I fundamentally agree with where you are going, but like another responder, I think that we have different understandings of the word "bravery." Hollywood's idea of "bravery" is really recklessness. And that is absolutely incompatible with cave diving, as it is with racing automobiles, fast and light alpine climbing, and other activities where training and judgment keep you alive.

But as this is not a Hollywood movie, we can use the proper definition:

  > Courage (also called bravery or valour) is the choice and willingness
  > to confront agony, pain, danger, uncertainty, or intimidation.
  > Physical courage is bravery in the face of physical pain, hardship,
  > death or threat of death, while moral courage is the ability to act
  > rightly in the face of popular opposition, shame, scandal,
  > discouragement, or personal loss.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courage

Cave divers are absolutely courageous. And brave. They just aren't reckless. Or foolhardy. To borrow a phrase from mountaineering:

"There are old cave divers. And bold cave divers. But no old and bold cave divers."

It seems to me that the "Hollywood bravery" you nicely describe really is bravery - Oxford Dictionaries says the word comes from French braverie or Italian braveria (boldness), based on Latin barbarus (c.f. barbarous). Alternatively it may be from bravo (wild, savage).

Courage on the other hand comes from Old French corage, from Latin cor (heart).

I think based on this the divers are courageous, not brave.

It's true that the word comes from those roots, but the Oxford dictionary you cite says plainly that the definition of the word as it is used today is:

  > Courageous behaviour or character.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/bravery

Just as long as we all agree that cave diving is not about being that ridiculous Hollywood stereotype dude who deliberately breaks all the rules for no damn reason and it works out because he broke all the rules for no damn reason.

I was agreeing with you. You wrote yourself that modern usage is synonymous, so I thought it would be interesting to look at the etymology too.

For the record the full OED favours the latter root for bravery (bravo < Old Italian braido, brado (wild, savage)). Strange they don't say the same thing.

Bravery is not fundamentally incompatible with cave diving: it’s a hard requirement.

People who simply aren’t brave just don’t go cave diving.

That’s not to say that skill and consideration aren’t very important, but those guys are still both brave.

Bravery is over-rated. It's a poor substitute for skill, experience and professionalism. I say this not to diminish the efforts of these divers, but to praise them fully.

Rock climbers drag themselves up a rock face with their bare hands, using a rope to catch them if they fall. Cavers drag themselves up a rope, because avoiding a fall is better than arresting a fall. That's the fundamental difference in culture and attitude between cavers and participants in "extreme sports".

Cavers go into a hazardous environment, but they mitigate those hazards through meticulous planning and preparation. They don't see their activities as inherently dangerous, but technically demanding. If you're taking risks in a cave, you're foolish rather than brave - you're working beyond the limits of your skill and experience.

Well, I am not a caver, but a climber, but know some, who are both. I don't think the difference you describe, exists. Both are activitys which can be very dangerous, but usually those who do it, are smart, because otherwise they would not be alive anymore. I started climbing, beeing not smart. But very soon I started getting smart, because I realised, otherwise I would stop beeing at all or end up paralized.

But there still remains a risk. Just like traffic is dangerous. Also, the thing is, doing the same, safe thing again and again, is boring. You want new experiences, new challenges. Wheter it be a new mountain, or a new cave. But with experience and beeing smart, you can do it quite safely, because you know your limits and the enviroment. But it is never 100% safe. Big rocks can come loose and hit or trap you, or water can come from channels you don't know about. This is life, you can't plan for all events.

See, no matter how skilled and careful you are, some necessary activities are more dangerous than watching paint dry. And courage/bravery is what motivates you to tackle these activities, in spite of your knowledge of their inherent danger.

Yes, skill is required, but actually skill is associated with courage; it is the skill that enables you to assess just how dangerous the activity might be, but it is courage that motivates you to undertake it, in spite of your knowing that no amount of skill can make it every-day-level safe

This whole argument ranks as one of the silliest things I've ever seen.

No kidding. You can be as prepared as they come and as fit as they come and still face a dangerous situation knowing that someone else's life is on the line going in to risk your own. If that does not qualify as brave I don't know what does.

> Rock climbers drag themselves up a rock face with their bare hands, using a rope to catch them if they fall. Cavers drag themselves up a rope, because avoiding a fall is better than arresting a fall. That's the fundamental difference in culture and attitude between cavers and participants in "extreme sports".

I completely disagree. I am a climber, I climb sports, trad and free-solo. Trad requires the most skill in evaluating risk and coping with and rationalising fear (my definition of bravery; conversely doing dangerous things without fear or understanding is not bravery, it's stupidity).

When you place gear on a route you are constantly assessing the capability of the system which affects your trust in falling on it, because not all routes have the same natural quantity, quality or distribution of protection... Bravery comes in all kinds of forms depending on the exact combination of gear and fall potential (what you are falling into), but an obviously valid type of bravery which is easiest to explain here is dealing with _irrational_ fear when you have the experience and skill to know that the system works but has a big fall potential: e.g you have completely solid gear well distributed up the bottom half of a pitch on a sheer or overhanging face with good fall potential, but a hard run-out stretch above with no gear (lets say 1/4 of the bottom half and about 6 meters above protection to make it scary but no groundfall potential), this is safe to fall on, but you will be scared and it will take bravery and experience (experience of how the gear works and knowing how much you can trust it, experience of falling and knowing how to react and what to expect from such a fall).

A more realistic and interesting scenarios are when there is some significant amount of risk, innate fear is very useful here to guide you to the seriousness of a situation, but you need the skill and experience to separate it from the irrational and then manage the "rational" part by responding to it but not letting it control you.

> Cavers go into a hazardous environment, but they mitigate those hazards through meticulous planning and preparation. They don't see their activities as inherently dangerous, but technically demanding. If you're taking risks in a cave, you're foolish rather than brave - you're working beyond the limits of your skill and experience.

I'm not a caver but I doubt any of the cavers involved in this dive would agree that "They don't see their activities as inherently dangerous". There _are_ inherent dangers with this dive, experience and skill allows you to mitigate and manage it and respond to dangers in the best way possible, but there will always be some amount of risk you cannot eradicate, this is where bravery has it's place, it's not about being fearless, it's about being in control and understanding and accepting the potential outcomes.

I will just leave this here for your reflection:

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/05/asia/thai-cave-diver-intl...