Humans and Competition

[The Cat]

You... don't get my point nor ceecee's point.

I tried.

from the mouths of guinea pigs.

Tis a pity though...

 

[Lark]

I'd say that we have a competitive society. The sad thing that even things like misery and sadness even have competition. Hence the whole "First world problems" meme. Personally I think that's insane, as while that meme may be a joke it does show the whole "Quit your whining, someone out there has it worst than you." mantra that seems to get repeated and used to minimize other people's troubles. People compete, that's a fact. There are few too resources out there for people to live in a peaceful, non-competitive way.

What I was suggesting in the OP was that would people grow lazy if they didn't have to compete? I wasn't referring to my personal views, I was just attempting to provide food for thought on the subject.

No, I wasnt suggesting anything, I was just asking what you meant by "indolent and decadent", those are turns of phrase which is interested me how and where you had come by them, though I see you meant "lazy".

Does popular mean the same thing as natural?

All the observation in your post here would indicate is the competition is a popular pass time and not that it is intrinsic to human nature. Less so would it suggest anything to do with resources. The example you gave yourself is one from a society which is not experiencing scarcity currently. In fact, probably has not experienced scarcity in some time.

What do you know about confirmation bias or discussion involving pretext?

 

[ceecee]

Sole for A LOT, not all. Learn to read, instead of jumping on the impulse of your contempt.

Learn to write, instead of sounding like your MAGA red hat is too tight then blaming it on day drinking.

 

[Lark]

I think competition will always exist. Perhaps humans can change competition to something less about productivity, materialism and constant consumption. Or at least attempt to make some changes in that better direction.

Competition is just a single motivation or practice in what is a plurality of motivations and practices, its not even likely that it is the most prevalent, or is ever likely to be.

There are a myriad of unacknowledged or deliberately ignored motivations and practices which exist as precursors to competition. It is paradoxical and ironic the amount of co-operation necessary for competition, whether you are going with a lawful context or chaotic one, to exist in the first place. Besides competition and co-operation there are a lot of other social exchanges, social investments, social interactions taking place too.

A good example of one is the gift relationship, it is paradoxical from the stand point of most understandings of competition since it involves reciprocity or generosity both of which are considered at odds with the idea of competition as conducted as a gainful activity, unless you think that psychological gain is on a par with material gain which most competition theories dont.

Anyway, I'm waiting for the big reveal that this whole thread was spawned by "I just read mein kampf and it says here that the Lebenstraum was absolutely a legit struggle because...".

Call me cynical, or maybe I just performed the function of interjecting into the discussion the desire direction anyway, those wily alt right keyboard warriors...

 

[Lark]

Competition is a sole motivator for a lot of entrepreneurship, purpose, and innovation. It is far too entwined with the ego, (in the sense of psychology) to just say "What would humans be like without competition?". It is akin to saying "What if we got rid of evolution?". While some may not bother with competing, and being true to themselves. They also won't make efforts to improve, and they will be satisfied with whatever base level they are on. Stagnation.

I'm still waiting for the entrepreneurs to create some wealth while all the workers are at home on lock down, I mean, its almost like they need their labour or something.

I always thought that entrepreneurs were the source of all wealth and good? I mean, was it all a bright shining lie afterall?

 

[Maou]

I'm still waiting for the entrepreneurs to create some wealth while all the workers are at home on lock down, I mean, its almost like they need their labour or something.

I always thought that entrepreneurs were the source of all wealth and good? I mean, was it all a bright shining lie afterall?

Some entrepreneurs used the pandemic to make money by repurposing their factories, such as alcohol corperations switching to make hsnd sanitizer etc.

 

[Maou]

Learn to write, instead of sounding like your MAGA red hat is too tight then blaming it on day drinking.

You must like me a lot to follow me around just to criticize all my posts, while insulting me. I will report you for harassment.

 

[ceecee]

You must like me a lot to follow me around just to criticize all my posts, while insulting me. I will report you for harassment.

lol You do know I get a notification every time you quote me, right?

 

[Lark]

If we are to evolve as a species we have to stop viewing competition as a huge virtue and something to constantly aspire to. Competition has it's place, but we so poorly apply it by thinking it always is good and has a use.

I would agree, within the proper limits and appropriate sphere set down to it, its probably great, the problem being that these things are generally established as both panacea/prescription and descriptor/fact of life to the eclipse of all else.

When it comes to competition though, it does not even achieve or accomplish what is hoped of it by most of those who prescribe it.

No better example could be found than the idea of perfect competition in economic theory, perfect competition among producers of generic goods or services is supposed to prevent monopoly control, spur efficient use of resources, equitable and optimal distributions of resources, allow everyone to control markets through the medium of consumer sovereignty etc.

Its a fine theory. Finer than communism.

By the alchemy of price signals and consumer power the self-interest of a single producer becomes/makes for the common good. Its spontaneous and requires no central planner or civil authority. Everyone can take part, no one is excluded through barriers/costs of entry or exit from a market, so you could fish and hunt in the morning, build after lunch and writer or critique before bedtime like the perfect polymath.

The difference is the fact diverges far from the theory/fantasy. Its more a useful pretext or rationalization propping up a facade. There's little or no competition where there's organized exploitation. Why would there be it gets in the way of business proper

 

[Lark]

Some entrepreneurs used the pandemic to make money by repurposing their factories, such as alcohol corperations switching to make hsnd sanitizer etc.

Great news!! We obviously do not need the lock down to end as these entrepreneurs do not need works to leave their home for this process, this will create the wealth we need.

I knew we didnt need the workers after all. Carry on.

 

[Lark]

Big corporations just stuck out their piggish hands asking for stimulus money and got it. The lack of morality within the competitive system is hurting working folks. That's my thinking on it. I might be wrong somewhere.

Competition was meant to make any moral prerequisites a mute point.

It was the whole of what Adam Smith was saying with that oft quoted idea about it was "not from benevolence" that the butcher, baker, candlestick maker produced their wares for market.

 

[Maou]

Great news!! We obviously do not need the lock down to end as these entrepreneurs do not need works to leave their home for this process, this will create the wealth we need.

I knew we didnt need the workers after all. Carry on.

What?

 

[Lark]

I wasn't talking or mentioning morality or ethics in my post, just the cold hard reality of what is outside of ourselves. Call it what you will, at the end of the day. Innovation requires competing ideas. You cannot have two things, and expect zero choice. You are literally promoting people doing whatever they want. So you want no standardize model. Which is ineffective in society. Choice implies competition. Because naturally, people will select the idea that they think suits them the most. There will always be a preference. Like a manual vs automatic. Humans have variety, just as they have a variety of preference. Your thinking is too black and white. It isnt even a matter of good or bad, but people will select things. Thus it is a competition. The "Winning" aspect you mention, only represents one individual Not all of society. Which is where I am talking from. Whether or not someone "wins" by people selecting their product over something else, isn't what I am talking about. I am saying that the selection of some product over another, will always exist.

Competition, natural selection, choice and a bunch other things explicit and implicit in your post are not the same thing or even equivocal.

Whether you want to introduce morality into the question or not.

Tell me, what do you understand of the "naturalistic fallacy" when it comes to logic games?

 

[anticlimatic]

Compete or die is literally the foundation of all life. In modern times a lot of people like to make the argument that science and society has subjugated nature rendering competition irrelevant. Unfortunately Covid19 has dispatched that argument.

Plus it's just fun. Who doesn't like some good sport every now and then?

 

[Lark]

...yeah, it is. Morality and ethics are a part of this. If it isn't, it needs to be.

Your view is fatalistic and deterministic. We cannot view the world from a dog eat dog world lens. To do so pits us all against each other into pointless conflicts. Humans can, do, and should innovate in the absence of competition. It isn't needed or required to make something good. There is far too much of it in the world, it is held in far too high of a regard because people are absolutely obsessed with "winning". You lose sight of the human condition.

I dont think there's too much of it, rather there's probably too much expected of it, and like I say its viewed in a manner which treats it as prevalent and prioritizes it when its a sham to do so.

There are some decent attempts to extrapolate an intrinsic or innate "psychology of ethics", one of the best I can think of is Erich Fromm's "Man for Himself", which is a paraphrasing of the old nautical term of "every man for himself", meaning "save yourself" or as an alternative to some other priority like "women and children first". Personally, I think his rooting of psychology in material conditions and prospects was better done in subsequent books like "Zen and Psychoanalysis", "Heart of Man" and "Pathology of Normalcy" but he's not widely or well read or listened to unfortunately (there are some great, cheaper audio books on iTunes and Amazon).

 

[Lark]

Whether or not you think it is ethical, doesn't mean it won't happen. This isn't a morality/ethics debate. It is what would happen if it didn't exist. Competition will always happen, because humans are subject to evolution too. Only few would deny humans are animals. Evolution affects ideas, as much as it does our societies and bodies. Things are constantly changing. And sometimes, changes result in extinction. So be careful how you want to change.

You think competition is the same thing as natural selection if you are invoking evolutionary theories?

So the thread on competition is a trojan horse for discussing social darwinism?

 

[Lark]

Sole for A LOT, not all. Learn to read, instead of jumping on the impulse of your contempt.

You sure are trying to win me to your side, aint'cha? Do me a favor, and don't waste your pretentious breath on someone you hate. You are already proving you can't help everyone, clearly.

You think Ceecee is "trying to win [you] to [her] side"? Why do you think that?

Why do you say "someone you hate"? I would like to understand why you use the turn of phrase "pretentious breath", can you tell me about that? Also what do you mean by "you are already proving you cant help everyone, clearly"? Do you think that you are in need of help and that Ceecee is trying to help you?

 

[Maou]

You think competition is the same thing as natural selection if you are invoking evolutionary theories?

So the thread on competition is a trojan horse for discussing social darwinism?

Nope, I am just saying competition exists, and always will. Thats it.

 

[Maou]

You think Ceecee is "trying to win [you] to [her] side"? Why do you think that?

Why do you say "someone you hate"? I would like to understand why you use the turn of phrase "pretentious breath", can you tell me about that? Also what do you mean by "you are already proving you cant help everyone, clearly"? Do you think that you are in need of help and that Ceecee is trying to help you?

I am being sarcastic. My impression of Ceecee's tone is rude, and insulting. She clearly dislikes me, but constantly quotes me. So what do you do in that position? S

 

[Lark]

Compete or die is literally the foundation of all life. In modern times a lot of people like to make the argument that science and society has subjugated nature rendering competition irrelevant. Unfortunately Covid19 has dispatched that argument.

Plus it's just fun. Who doesn't like some good sport every now and then?

What modern times? Who are these "lot of people" and when did they make this argument? I dont remember reading it lately. I read a lot of people saying the opposite. Constantly. Unfortunately, as with this post, they are not good at supporting it with any sort of evidence.

I really do not see how a pandemic is a vindication of competition or the extreme notion that you join with competition or die or that this extreme notion is a foundation of life. Perhaps you can elaborate.

I dont think pandemic is fun or sport to be honest. Perhaps that is not what you meant. Sport surely is an example of competition which does not in any way resemble the extreme notion of compete or die.