1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hey Guest, is it this your first time on the forums?

    Visit the Beginner's Box

    Introduce yourself, read some of the ins and outs of the community, access to useful links and information.

    Dismiss Notice
Cookies New to the forums?

Discussion of competition

Discussion in 'Miscellaneous' started by vampo, Mar 23, 2013.

Mods: BlueLuigi
Page 3 of 3
  1. FuzzyBlueBaron

    FuzzyBlueBaron Warm, Caring, Benign, Good and Kind Philanthrope Global Moderator Forum Moderator Donator Tester
    1. The Young Blood Collective - [YB]

    Messages:
    2,508
    Thank you, RC.

    Now, without having bought the book (it being hideously expensive once you include shipping to Australia-- although, I may order it and ship it to my parent's-in-law where I can pick it up next time I'm in the US) I obviously can't get a full look at his arguments against competition, but having read through the articles here (http://www.alfiekohn.org/articles_subject.htm#null) most of his work is looking at how competition affects education & work environments. There are pieces that address play (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...1/five-not-so-obvious-propositions-about-play) and competition in sports (http://www.alfiekohn.org/miscellaneous/compsports.htm) but neither of them really address the 2 points I made regarding the underlying assumptions surrounding the competition:entertainment paradigm (NB: I've included the point before my 2 main points to help give context):

    Now, I concede that there may be things I've missed due to not having physically read his book, but in my scholarly opinion I feel there are factors Kohn has not addressed that render his claim 'competition == bad' only partially true. Just because competition in entertainment & recreation can lead to negativeness does not mean it always will-- and until, at a bare minimum, the factors I listed in the above quote are addressed the claim that 'competition always makes for poorer entertainment' is (and will remain) suspect/spurious/silly.
    ----

    I apologise that your discussion was chopped up like that, but it was (as a number of people had pointed out) hideously off-topic. If it's any comfort, MM would probably have never read it and Geti will undoubtedly be following the debate wherever it gets moved to. Also, you're free to leave, ofc, but I find it sad that you don't consider 'random strangers' like myself worthy of continuing dialogue-- I know I was enjoying/learning from the debate. :3
     
    FuzzyBlueBaron, Mar 25, 2013
    #41
    Beef likes this.
  2. Reactorcore

    Reactorcore Shark Slayer

    Messages:
    155
    Fair enough, you're showing some real effort with your post, so I'll try to address them.


    It always does actually, especially if the competitions are ongoing and designed around competetiveness at their core (such as leaderboards) and not some other values, like improvement, teamwork, prize or anything else that people might participate for when they enter a competition.

    At its core, competition itself is about defeating someone, so inherent to a competition there is always a winner and always a loser. This is a hard fact. Competition is about winning and losing, not improvement, teamwork, the prize or anything else. Thats the core definition of competition, no more, no less.

    The problem is, people seem to think that:

    Improvement/teamwork/prize/all the good stuff = competition.

    This is wrong. These are all completely seperate. There is absolutely nothing good about competition, but because competition is usually bundled with the good things mentioned above, they make the mistake of assuming that competition itself is good and not realizing that these things are completely seperate.
     
    Reactorcore, Mar 25, 2013
    #42
Mods: BlueLuigi
Page 3 of 3