers important against the convictions of others. Lachman asserted that “physical harm could be a threat in cases of moral courage; however, the most likely risks are humiliation, rejection, ridicule, unemployment, and loss of social standing” (p. 131). Individuals are willing to withstand these consequences because of the value they place on the act.

However, Bournes, with the lens of the humanbecoming perspective in 2000 and 2002, viewed courage as a universal lived experience that is fundamental to humans. Bournes (2000), in her concept inventing, recognized courage as steadfastness amid risky endeavors. She defined the phenomenon of having courage as “deliberate steadfast risking while creatively living the cherished with opportunities-restriction” (p. 146). According to Bournes, individuals willingly embrace an unsafe situation when living courageously. Also, Bournes (2002) investigated having courage using the Parse method with 10 participants, ages 21 to 64 years, living with spinal cord injuries who lived in a community. The Parse method is a phenomenological-hermeneutic approach that involves three processes: dialogical engagement, extraction-synthesis, and heuristic interpretation. In this investigation, Bournes aimed to discover the structure of the lived experience of having courage and enhance the knowledge of humanbecoming. According to her research findings, “the structure of the lived experience of having courage is a fortifying tenacity arising with triumph amid the burdensome, while guarded confidence emerges with the treasured” (p. 222). The structure revealed that courage involved resolute steadfastness amid challenging situations. The participants’ narrations captured the structure of courage. According to one participant, “Having courage is believing in what you can do and deciding you are going to work, or travel, or play sport, even though you fear everything, you just have to hope for the best” (p. 226). Another participant stated,

Having courage is like a baby taking a first step, falling down, and being willing to get back up and keep on trying. It is not letting fears or inabilities be overwhelming and not living in the past or wallowing in self-pity and wasting away. (p. 222)

The descriptions indicated that people living with courage are tenacious in challenging situations.

Integrative Themes

The themes that surfaced after searching across the literature in various disciplines on the concept of having courage are (a) steadfastness in the midst of fear and (b) unfaltering commitment to the cherished.

Steadfastness in the Midst of Fear

Courage as the strength to remain resolute in the presence of fear surfaced from literature in the disciplines of philosophy, theology, psychology, business, and nursing. Aristotle conceptualized courage as the means of handling cowardice and rashness. He believed that courageous individuals are not necessarily fearless, but usually face their fears for a noble cause. In his writing Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle stated that

a courageous man always keeps his presence of mind (so far as a man can). So, though he will fear these fearful things, he will endure them as he ought and as reason bids him, for the sake of that which is noble, for this is the end or aim of virtue. (Aristotle, 350 B.C.E./1893, III. 7)

An individual with courage purposefully withstands fear based on the right motive. Aristotle also highlights five acts similar to courage but not precisely courageous acts themselves. First are acts done because of fear. Individuals may act in certain ways because of fear of their superiors, or they may withstand some pressures to avoid people’s comments. If the motive behind a soldier’s act against danger is the fear of reprisal, then it will not be regarded as a courageous action. According to Aristotle (350 B.C.E./1893), “we must be brave because it is fine, not because we are compelled.” Second, actions that are motivated by one’s expertise may not be considered courageous. For instance, a trained soldier who can differentiate between precarious and safe situations based on their training may appear courageous to outsiders but may not necessarily be. A third concern about actions that seem courageous is that acts that look brave but are based only on emotion. The fourth are acts that only appear courageous involving actions done by people who are overconfident. Aristotle (350 B.C.E./1985) believed these individuals often act because they amplified their strengths and downplayed their weaknesses. Lastly, an act done out of ignorance may not be regarded as a courageous one. For an action to be viewed as courageous, an individual’s action must flow from an understanding of the situation at hand (Aristotle, 350 B.C.E./1985).

The notion of courage as steadfastness amid fear also is relevant in theological circles; for instance, the Holy Bible recorded the account of how Queen Esther risked her life and approached the king without an invitation. Esther, a Jew, resolutely dared the king’s wrath when she went and pleaded the case of her people with him at an unsuitable hour. Esther exemplified courage by her unrelenting pursuit despite the fear in her desperate testimony to the king. Esther said, “So I will go in unto the king which is not according to the law: and if I perish, I perish” (King James Bible, 1611/2021, Esther 4: 16b). This showed that Esther was aware of the danger of seeing the king uninvited, but she was steadfast in her desire to deliver her people.

Similarly, a contemporary philosopher has also conceived courage as a kind of steadfastness similar to the story of Esther. Philosopher Umphrey (2011), in Plato’s Laches on Courage, uses Plato’s writings to stress that individuals with courage usually possess a specific willingness to stand and not retreat. He saw “courage as a steadfastness of the soul” (p. 15). In addition, courage was conceptualized as the natural strength to resist torment. Lindh et al. (2010), from the discipline of nursing, had a similar view of courage as Umphrey after applying philosophical theories in their study. These nurse researchers reviewed nine articles and three doctoral dissertations with empirical perspectives that related courage to nurses. A manual search was used with the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) from 1999 to July 2009. According to Lindh et al., “courage was related to nurses’ emotional anxiety, overcoming obstacles, and willingness to expose themselves to risk” (p. 562). The researchers believed making choices without understanding the consequences was fearful and required courage.

In a similar fashion, Shelp (1984), from the discipline of theology, mentioned fear and endangered good, among other conditions, as a necessity for courage when describing patient-physician relationships. According to Shelp, a courageous person is not hindered by fear but inspired by threat and endures it. Shelp believed that

courage is the disposition to voluntarily act, perhaps fearfully, in a dangerous circumstance, where the relevant risks are reasonably appraised, in an effort to obtain or preserve some perceived good for oneself or others recognizing that the desired perceived good may not be realized. (p. 354)

In other words, courageous persons willingly persevere in dangerous situations. Such is true concerning people enduring distress, fear, and uncertainty.

Rorty (1986), a philosophy professor, agreed with Shelp’s perspective. According to Rorty, courage is a disposition that enabled individuals to sustain noble action in the presence of fear, risk, and difficulties. Rorty further described courage as a “specific disposition necessary for physical hand-to-hand combat, to stand one’s ground or to advance against a powerful opponent” (p. 162). She believed that people who displayed courageous acts usually do so because they saw the need to overcome fear. Other reasons for courageous action amid fear were preoccupation with tasks such that fear seems to appear outside the activities and the perception of fear as unreal. According to Rorty, negative emotions, like anger, can distract a courageous person from fearing while moving toward a goal. In the same vein, a courageous individual, through pride, can fend off fear or, on some occasions, make the person act despite fear because of hatred for shame.

Tillich (1952), a Christian existentialist and philosopher, concurred with Rorty (1986) and saw courage as the strength of a person that affirmed self against fear or anxiety. According to Tillich (1952), “courage listens to reason and carries out the intention of the mind; it is the strength of the soul to win victory in ultimate danger” (p. 10). Courage was viewed as the might of the mind to subdue fear. He asserted that courage was universal, which affirmed individuals’ being in spite of nonbeing. Risk was present with courage, and it was the constituted nonbeing that threatened self-affirmation.

Similarly, a well-known scholar in nursing, Finfgeld (1995) agreed that courage occurs in the presence of fear. In 1995, Finfgeld conducted a grounded theory study using chronically ill elderly persons 67 to 94 years of age who lived within a community. Finfgeld applied theoretical sampling to recruit elderly participants. They exhibited the characteristic of self-respect and were asked to define courage and identify the components of becoming and being courageous. The responses of these chronically ill elderly were recorded verbatim, and a constant comparative method was used to analyze the data. Findings from Finfgeld’s study indicated that courage was usually reported in the presence of threatening situations. She also concluded that a measure of mental or physical struggles occurred in situations where courage was learned and manifested.

Finfgeld (1999) also found that fear was a factor in courageous endeavors. In 1999, she synthesized six qualitative research studies to conceptualize the phenomenon of courage and found that courage was a “bridge between fear and action” (p. 809). She concluded that courageous individuals usually accepted challenging situations, which ultimately strengthened them to forge ahead regardless of fear.

Hannah et al. (2007), from the discipline of psychology, identified the role of fear when they formulated their general model of courage. Although these authors identified a need for the model’s empirical validity for proper generalization, they presented a theoretical definition underpinning their model of courage. According to Hannah et al., courage was conceptualized as a subjective experience where individuals perceive risk, identify fear, and ultimately overcome it. In addition, those developing this model believed that certain factors such as positive traits, social forces, values, beliefs, and positive states help individuals act courageously. As these positive traits aid a courageous mindset, the negatives prevent it; unfortunately, the authors failed to identify the negatives.

Similarly, Finfgeld (1998) found courage as unawareness in the presence of fear when a grounded study was conducted titled, Courage in Middle-Aged Adults With Long-Term Health Concerns. In this study, Finfgeld recruited 25 participants (15 women and 10 men) aged 40 to 64 years who were residents of central Illinois rural and metropolitan areas. The study’s participants had long-term health challenges including diabetes mellitus, heart problems, multiple sclerosis, hard-to-control seizure disorders, and residual brain injuries. Finfgeld interviewed the participants using an open-ended question on the definition and description of courage. Finfgeld’s results support the notion that courage involved being in charge of one’s welfare while keeping on with life despite the difficulties. For example, one of the participants in the grounded study by Finfgeld said, “Courage has been willing to do something difficult, impossible, or dangerous because you feel it ought to be done or you think the results of your doing so is a good and proper thing” (p. 162).

In the same vein, Goud (2005), a psychologist, investigated courage across various disciplines through content analysis. The investigation aimed to create a conceptual model and presented ways through which courage can be developed. Goud identified three dimensions of courage, namely, fear, action, and purpose. According to Goud, fear can be of various types and different intensities based on individual situations. The content analysis showed that courage is the willingness to remain steadfast while facing fears. Goud believed that the severity of fear differs. “Examples of physical fear-inducing dangers include combat, severe injury or injury or illness, aggressive animals and standing in an arena with nothing more than a cape and sword while awaiting the charge of a 1,700-pound fighting bull” (p. 104). Also, living courageously may involve facing psychological fear.

In his book, The Courage Quotient, Biswas-Diener (2012), a psychologist, concurred with Goud’s view of courage in defining the concept “as the willingness to act even in the presence of fear, risk, and threat” (p. 8). According to Biswas-Diener, an individual who scales a frozen waterfall or one who discloses an unethical business practice of a manager in an institution has displayed courage. The individual in the first scenario risked being injured, while the latter feared being fired. This psychologist further noted that both scenarios have these three or four characteristics “(1) there is perceived danger or threat to an individual (2) the outcome of the action is uncertain (3) fear was present (4) the person willfully, intentionally acted, despite the presence of the first three characteristics” (p. 8). He therefore formulated the courage quotient as “Courage quotient = Willingness to act/fear” (p. 11). Biswas-Diener believed that individuals with high courage quotients understand that the two activities involved in courage are the willingness to act and control fear. The two are rooted in the brain’s function called the motivational systems. One system is the behavioral inhibition system, which influences human beings to act cautiously. In contrast, the other system, the behavioral activation system, controls individuals to gravitate toward their goals. He therefore submitted that “those with high courage quotient often know when it is best to work on controlling their fear and when it is wiser to try to muster the will to act” (p. 11). Many psychologists described courage with reference to individuals’ dispositions or behavior (Norton & Weiss, 2009; Woodard, 2004; Woodard & Pury, 2007; Worline, 2004).

In contrast to Biswas-Diener, philosophy professor Worline (2004) described courage as a form of social life in her dissertation, Dancing the Cliff Edge: The Place of Courage in Social Life. She revealed courage with the photograph (circa, 1895), Dancing the Cliff Edge, of two women with long hats dancing on a small outcrop of the rock. The picture signified steadfastness in the desire for freedom when women were not permitted to act beyond the traditional home roles. According to Worline (2004), the “women are daring, striking a one-footed pose in an affront to that imposing landscape, refusing to surrender their individuality even in the face of massive opposition” (p. 61) revealed courage. Also, another psychologist, Deutsch (1961), described courage in terms of standing against social intimidation. According to Deutsch, courage is exemplified in these scenarios:

One representative in the Florida legislature who, in the face of unanimous opposition from his colleagues, spoke against and voted against their school segregation bill; or, again, from Vergniaud who defied Robespierre, by speaking out against the excesses of the French revolution even though he was aware that it meant immediate arrest and being sent to the guillotine himself. (p. 52)

In their works, the psychologists Woodard (2004), Woodard and Pury (2007), and Norton and Weiss (2009) recognized the factor of fear while creating scales for the measurement of the concept of courage. Besides the development of a courage scale, Woodard (2004) aimed to explore the influence of courage on hardiness in his article, “Hardiness and the Concept of Courage.” He conceptualized courage as “acting for a meaningful cause despite the fear that results from a threat exceeding personal resources” (p. 180) to create his 31-item scale. Woodard recruited 10 psychology experts in scale development to develop these items. Most of the items reflected the notion of fear; for example, “I would return into a burning building to save a family pet we love dearly” (p. 181). Also, Woodard and Pury (2007) revised the Woodard scale because of the weakness in the theoretical definition, which stated that courage could occur in fearful situations alone. According to Woodard and Pury, courageous action may occur with or without fear. For the updated Woodard (2004) scale, they conceptualized courage as “the voluntary willingness to act, with or without varying levels of fear, in response to a threat to achieve an important, perhaps moral, outcome or goal” (Woodard & Pury, 2007, p. 136). Using a three-phased procedure with college undergraduates in one of the public schools in the Southeastern United States, these psychologists created 23 items representing courage. Also, Norton and Weiss (2009), like Woodard and Pury, developed their 12-item scale measuring courage as a behavioral approach despite the experience of fear. They validated the scale through a two-phased procedure with undergraduate psychology students at Houston University. Findings from the analysis showed that courage is measurable and can predict behavior in the presence of a frightening stimulus.

Furthermore, emeritus clinical psychology professor Rachman (2004) agreed with the nature of courage as described by Norton and Weiss (2009). Therapy clinicians often ask clients with anxiety or uncontrolled fear to approach things that terrify them. Rachman (2004) gave an example of a client who displayed excessive fear of touching “unsafe” objects, eating foods that she felt were unsafe, and closely interacting with people she believed to be diseased, including her nuclear family. He further pointed out that the client’s fear was so extreme that she only sat on a chair that she considered safe, and the chair had to be disinfected before use. This fearful client was asked to have a regimented session of exposure to things, places, and people that frightened her. According to Rachman, “she felt extremely frightened at times and endured unpleasant physical reactions, including profuse sweating and palpitation” (p. 150). Nevertheless, her fear subsided after two months following the exposure therapy. Although Rachman believed consistent exposure to frightening objects or people by an individual could help overcome fear and grow courage, the conceptualization needs to be studied further. However, courage plays a vital role in managing panic disorders or anxiety.

Uniformly, Poland (2008), a psychoanalyst, likened courage to the decision to embark on analysis with a client. According to Poland, courage can be related to “the wise analyst’s decision to embark on an analysis is not a going forth fearlessly but a professional commitment to venture on the analytic journey as honestly as possible despite fear” (p. 557). It is worthy of note that the danger experience by an analyst is often real and not theoretical. Poland believed that courage takes place in daily activities, even as part of human biology. Individuals possess the pressure to grow, which requires them to move above comfort to risk new dangers as development unfolds. According to Poland, “humanity walks upright, but each individual’s walking, genetically determined as it is, requires a protocourage for that person to persist as a very young child in the serial falling down and getting up again that becomes walking” (p. 558). This form of courage also presents in other developmental stages of life beyond adulthood.

From the educationist perspective, leaders need courage to promote social justice (Lowery, 2019). Lowery proposed a framework that can help in courage development. According to Lowery (2019), leadership candidates may intend to float policies that will ensure social justice. Still, it may only remain an intention without courage, which is the force that pushes individuals amid opposition. Lowery conceptualized courage as “the propelling or motivating force that drives us to overcome fear so that the pursuit of a socially just outcome is carried out with an awareness of possible risks” (p. 5). For a leader to act professionally with courage, the principle he stands for must exceed the risk of job security or pressures. Lowery developed a non-linear framework of six dimensions for courage development for social justice leaders. She used Goud’s (2005) three dimensions (purpose, action, and confronting fear) and added two dimensions, reflective questions and experiential learning. Reflective questions on the influences of culture and experience on the leader help them accept the fear involved in social justice. Also, unrestricted questions to leaders may help review new content. Lowery (2019) believed that "through reflective questions and dialogue that address possible fears, risk, and discomfort that candidates face in response to various activities” (p. 8), courage can be developed. With experiential learning, leadership candidates have active participation that will ultimately help them confront their fears in demanding situations. Also, the former U.S. President Kennedy (1956), in his book Profiles in Courage, concurred with Lowery’s views. He believed that politicians are usually faced with several pressures each time they are involved in decision-making. Examples of these problems are the pressure to be admired by the public, pressure of being true to individuals’ conscience, and pressure from their constituencies and political parties. Kennedy believed it takes political courage for these representatives to make decisions considering the conflict of forces.

To sum up, all the literature discussed in this portion of the article supports the theme that courage is “steadfastness in the midst of fear” and that individuals living with courage remain relentless in fearful situations.

Unfaltering Commitment With the Cherished

Many authors across psychology, nursing, philosophy, and business believed courage could be described as an unfaltering commitment to something of value. Tillich (1952), a Christian existentialist philosopher, asserted that courageous individuals act purposefully for a noble cause. He believed the motivation behind a courageous act is for the sake of a praiseworthy or beautiful result. Individuals deliberately sacrificed for something of worth when living courageously:

This sacrifice may include pleasure, happiness, even one’s own existence. In any case it is praiseworthy, because in the act of courage, the most essential part of our being prevails against the less essential. It is the beauty and goodness of courage that the good and the beautiful are actualized in it therefore, it is noble. (p. 6-7)

Tillich (1952) highlighted commitment as a strong element in accomplishing what an individual considers valuable. In the same vein, Daniel Putman (2001), a philosophy professor, supported Tillich’s description of courage. In his 2001 discussion, “The Emotions of Courage,” Putman stated that “courage involves deliberate choice in the face of painful or fearful circumstances for the sake of a worthy goal” (p. 463). Putman, while describing courage, used the example of an alcoholic seeking treatment. To Putman, an alcoholic seeking treatment is doing so amid the fear of losing his esteem. The commitment and value for self-esteem over alcohol help to stay the course in treatment.

Also, Bauhn (2003), a philosopher, presented the idea of a valuable goal when describing the concept of courage. To Bauhn, “courage is about the efforts expended by an agent to pursue her goals in the face of her fears of failure and personal transience, not about the value of the goals themselves” (p. 32). He differentiated the value of the goal from the observers’ and the agents’ perspectives. Courageous individuals are committed to what is considered precious to them. Also, Bauhn believed knowing the individual’s valuable goal and long-term consequences may present challenging thoughts about courage. For instance,

Suppose that someone in the late 1890s saved a child from a burning house, confronting her fear of personal transience in the operation. and that this child was Adolf Hitler. Would our knowledge of Hitler’s later career force us to deny that the person saving Adolf’s life was courageous? (p. 33)

Bauhn (2003) asserted that Hitler’s later action does not cancel the courageous acts of the individual who rescued him as a baby in the narration; most likely, the person treasured saving a helpless child.

Shelp (1984), a theologian, asserted that living courage is often toward worthy ends. However, he stated that “one can act from morally reprehensible motives and for morally repugnant ends and still show courage” (p. 355). Evaluating the worth of the outcome can differentiate courage and foolhardiness. For instance, it would be considered recklessness for “a millionaire to risk life to retrieve a one dollar bill being blown about by the wind of speeding automobiles on a crowded interstate highway” (p. 355) even though their action showed courage.

Detert (2018), a professor of business administration, concurred with Shelp (1984) in his conceptualization. Professor Detert (2018) focused on workplace courage. He believed courage is critical to taking worthy actions, mainly in the presence of potential risks. Detert asserted, “The people I’ve studied who have been successful in their courageous acts asked themselves two questions before moving ahead: Is this really important? and, Is this the right time” (p. 4 133). He maintained that the value of a goal is often the motivation behind the unwavering pursuit by these individuals. Detert highlighted four principles that can aid workplace courage and produce results. They are: (1) laying the groundwork, (2) choosing your battles, (3) persuading at the moment, and (4) following up. However, individuals’ values and higher purposes remain essential in courage.

Kramer (2017), a business and management professor, gave a similar explication as Detert (2018). He defined courage as “the ability to act for a meaningful (noble, good, or practical) cause despite experiencing the fear associated with perceived threat exceeding the resources” (p. 263). Thus, an individual displays an unrelenting commitment to the valued while living courage. Also, the professors of management, Kilmann et al. (2010), who concurred with Kramer (2017), asserted that the critical component of courage is pursuing a worthy goal. They developed the Organizational Courage Assessment (OCA) through the adopted definition of

courageous as act in an organization as including five essential properties: (1) free choice in deciding whether to act (versus being coerced); (2) significant risk of being harmed; (3) assessment that the risk is reasonable and the contemplated act is considered justifiable (not foolhardy); (4) pursuit of worthy aims; and (5) proceeding with mindful action despite fear. (Kilmann et al., 2010, p. 16)

The willingness of the act shows that a worker in an organization must value it; if not, then there will not be a need to be committed to it.

Similarly, in his book on courage, Kennedy (1956) wrote of courage as the idea of remaining faithful to an individual’s values when he described George Norris’s disposition to activities in the House of Representatives. In 1910, Norris was a Republican representative of Nebraska who was passionate about his integrity. To allow for fairness in the House, he confronted the speaker, a fellow Republican, to introduce a resolution that permitted the House to choose its House Rules Committee instead of the dictatorship practice of the speaker making the selection. Norris displayed courage by proposing an end to “cannonism” in the House of Representatives. According to Kennedy (1956), Norris once made a declaration that captured his commitment to his integrity; he stated:

I would rather go down to my political grave with a clear conscience than ride in the chariot of victory as a Congressional stool pigeon, the slave, the servant, or the vassal of any man, whether he be the owner and manager of a legislative menagerie or the rule of a great nation. . . . I would rather lie in the silent grave, remembered by both friends and enemies as one who remained true to his faith and who never faltered in what he believed to be his duty, than to still live, old and aged, lacking the confidence of both factions. (p. 211)

Goud (2005), a psychologist, agreed with this perspective when he mentioned a higher purpose as one of the three dimensions of courage. He stated that the motivation behind courageous acts is a noble purpose. In other words, courage propels an individual to pursue the cherished. Also, with courage, the measure of commitment exhibited by an individual directly reflects a sense of purpose. Goud gave an example reflecting an unwavering commitment to values.

A student of mine was severely injured in an auto accident, his wife killed, and child survived with minor injuries. During a lengthy rehabilitation, he became depressed over his loss. The reason “to continue” was getting dimmer. Then one day, his daughter was giggling and playing with her toys, and the father became sharply aware that his now-too-long self-absorption was not going to help him raise his child. He had a worthy purpose chattering right in front of him. (p. 113)

For the student, the capacity to remain committed to life and fight depression is based on courage for the value he placed on his daughter.

Furthermore, from the discipline of psychology, Pury et al. (2015) also noted that the worth of a goal is one of the components of courage. Other elements of courage are volition and risk. They “define courageous action as voluntarily acting despite personal risk in the pursuit of a noble or worthwhile goal” (p. 383). However, Pury et al. noted that there could be a conflicting view of an act between the actor and the observer. When most observers in an actors’ society see its action as wrong and the actor considers it valuable, bad courage ensues. Pury et al. aimed to assess the construct of bad courage and see if it is similar to personal risk, voluntary, and worthy valuation. In a study, these psychologists conducted an internet search for transcripts from individuals who committed or attempted suicide (n=12) and from terrorist or spree killers (n=8). Undergraduate coders employed by Pury et al. assessed each statement for the three constructs of courage. The result showed a value of a goal is present in 75% of the transcripts from suicides, with 100% from killings. Individuals living with bad courage are also moved by what they consider worthwhile, which indicates that courage cannot always be referred to as a virtue.

By the same token, Gruber (2011), from the discipline of psychology, stressed the importance of worthwhile outcomes when describing the concept of courage using the interactional model of Humanistic Cognitive Behavioral Theory (HCBT). The components of the model consisted of cognition, behavior, environment, and courage. Gruber defined courage as “the cognitive, voluntary mental process used to enact change on a stable system for the intention of a positive outcome” (p. 274). While Gruber highlighted the worthwhile outcome of courage, he recognized the concept of courage as an active process of an individual’s cognitive use. Also, the desire for a good outcome must be present before an act can be considered courageous. Similarly, psychology professors Rate et al. (2007) believed courage is oriented toward the valued. They conceptualized four components of courage as “(a) a willing, intentional act, (b) involving substantial danger, difficulty, or risk to the actor, (c) primarily motivated to bring about a noble good or morally worthy purpose, (d) despite, perhaps, the presence of the emotion of fear” (p. 95). Rate et al. explored the component of courageous behavior through the implicit theories of courage. According to Rate et al., the implicit theories are focused on an individual view of the concept of courage, unlike the explicit theories that describe courage based on the development of constructs through literature search. The first study presented by Rate et al. sought to compile courageous behaviors from 175 students (undergraduates and graduates) recruited from Yale University and the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA). The total number of participants from the former and the latter were 107 (79 males and 28 females) and 68 (30 males and 38 females), respectively. These participants generated 1118 courageous behaviors that were later reduced to 639 items. This showed that many behaviors had doing the right thing as part of the components of courage. Something that people consider the right thing is often a reflection of what they esteem. With courage, individuals are committed to things they value.

Poland (2008), a psychoanalyst, posited a slightly different stance by stating that individuals often display courage whenever they care deeply for others or their cherished personal values. He cited the role played by Muriel Gardiner, a prosperous American psychoanalyst during the Austrian revolution. According to Poland, Muriel, a medical student at the University of Vienna in 1932, demonstrated courage when she endured the Nazis and rescued many Jews alongside others in dangerous conditions. Muriel helped the people because she cared and was committed to people in despair; her cherished value ultimately reflected courage. Ashton (2017), a child psychologist, acknowledged the idea of a worthy end as the motivation for courage in her article “Professional Courage: What Does It Mean for Practitioner Psychologists?” She focused on the concept of professional courage in developing the holistic model for professional courage in her work. According to her, “professional courage is an intentional action or inaction towards a goal perceived as worthy in the face of perceived risk” (p. 4). The central features of her holistic model are worthy goal, risk, and action.

The aforementioned authors in their writings reflected the theme, unfaltering commitment with the cherished. This indicated that the inspiration behind the unwavering affirmation of individuals’ courage is the treasured, something highly valued.

Conclusion

The scholar discussed the foreknowings of having courage. Two themes were identified after an integrative review of literature across multiple disciplines. The two themes that surfaced from this review were (a) steadfastness in the midst of fear and (b) unfaltering commitment with the cherished. While the concept of courage is widely regarded as a virtue, there is still a lack of consensus about its definition. The crafted themes will enhance the current knowledge of the concept of courage.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this review.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the authorship and/or publication of this review.

ORCID iD

Olushola Ajadi

References

Aristotle. (1893). Nichomachean ethics of Aristotle, 5th ed. ( Peters

F.H.

, Trans.). Kegan Paul, Trench, Truebner & Co. (Original work published ca. 350 B.C.E.)

Aristotle. (1985). Nicomachean ethics ( Irwin

, Trans.). Hackett Publishing Company. (Original work published ca. 350 B.C.E.)

Ashton

(2017). Professional courage: What does it mean for practitioner psychologists? Educational Psychology Research and Practice, 3(1), 1-13.

Bauhn

(2003). The value of courage. Nordic Academic Press.

Bickhoff

Levett-Jones

Sinclair

P. M.

(2016). Rocking the boat—nursing students’ stories of moral courage: A qualitative descriptive study. Nurse Education Today, 42, 35-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.03.030

Biswas-Diener

(2012). The courage quotient: How science can make you braver. Wiley.

Bournes

D. A.

(2000). Concept inventing: A process for creating a unitary definition of having courage. Nursing Science Quarterly, 13(2), 143-149. https://doi.org/10.1177/08943180022107582

Bournes

D. A.

(2002). Having courage: A lived experience of human becoming. Nursing Science Quarterly, 15(3), 220-229. https://doi.org/10.1177/08918402015003008

Detert

J. R.

(2018). Cultivating everyday courage. Harvard Business Review, 96(6), 128-135.

10.

Deutsch

(1961). Courage as a concept in social psychology. Journal of Social Psychology, 55(1), 49-58.

11.

Finfgeld

D. L.

(1995). Becoming and being courageous in the chronically ill elderly. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 16(1), 41-49. https://doi.org/10.3109/01612849509042959

12.

Finfgeld

D. L.

(1998). Courage in middle-aged adults with long-term health concerns. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 30(1), 153-170.

13.

Finfgeld

D. L.

(1999). Courage as a process of pushing beyond the struggle. Qualitative Health Research, 9(6), 803-814. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973299129122298

14.

Gallagher

(2011). Moral distress and moral courage in everyday nursing practice. Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 16(2). https://doi.org/10.3912/OJIN.Vol16No02PPT03

15.

Goud

N. H.

(2005). Courage: Its nature and development. Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education and Development, 44(1), 102-116. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2164-490x.2005.tb00060.x

16.

Gruber

(2011). The psychology of courage: Modern research on an ancient virtue. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 45(2), 272-279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-011-9155-x

17.

Hannah

S. T.

Sweeney

P. J.

Lester

P. B.

(2007). Toward a courageous mindset: The subjective act and experience of courage. Journal of Positive Psychology, 2(2), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760701228854

18.

Hawkins

S. F.

Morse

(2014). The praxis of courage as a foundation for care. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 46(4), 263-270.

19.

Kennedy

J. F.

(1956). Profiles in courage. HarperCollins Publishers

20.

Kilmann

R. H.

O’Hara

L. A.

Strauss

J. P.

(2010). Developing and validating a quantitative measure of organizational courage. Journal of Business Psychology, 25(1), 15-23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-009-9125-1

21.

King James Bible. (2021). King James Bible online. https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611-Bible/ (Original work published 1611)

22.

Kramer

(2017). To become or not to become? Existential courage and the quest for identity. In Scott

(Ed.) & George

(Ed.), Handbook of heroism and heroic leadership. Routledge.

23.

Lachman

V. D.

(2007). Ethics, law, and policy. Medsurg Nursing, 16(2), 131-133.

24.

Lindh

I. B.

Barbosa da Silva

Berg

Severinsson

(2010). Courage and nursing practice: A theoretical analysis. Nursing Ethics, 17(5), 551-565. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733010369475

25.

Lowery

(2019). “What are you willing to do?”: The development of courage in social justice leaders. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1690698

26.

Mohadeseh

Mohaddeseh

Azam

Mahboobeh

(2021). Correlation of moral courage and organizational commitment in operating room nurses. Siriraj Medical Journal, 73, 183-190.

27.

Murray

J. S.

(2010). Moral courage in healthcare: Acting ethically even in the presence of risk. OJIN: The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.3912/OJIN.Vol15No03Man02

28.

Norton

P. J.

Weiss

B. J.

(2009). The role of courage on behavioral approach in a fear-eliciting situation: A proof-of-concept pilot study. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2008.07.002

29.

Parse

R. R.

(2016). Parsesciencing: A basic science mode of inquiry. Nursing Science Quarterly, 29(4), 271-274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894318416661103

30.

Poland

W. S.

(2008). “The best thing in me”: The analyst’s courage in clinical practice. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 25(3), 556-559. https://doi.org/10.1037/0736-9735.25.3.556

31.

Pury

C. L. S.

Starkey

C. B.

Kulik

R. E.

Skjerning

K. L.

Sullivan

E. A.

(2015). Is courage always a virtue? Suicide, killing, and bad courage. Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(5), 383-388. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2015.1004552

32.

Putman

(2001). The emotions of courage. Journal of Social Philosophy, 32(4), 463-470. https://doi.org/10.1111/0047-2786.00107

33.

Rachman

S. J.

(2004). Fear and courage: A psychological perspective. Social Research, 17(1), 149-176.

34.

Rate

C. R.

Clarke

J. A.

Lindsay

D. R.

Sternberg

R. J.

(2007). Implicit theories of courage. Journal of Positive Psychology, 2(2), 80-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760701228755

35.

Rorty

A. O.

(1986). The two faces of courage. Philosophy, 61(236), 151-171. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819100021045

36.

Shelp

E. E.

(1984). Courage: A neglected virtue in the patient-physician relationship. Social Science and Medicine, 18(4), 351-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(84)90125-4

37.

Tillich

(1952). The courage to be. Yale University Press.

38.

Umphrey

(2011). Plato’s laches on courage. Apeiron, 10(2), 14-22. https://doi.org/10.1515/apeiron.1976.10.2.14

39.

Woodard

C. R.

(2004). Hardiness and the concept of courage. Consulting Psychology Journal, 56(3), 174-185. https://doi.org/10.1037/1065-9293.56.3.0

40.

Woodard

C. R.

Pury

C. L.

(2007). The construct of courage: Categorization and measurement. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 59(2), 135-147. https://doi.org/10.1037/1065-9293.59.2.135

41.

Worline

M. C.

(2004). Dancing the cliff edge: The place of courage in social life. (Publication No. 3122074) [Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

42.

Zavaliy

A. G.

Aristidou

(2014). Courage: A modern look at an ancient virtue. Journal of Military Ethics, 13(2), 174-189. https://doi.org/10.1080/15027570.2014.943037

Conceptual Foreknowings: Integrative Review on Having Courage

Abstract

Keywords

Integrative Themes

Steadfastness in the Midst of Fear

Unfaltering Commitment With the Cherished

Conclusion

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iD

References