The importance of competition

[███]

Something I saw on the news a while ago now that just come to my attention again the other day at work. The question is how important is competition in life and what do people think about attempts to desensitise competitive activities that may prepare people for the real world.

Specifically, I'm thinking about things like sports day at school. The article I read was banging on about how they no longer award certificates to the winners, runners-up and third place competitors but to everyone who competes. Similar ideas are being implemented in the academic sphere with awards for attainment and effort being removed in preference of a generic pat on the back.

The theory, as far as I can work out, is that nobody gets their feelings hurt. There's no crying, no moods, no disappointment, no anger. Further than that I guess you could say it removes an unnecessary element of life at a young age. Kids are often ridiculed by their classmates because of their inability to perform, whether that be throwing a javelin or finding a remainder. I imagine that sort of thing can be quite disruptive and derogatory to a small child.

However, that's not what I think on the subject. My whole life is based around my ambition to be the best at whatever I do. It's unrealistic if not impossible but it's got me this far. To remove the prize at the end and the award you receive would be truly poor in my view. That feeling of being better than someone else at something and the confidence it instills is tremendous. It's what made Britain great. I blame much of our international sporting failure on our general lack of drive to succeed and this mentality (particularly in British sprinting for example) that finishing second best is okay as long as you tried your hardest. Try harder. It's far better to be the victorious Brit then the stereotypical plucky one.

[Sagat]

Hm.

Sounds like the communist, liberal leftists are slowly getting their way after all.

Humanity and it's stupid feel good, "everyone wins" views may be great, but nature and life in general quickly separates the winners and losers. This crap is just going to make it all the harder for them to accept it when they do lose, and they will eventually.

[Eris]

I never gave much for competition. I'm a loner, and I've always been one. I have no need to compare myself with others. Though, apparantly, some people seem to have that need. Can't say I understand them.

[miniPhil]

I agree with this on some points. I dont think you should presurise kids into winning but at the same time competion can help them to strive to get better.
I think under a certain age, a point where doing your best and striving for goals doesnt matter to kids.
But then again if they have that atitude then they will become lazy. I really cant decide.

[Fiery]

I agree with Eris, on this one. I'm not much for competition, either, nor do I compare myself with anyone. The compulsion just does not exist.

It is not competition that propels me to achieve, it is work, and the thing it is I create that represents the end means of my thoughts.

Competition only instills the belief that you need others to be successful, or a means by which to measure your own productivity.

[Eris]

I agree with Eris, on this one. I'm not much for competition, either, nor do I compare myself with anyone. The compulsion just does not exist.

It is not competition that propels me to achieve, it is work, and the thing it is I create that represents the end means of my thoughts.

Competition only instills the belief that you need others to be successful, or a means by which to measure your own productivity.

If anything, competition (especially sports) dulls the mental faculties. You've got no time to contemplate if you spend all your time in futile pursuits, like a hamster in a wheel.

[Fiery]

If anything, competition (especially sports) dulls the mental faculties. You've got no time to contemplate if you spend all your time in futile pursuits, like a hamster in a wheel.

Yes.

Competition suffocates, rather than stimulates.

To compete against another individual is to surrender to his every move, when ironically, the "spirit" of competition is to never yield until victory is achieved.

Is it really victory, when your mind is conditioned to always think of the other man, and what his next move will be? To be tied down by your mind's own compulsion to be obsessed with that of something that is not yours?

Competition is for the parasite. He can only take what is not his, and alter it, proclaiming it better, because it is "progressive" and "different." In its facade, it is different - in structure, it is exactly the same.

This world was not built by competition. It was built with thoughts. It was improved with thoughts. Progress does not push people by banding them together, but by flinging men to seperate corners, to be left alone with their own minds.

One needs competition if one cannot concieve a world of his own.

[Regex]

If anything, competition (especially sports) dulls the mental faculties. You've got no time to contemplate if you spend all your time in futile pursuits, like a hamster in a wheel.

If you believe this, why do you play any video games at all?

To the contrary, competition brings motivation. It's not a futile pursuit if you are striving to be the best at something. Whether you're trying to be the best physicist, or if you're trying to be the best chaotic evil Halfling rogue, if you have a goal that you are trying to reach, you will work toward that goal, including sharpening your "mental faculties". Sure, they physicist has more potential to be beneficial to society than the D&D player, but the idea behind it is the same.

With the competition between the two major microprocessor manufacturers, we've had a continuous increase in PC performance. Do you honestly believe that they would be at the speed and performance they are if they didn't have something to lose by just making the same chips, only cheaper? The businesses were motivated to produce higher performing chips, and they succeeded.

Competition suffocates, rather than stimulates.

I'd like to see supporting evidence for such a conclusion. All evidence thus far indicates that competition has brought about progress.

Is it really victory, when your mind is conditioned to always think of the other man, and what his next move will be? To be tied down by your mind's own compulsion to be obsessed with that of something that is not yours?

Competition is for the parasite. He can only take what is not his, and alter it, proclaiming it better, because it is "progressive" and "different." In its facade, it is different - in structure, it is exactly the same.

But it's not obsession with the opponent, so much as obsession with self. To say "I am better" is to demonstrate your progress ahead of the rest of humanity. This is the very basis behind evolution. To progress in small amounts, in different ways, over time. Until in the end, you find that you have become something very different than the original animal.
To go back to the computers, just look at the original computers that started it all. Tell me that computers are exactly the same "in structure."

This world was not built by competition. It was built with thoughts. It was improved with thoughts. Progress does not push people by banding them together, but by flinging men to seperate corners, to be left alone with their own minds.

The thoughts were most often inspired by some sort of competition. Whether it was political competition, or economic competition. Columbus found the Americas when he was looking for faster trade routes to India, for example.



Competition doesn't have to always involve other people either. You can compete with yourself, strive to break your own record. This is the thought process among a great deal of people trying to become physically fit. Added motivation, including personal goals.


Competition is part of human nature. And so far, it's shown to bring progress in many forms. I may not enjoy playing or watching sports, but I can at least appreciate the benefit to them.

[Eris]

If you believe this, why do you play any video games at all?

I play video games, though not competitive ones.

To the contrary, competition brings motivation. It's not a futile pursuit if you are striving to be the best at something. Whether you're trying to be the best physicist, or if you're trying to be the best chaotic evil Halfling rogue, if you have a goal that you are trying to reach, you will work toward that goal, including sharpening your "mental faculties". Sure, they physicist has more potential to be beneficial to society than the D&D player, but the idea behind it is the same.

I really can't recall anyone competing in either physics or D&D. Sure, there are awards, but that's not why you do it.

With the competition between the two major microprocessor manufacturers, we've had a continuous increase in PC performance. Do you honestly believe that they would be at the speed and performance they are if they didn't have something to lose by just making the same chips, only cheaper? The businesses were motivated to produce higher performing chips, and they succeeded.

I was mainly referring to competition between people, and not economics.

[Fiery]

But it's not obsession with the opponent, so much as obsession with self. To say "I am better" is to demonstrate your progress ahead of the rest of humanity. This is the very basis behind evolution. To progress in small amounts, in different ways, over time. Until in the end, you find that you have become something very different than the original animal.
To go back to the computers, just look at the original computers that started it all. Tell me that computers are exactly the same "in structure."

A computer is still a computer. A = A. Yes, of course I won't disagree with the fact that computers have advanced in leaps and bounds. That's not what I was arguing.

Competition can spur improvement. But without the strangle hold of competition on your mind, you're free to discover your own thoughts, in their purest form. Progress comes from thoughts, yes, but they are not entirely your own. They're another layer atop a myriad of collected ones.

Going back to your reference on computers: Competition has spurred improvements in computers, but it hasn't created the impulse to create something completely new; something innovative, and more efficient than a computer. Something that's not a computer.

[Regex]

I play video games, though not competitive ones.

I know you played Command & Conquer. Don't you play to win? Don't you devise new strategies and try to be more efficient at winning?
Even if you are absolutely satisfied with not winning in the game, you still play to win. That in itself is still a form of competition.

I really can't recall anyone competing in either physics or D&D. Sure, there are awards, but that's not why you do it.

D&D competitions are rarely ever on any sort of professional level. But you find D&D tournaments at nerd gatherings everywhere. People playing last man standing, whether they're just showing off their favorite character, or they're trying to beat everyone else. Once again, that is competition.
As for physics, you need only look at the business world.

I was mainly referring to competition between people, and not economics.

But these are rooted in the same thing. You can't say that they are exclusive from each other.

Though I do agree that the people that are absolutely petty with competition are taking it too far. There's no reason to be ridiculously competitive with everything there is. As with everything, there is a point where it's in excess.

And I'd also like to clarify, in no way can competition measure your worth as a person. You can have fun and there can be winners and losers. But people's worth can come out in so many ways. A single competition to test one specific skillset should never ever be used to discourage someone personally. And that's what I find happens so much with sports, especially up through high school. And I do agree that there often times is too much emphasis on this particular form of competition.

Competition can spur improvement. But without the strangle hold of competition on your mind, you're free to discover your own thoughts, in their purest form. Progress comes from thoughts, yes, but they are not entirely your own. They're another layer atop a myriad of collected ones.

Going back to your reference on computers: Competition has spurred improvements in computers, but it hasn't created the impulse to create something completely new; something innovative, and more efficient than a computer. Something that's not a computer.

There are no pure thoughts. You can discover your own thoughts, but they will always, always be influenced by the things around you. Without this fundamental understanding, we could never make the progress we have made. I don't think anyone would have considered building an engine that can move cars at 60 MPH without having seen an engine that moved a car at 25 MPH. We make progress in smaller steps, so that we can get the understanding we need to take the next step.

For example, look at the competitions between robot dogs playing soccer. The intention behind this competition is to create robots that can react quickly to their situations. They're starting with something simple, and when that is mastered, they can move on to something more complex.

No, a computer will rarely inspire someone to build a machine that can take you faster than light. That's just not how inspiration works.

[Buruku]

Competition is very important to western civilization, thats how we have been wired to think throughout history. The Greeks very much believed in "healthy competition" as a way to make ourselves better, and to keep us motivated in life.

This is not such a popular idea in some eastern countries though, where they believe that you shouldn't spend your time comparing yourself to others, but rather just being happy with what you have.

I think a lot of people that deny being competitive are fooling themselves. You may not be a really competitive person by nature, but we live in a patriarchal society, which makes it hard to avoid.

I do believe in healthy competition, but I don't go overboard.

[genericusername2]

Competition in the sports sense certainly does fuel more successful athletes, but its hard to tell whether that's particularly useful, especially in the lower levels. A very successful high school sportsman may not even scratch the surface of getting into professional sports, so unless the player is, with a baseball reference, hitting .500 and has lots of HR and RBI, you shouldn't give them too many awards. Only the best at such a broad level "deserve" it. Self Esteem is a measure of character, assholeness, and a whole lot of other things, it can be built up by virtually anything as long as a person has control of his emotions and mind, so I suppose if it lowers some random kids' self esteem it doesn't really matter.

Competition in business would be okay with various regulations on the companies' behavior. But to climb the ladder in a Peter Keating sort of way (a la The Fountainhead) is bound to cause all sorts of corruption, and thus competition breeds corruption in the wrong situation.

In school circumstances, it encourages children to work harder and better themselves. This is then continued in the 'real' world. If there was no competition in business, one company would monopolise the market and therefore be able to charge/do whatever they wanted. Competition in business is necessary to ensure the consumer gets a fair deal.

In fact, take it to a very basic level - genetics and evolution (okay, complicated level, but...). Competition and survival of the fittest is what got us where we are today. Species do not evolve without pressures of competition to make the gene pool better itself and the fight for survival with the environment. Without competition, we could well still be sat in the trees.

As for the comment about British attitudes, too damn right. Our country has been overrun by political correctness. It's now far safer to sit back and just say everybody did well than take a stand and say someone did **** and needs to do better. Especially if that someone is from a minority group. We as a nation have been castrated by PC, as patriotism is now seen as racism. Until this is corrected, we'll never do well at sports - or anything else - because we don't have the self-confidence or the will to win.