Who here believes humans, or the majority of humans, in our society in
particular, need to stop competing over so many things? How do you think
competition comes about, from society, nature or a combination of both?
A lot of people compete over a number of things, whether it be a fight to have more material wealth than someone else, a fight to look happier than someone else, etc.
I believe we, as individuals, should stop competing with one another and start competing with our self. We should strive to be all that we can be instead of striving to be the best at everything, which is basically futile. If we were to do this, we would collectively be the best at everything, in addition to freeing ourselves as individuals from the machine that is the ills of society, resulting in unadulterated individuality.
Too idealistic? Is there really such a thing?
As for the second question, I believe that most competition is brought about by society, but obviously it is in our nature to compete too. Why must we compete with others though? Why not be an individual and compete with yourself to satisfy this characteristic? Why give into the collective competition?
I look forward to your opinion.
Competition
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17163
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 6:54 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Cheshire, England
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17163
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 6:54 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Cheshire, England
-
- Axe
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2002 7:43 pm
HAHAHAHAHhahahahaha
no man that's not me at all
i'm not taking anything actually, i just like random humor. i'm carrying it over from pinkfan.com a GREAT message board where nobody ever talked about floyd, a classic and legendary board that you people wouldn't have liked more than likely
random humor is the best, c'mon admit it
no man that's not me at all
i'm not taking anything actually, i just like random humor. i'm carrying it over from pinkfan.com a GREAT message board where nobody ever talked about floyd, a classic and legendary board that you people wouldn't have liked more than likely
random humor is the best, c'mon admit it
-
- Knife
- Posts: 331
- Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2002 12:38 pm
- Location: Aide of Adel.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 11559
- Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
- Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...
Re: Competition
Real Pink in the Inside wrote:Who here believes humans, or the majority of humans, in our society in
particular, need to stop competing over so many things? How do you think
competition comes about, from society, nature or a combination of both?
A lot of people compete over a number of things, whether it be a fight to have more material wealth than someone else, a fight to look happier than someone else, etc.
I believe we, as individuals, should stop competing with one another and start competing with our self. We should strive to be all that we can be instead of striving to be the best at everything, which is basically futile. If we were to do this, we would collectively be the best at everything, in addition to freeing ourselves as individuals from the machine that is the ills of society, resulting in unadulterated individuality.
Too idealistic? Is there really such a thing?
As for the second question, I believe that most competition is brought about by society, but obviously it is in our nature to compete too. Why must we compete with others though? Why not be an individual and compete with yourself to satisfy this characteristic? Why give into the collective competition?
I look forward to your opinion.
Deja vu.
I wonder if you still have my response to this?
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
Re: Competition
Nope. I never did get around to replying either.mosespa wrote: Deja vu.
I wonder if you still have my response to this?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 7074
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 12:54 pm
- Location: Edinburgh or Aberdeen depending on the time of year
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 11559
- Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
- Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...
I'm not Keith...but I'll stick my two cents in here.
I am opposed to socialism because it emphasizes the "collective" over the individual. Without individuals, you could not have a collective. So it's a bit ridiculous in my opinion to emphasize the importance of the sum over that of it's parts.
The whole may be greater than the sum of it's parts, but the whole is nothing without the parts of it's sum.
If you follow the credo, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need," you then run into the questions, "Who decides ability?" and "Who defines 'need'?" and "Who gave them that right?"
The "free" world denounced the communists and the facists...now, the whole world is crying for more socialism. Make up your minds, folks. First we tried to eradicate the socialists (facism and communism are forms of socialism)...now we're trying to become more like them.
What gives?
I am opposed to socialism because it emphasizes the "collective" over the individual. Without individuals, you could not have a collective. So it's a bit ridiculous in my opinion to emphasize the importance of the sum over that of it's parts.
The whole may be greater than the sum of it's parts, but the whole is nothing without the parts of it's sum.
If you follow the credo, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need," you then run into the questions, "Who decides ability?" and "Who defines 'need'?" and "Who gave them that right?"
The "free" world denounced the communists and the facists...now, the whole world is crying for more socialism. Make up your minds, folks. First we tried to eradicate the socialists (facism and communism are forms of socialism)...now we're trying to become more like them.
What gives?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 7074
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 12:54 pm
- Location: Edinburgh or Aberdeen depending on the time of year
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17163
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 6:54 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Cheshire, England
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
Re: Competition
Look what I found:Real Pink in the Inside wrote:Nope. I never did get around to replying either.mosespa wrote: Deja vu.
I wonder if you still have my response to this?
On 6/14/01 1:45:00 PM, The Poster Formerly Known As R.PITI wrote:
>Who here believes humans, or
>the majority of humans, in our
>society in
>particular, need to stop
>competing over so many things?
>How do you think
>competition comes about, from
>society, nature or a
>combination of both?
First of all, I think competition is not something that can be "stopped." Natural Selection is a form of competition...competition for survival.
I think it's a force of nature. Hot air currents and cold air currents collide...what happens next depends upon which force "wins the competition."
It seems to me (and please let me know if I'm off base here) that what you refer to as "competition" is a form of "greed"...trying to have more than everyone else.
Greed is an unfortunate part of the condition of perfection. People are always saying "in a perfect world." This IS a perfect world. We have light AND dark, good AND evil, mountains AND plains...etc. Greed is just the opposite of altrusim (which, when carried to extremes, can be just as morally incorrect as greed...IMHOnion.) There's nothing that can be done about it without some kind of shift in exactly what it means to BE human.
At least that's how I see it, anyway.
>I believe we, as individuals,
>should stop competing with one
>another and start
>competing with our self. We
>should strive to be all that
>we can be instead of
>striving to be the best at
>everything, which is basically
>futile.
Wouldn't "being all that you can be" presuppose competing to defeat failure to be all that you can be?
If we were to do
>this, we, collectively, would
>be the best at everything, in
>addition to freeing ourselves
>as individuals, at least in
>part, from the machine that is
>the ills of society, resulting
>in unadulterated
>individuality.
>Too idealistic? Is there
>really such a thing?
Dude...working together is what MAKES the machine. You are talking about merely replacing one machine with another. In fact, anyone who has ever talked about dismantling whatever current machine may be running is also talking about replacing it with a different machine.
No machine is without it's "flaws"...and no two people will ever agree on the best way to eliminate all of the flaws...or even on what the flaws ARE.
Why
>must we compete with others
>though?
Because they're there.
Look at it this way for a second. You have a certain goal you want to reach...whatever that goal may be, it's important to you that you reach it.
Now, someone else is after the same goal you are after. There may be plenty to go around, but you thought of reaching this goal on your own, so, it becomes YOUR PERSONAL goal.
This other guy is out to achieve YOUR goal...take YOUR dream. You don't want to let that happen, so you try to achieve it before he does.
Why not be an
>individual and compete with
>yourself to satisfy this
>characteristic?
"Aw man, you're talking about making changes within myself...that's hard work...I don't want to do that."
--Society In General.
Besides...who gives a shit if you take something from yourself? At least then you still have it.
Why give into
>the collective competition?
>Why HAVE WE given into the
>collective competition?
Because it's how you get ahead in the world. Progress is all about forward motion. You don't want to stand still, you stagnate and die. When you move forward, you encounter opposition (one of Newton's Laws, I think,) competition is a form of opposition. It must exist.
What you call "competing with yourself," I call "improving yourself."
God, I hate knowing everything...........
mosespa
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune