Who was the best? Examples of boxers displaying personal integrity / moral courage

[Stevie G]

Originally Posted by frankenfrank

There r very few parts of d world where such accusations may seem unbelievable , but most readers and more so posters in here r from these parts so i wonder how many buy in2 this .

Could well have happened. That part of the world has always had very shady and corrupt regimes. Even by politicians own standards !!

[aj415]

Well well, this thread devolved in excitable fashion, with some great contributions on the way.

I really tried to avoid the Ali nostalgia/controversy but perhaps that was the wrong strategy.

Anyway it seems there is a lack of clarity of the exact definitions of the terms in the thread title, Personal Integrity and Objective Moral Courage.

I would like to share my cliffnotes version.. and incomplete/flawed opinion/understanding of the exact nature of these behemoth concepts..*Someone who knows more or disagrees, please chime in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Personal Integrity - (origin Latin “integer,” meaning “whole.”)
The unification of :
-Personal Convictions
-Spoken Convictions
-Actions or Behavioral Convictions

A person who "is true to themselves, or walks the walk" as it were. When what they believe in thier minds, what they tell others they believe, and the belief thier actions and behaviors support are all synonymous = integrity.

THE COURAGE to have have personal integrity does not make one inherently a good person by default! For example I can say HITLER was a man of tremendous personal integrity, and also say he is an example of ultimate evil, and I have not contradicted myself. Personal Integrity means the courage to live, act and stand up for personal convictions you believe in regardless risk of embarrasment, loss of job, losing a friendship, relationship, public disgrace, unpopularity etc. Also an aspect of Moral Princples but just one aspect!

A man ahead of his time like Jack Johnson, may have had questionable morals, but certainly his integrity can be said to be legendary.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Objective Moral Principles:

The objective and universal qualities and attributes that characterize what it means to be good. Virtues to strive for, (studied for thousands of years by religion and philosophy):

trustworthiness- (loyalty, reliability, honesty, integrity)

respect - (golden rule)

humility - (appropriate perspective, compassion, altruism/
non-attention seeking, unreturned, acts of charity)

responsibility - (accountability, self-autonomy)

justice


Unlike the personal convictions portion of personal Integrity, these moral principles are not something that can be picked and chosen at will. Simply,they can either be lived up to or not.

Moral Courage = when a person stands up for one or all of these objective universal values, and incorporates this into the fabric of his integrity.


Personal Convictions
Spoken Convictions
Acted on Convictions
+Objective Moral Convictions

I am not too familiar with the details of Max Schmellings acts of good, but from the accounts given here it sounds like he exemplifies moral courage.

[aj415]

Originally Posted by orriray59

Joe Louis. Sad what happened between him and the IRS, even sadder when he got so paranoid in old age.

Certainly, if nothing else the brown bomber can be said to show great forbearance and fortitude with the adversity he faced out of the ring.

Originally Posted by burt bienstock

Ali joining a HATE GROUP,and avoiding military services,whilst other young men hating to go, but honoring their duty and served, was NOT an act of personal integrity...Any more than a bank robber , robbing a bank because
he needed money for his family...Not one of us can not claim we avoiding
a duty, could not come up with a rational excuse for our act...Was Clay/Ali
more NOBLE than the vast majority of Americans who despised leaving their jobs and loved one's, but served in the armed forces, because the law
of the land required them to do so, displayed less integrity than a Clay did at that time. ? No. I say...If we don't like the law, we should vote the bums out or face the consequences of our act, otherwise we would have anarchy...My contention is that anyone can say that they displayed "integrity" for whatever act they commit. It is called "rationalization ".
INTEGRITY...

The issue here I will take umbridge with is semantics or lack of agreed definition. See my above post for my understanding of Integrity, which under that umbrella Ali displayed in great quantities.
The issue you and others have is about the morality or the ethical nature of his decision. I will leave to you and others to hash out.

Originally Posted by BillB

Max Schmeling.

Schmeling risked his life by hiding two Jewish children in his home during Kristallnacht. He later saw to it they escaped Germany and were sent to the US.

He helped support Joe Louis, financially, during the later part of Joe's life. Schmeling even paid for his funeral.

These observations of Schmeling inspire me to go more indepth in learning about the man and his life. Thank you.

Originally Posted by salsanchezfan

The Schmeling shout is a great one. The difference between him and Ali is that Schmeling put his own safety at risk to preserve the life and well-being of another. All Ali did was get used as a mouthpiece for the Black Muslims (at worst) or use the occasion to further their political/social cause as perhaps his own idea at best.

Big, big difference.

Well, I certainly hope there is a difference, they are completely different situations. But they are both candidates for displaying different aspects of Moral Courage in my opinion.
I have a limited knowledge of Max Schmellings, and his integrity and charitability, just what I am reading here so if I misspeak someone please feel free to correct me. Anyway his actions really are unquestionably charitable and courageous. It displays the same physical courage needed for the ring (risking his life), while also showing his charitable and compassionate qualities.
Ali’s are much more controversial, but the situation was also much more complex, politically and socially explosive. It is really nonproductive to “compare” the two.
The backdrop of the Civil Rights, and Ali’s unafraid nature prompted his joining of such an extremist group. The intention for right and good and justice was there, perhaps its expression was questionable. But given someone prone to be unafraid to speak his mind, and act on what he believes, is joining such rash a group really an unpredictable or inappropriate response when the same person has a personal experience, understanding and observation of the past and continuing victimization of the group of people he racially belonged to and felt akin to?
Like I mentioned previously, we now know all the deficiencies with the group. But EVEN if you adopt the cynical viewpoint – that he was USED as a mouthpiece-- the loyalty he displayed, to take the brunt of the criticism, shame, losing his livelihood,reputation, fame, endorsments or however that worked back then, to face the unknown consequences in the face of such a decision still oozes a plethora integrity, loyalty, and honesty. How many athletes, or CEO’s or anyone else would give up their livelihood and reputation for the loyalty of others or for the principles he believed in?
It’s arguably a harder decision then the one Schmeling made, not because Schmelling risked his life, and there was probably some physical risk to Ali too, but Morally schmellings is a no-brainer. Help someone/risk your life or don’t. Ali’s situation, decision, and response was infinitesimally more intricate and colorfully complex.

Originally Posted by Thread Stealer

http://www.antekprizering.com/ttlewiscut.html

Originally Posted by MadcapMaxie

Max Baer despite having a bit of rep was extremely charitable and had alot of integrity giving alot of time and money into dozens of childrens programs around the country. Friends of Baer said when driving around the city if he saw a homeless person he'd demand the car be halted, would walk out and give the homeless person a wad of cash.

But i agree with most Schmeling is the greatest example you can find for those with integrity and moral courage, he risked his life numerous times, gave up money numerous times for others.

Interesting! don’t know how much stock I would put into believing the homeless/wad of cash story though… at least the way you’ve presented it here

Originally Posted by mcvey

This may be a controversial statement, but my pick is.


JACK JOHNSON

Any other thoughts ? Why Jack Johnson?

Originally Posted by bodhi

The difference between Schmeling defying the law and Ali dodging the draft is that Schmeling did so to rescue life and in opposition to an immoral, ethic-less and criminal regime. Ali dodged the draft to not go to war. It was not a civil rights issue. If he would have gone to prison for sitting on the back of the bus or because only blacks would have been drafted than yes, he would have a case. However that was not the case. He still stood up for what he believed in and suffered for it, so he still should be considered for honourable mentions.

Anyway, my Top5 would look like this, in order of "appearance":
Jack Johnson
Johann Trollmann - he might be my number one choice. He died in a concentration camp for his courage.
Barney Ross
Max Schmeling
Joe Louis

Care to expound? Why these guys? Why this order?

Originally Posted by salsanchezfan

Courage I would certainly agree with. I think, however, we need to be careful here about the definition of "integrity" and "moral courage" when applied to a Jack Johnson. He did what he did for himself and himself only. I don't see him fitting this description.

Agreed, plenty of courage and integrity ,but a deep abyss in moral principles

Originally Posted by Pachilles

i'll say this much, Ali fought more vietcong than Dempsey fought blacks

Haha!

Originally Posted by Vockerman

Lets get back to the topic and leave the "outside the ring" stuff outside, please.

here is my guy and I NEVER hear him mentioned

"I will defend my title against all comers, none barred. By this I mean white, black, Mexican, Indian, or any other nationality. I propose to be the champion of the world, not the white, or the Canadian, or the American. If I am not the best man in the heavyweight division, I don't want the title."

And from everything I have read he lived up to that claim.
Along the way he set records (at that time) for the fastest knockout in a title fight (one minute and 28 seconds) and the most consecutive wins by knockout (eight) by a heavyweight champion. He was the shortest heavyweight champion in history and the second lightest after Bob Fitzsimmons. He once defended his title twice in one night, although some historians refuse to accept those wins as title defences, insisting they were exhibition bouts. But in newspapers at the time, they were advertised as heavyweight title fights. If those defences are counted in his record, he actually successfully defended his title 13 times. He defeated more challengers in the two years and 10 months he held the crown than Sullivan, Corbett, Fitzsimmons, Jeffries, and Hart put together. And those five gentlemen were on the throne for a combined total of 24 years.
Gentlemen, I give you the almost forgotten - Tommy Burns

Interesting. However this thread is for life and action away from the ring.. did you have any Burns anecdotes in this regard?

[whosthere]

Originally Posted by frankenfrank

I think u took d exact opposite of what i meant .
I meant that most here would consider it as a conspiracy theory .
I usually don't go by majority's opinion when nontrivial topics r at stake .

That's possible, but still in all, you're post did make me realize that there are indeed people here from that part of the world that would have a much better "feel" of the situation than I, as an American, would have.
I'm not much on conspiracy theories, but given my limited understanding of the politics of the region, it seems well worth investigationg further.
It may be too, that as an Arguello fan both in and out of the ring, I would just like to believe he wouldn't take his own life with so much accomplished and so much more to do.

[burt bienstock]

Originally Posted by aj415

Certainly, if nothing else the brown bomber can be said to show great forbearance and fortitude with the adversity he faced out of the ring.


The issue here I will take umbridge with is semantics or lack of agreed definition. See my above post for my understanding of Integrity, which under that umbrella Ali displayed in great quantities.
The issue you and others have is about the morality or the ethical nature of his decision. I will leave to you and others to hash out.


These observations of Schmeling inspire me to go more indepth in learning about the man and his life. Thank you.


Well, I certainly hope there is a difference, they are completely different situations. But they are both candidates for displaying different aspects of Moral Courage in my opinion.
I have a limited knowledge of Max Schmellings, and his integrity and charitability, just what I am reading here so if I misspeak someone please feel free to correct me. Anyway his actions really are unquestionably charitable and courageous. It displays the same physical courage needed for the ring (risking his life), while also showing his charitable and compassionate qualities.
Ali’s are much more controversial, but the situation was also much more complex, politically and socially explosive. It is really nonproductive to “compare” the two.
The backdrop of the Civil Rights, and Ali’s unafraid nature prompted his joining of such an extremist group. The intention for right and good and justice was there, perhaps its expression was questionable. But given someone prone to be unafraid to speak his mind, and act on what he believes, is joining such rash a group really an unpredictable or inappropriate response when the same person has a personal experience, understanding and observation of the past and continuing victimization of the group of people he racially belonged to and felt akin to?
Like I mentioned previously, we now know all the deficiencies with the group. But EVEN if you adopt the cynical viewpoint – that he was USED as a mouthpiece-- the loyalty he displayed, to take the brunt of the criticism, shame, losing his livelihood,reputation, fame, endorsments or however that worked back then, to face the unknown consequences in the face of such a decision still oozes a plethora integrity, loyalty, and honesty. How many athletes, or CEO’s or anyone else would give up their livelihood and reputation for the loyalty of others or for the principles he believed in?
It’s arguably a harder decision then the one Schmeling made, not because Schmelling risked his life, and there was probably some physical risk to Ali too, but Morally schmellings is a no-brainer. Help someone/risk your life or don’t. Ali’s situation, decision, and response was infinitesimally more intricate and colorfully complex.




Interesting! don’t know how much stock I would put into believing the homeless/wad of cash story though… at least the way you’ve presented it here


Any other thoughts ? Why Jack Johnson?


Care to expound? Why these guys? Why this order?



Agreed, plenty of courage and integrity ,but a deep abyss in moral principles


Haha!


Interesting. However this thread is for life and action away from the ring.. did you have any Burns anecdotes in this regard?

AJ, I am not in the fray anymore but as my name was mentioned, you bring up various points of the issue, which truly can never be solved...
Just as the old adage, "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder", the concept is in the eyes of the majority of the generation we are spawned from...
I truly believe that everyone in our democracy has to obey the law [WITHIN LIMITS of course ] or anarchy reigns... The advocates who thought Clay did what he THOUGHT was the right thing MUST REMEMBER that Millions of Americans of that time, took the OPPOSITE position that Clay and the Nation of Islam took...Who was correct ? You know my answer...Cheers
AJ for a thoughtful synopsis of a complicated issue...

[whosthere]

Originally Posted by burt bienstock

AJ, I am not in the fray anymore but as my name was mentioned, you bring up various points of the issue, which truly can never be solved...
Just as the old adage, "beauty is in the eyes of the beholder", the concept is in the eyes of the majority of the generation we are spawned from...
I truly believe that everyone in our democracy has to obey the law [WITHIN LIMITS of course ] or anarchy reigns... The advocates who thought Clay did what he THOUGHT was the right thing MUST REMEMBER that Millions of Americans of that time, took the OPPOSITE position that Clay and the Nation of Islam took...Who was correct ? You know my answer...Cheers
AJ for a thoughtful synopsis of a complicated issue...

Honestly, I'm not trying to attack anyone here, and I'm truly interested in your opinion. that's why I'm here...to understand things...

I think, and he can correct me if I'm mistaken, that AJ defines one aspect of moral courage as the willingness to take a stand opposed to popular opinion.

While I agree with you about the right and wrong of Ali's decision, I think he could have found some way to serve his country like many others who opposed the war did, that by AJ's definition, it did take courage to hold to an unpopular decision, even to the point of being stripped of his title.

Would that not give him the "courage of his convictions?" Even though you and I both disagree with what he did?

[burt bienstock]

Originally Posted by whosthere

Honestly, I'm not trying to attack anyone here, and I'm truly interested in your opinion. that's why I'm here...to understand things...

I think, and he can correct me if I'm mistaken, that AJ defines one aspect of moral courage as the willingness to take a stand opposed to popular opinion.

While I agree with you about the right and wrong of Ali's decision, I think he could have found some way to serve his country like many others who opposed the war did, that by AJ's definition, it did take courage to hold to an unpopular decision, even to the point of being stripped of his title.

Would that not give him the "courage of his convictions?" Even though you and I both disagree with what he did?

W H I have respect for you cause you are passionate in your convictions, just as i am too...We both abhor wars and killings, but sometimes to stop evil we have to pitch in for the commom good...In the second WW, there were conscientious objecters who refused to kill the enemies soldiersfor
"mora" reasons...Such as actor Lew Ayres who at the height of his career was a STAR but refused to serve the draft, but VOLUNTEERED to drive an Ambulance, thus avoiding killing anyone but saved lives in Europe's battle fields...He was villified at first, but soon gained the respect he deserved
by risking his life as an ambulance driver...Ironically his first great movie hit was as a German Soldier fighting in the Ardennes, in the WW1...Great
anti-war picture describing the futility of SENSELESS killing...So we both abhor war, but there is some Wars necessary as the American Revolutionary War and the Civil War, and of course the battle of the Allies
against Nazism in WW2...But i too think that Viet Nam was futile in the long run, but the USA's intention was to stop the desire of Communist Russia to expand in that part of the world...Was it successful.? Who knows but just as a doctor in good faith operates on a patient to prevent a worse illness, but the operation was messy, and the patient was not much helped by the surgery, the USA's intention was good in this messy world...So
we are probably both on the same page for the most part and I wish you
well...Cheers, and back to HARRY GREB ....

[whosthere]

Originally Posted by burt bienstock

W H I have respect for you cause you are passionate in your convictions, just as i am too...We both abhor wars and killings, but sometimes to stop evil we have to pitch in for the commom good...In the second WW, there were conscientious objecters who refused to kill the enemies soldiersfor
"mora" reasons...Such as actor Lew Ayres who at the height of his career was a STAR but refused to serve the draft, but VOLUNTEERED to drive an Ambulance, thus avoiding killing anyone but saved lives in Europe's battle fields...He was villified at first, but soon gained the respect he deserved
by risking his life as an ambulance driver...Ironically his first great movie hit was as a German Soldier fighting in the Ardennes, in the WW1...Great
anti-war picture describing the futility of SENSELESS killing...So we both abhor war, but there is some Wars necessary as the American Revolutionary War and the Civil War, and of course the battle of the Allies
against Nazism in WW2...But i too think that Viet Nam was futile in the long run, but the USA's intention was to stop the desire of Communist Russia to expand in that part of the world...Was it successful.? Who knows but just as a doctor in good faith operates on a patient to prevent a worse illness, but the operation was messy, and the patient was not much helped by the surgery, the USA's intention was good in this messy world...So
we are probably both on the same page for the most part and I wish you
well...Cheers, and back to HARRY GREB ....

Thank you. A gracious close, and yes, I suspect we would find more to agree on than to disagree...
Unless, of course, you don't like Harry Greb...
kidding...mostly. I am a fan of Greb, although sadly it seems I'll never actually get to see any fight footage.

[frankenfrank]

Any1 who hasn't fought / won't fight (and i explicitly mean not in any sort of regulated by any means combat sport) has no right 2 preach in favor of war , regardless of how just its cause may b .