On 20/09/2011 02:51 PM, Mike the Elder wrote:

> As for the classroom environment, I support the notion of cutting way back on
> creating artificial institutionally sponsored forums for separating students

> questions about the intrinsic value of their efforts and actions instead.  Life


> on competition to become an irrational preoccupation with stamping out

> meeting.

This teacher was clearly of the opinion that *all* competition is 
inherently a bad thing. Much like there are people who insist that 
violence is wrong, and would peacefully let somebody beat them to death 
rather than actually defend themselves.

Myself, I happen to agree with your sentiments on the matter...

Post a reply to this message

On 9/20/2011 5:54 AM, Invisible wrote:

>
> Think about it. In a competition, you win by making somebody else lose.
>

Of course, the real world is competitive. What you have done, by denying 
the existence of competition is sent someone into society who is 
ill-prepared to deal with that society. Sure, you can have personal 
goals, but somewhere someone is going to lose out where you win. The 
other applicants for a job, the promotion from a pool of workers, 
finding a mate; all competitive.

By not acknowledging that the world is competitive, that person is 
likely to experience extreme disappointment when they don't get the job. 
"But it was my personal goal, why didn't it happen?"

Or, it could swing the other way. "Hey! It was my personal goal to 
become manager. Your goals don't matter, so what is your problem? I 
achieved my goal. I'm sure you will someday, too.

Learning competition means understanding that you will not always come 
out on top. It's about learning to be fair to others. It means giving 
the other side due consideration. I for one welcome competition in our 
schools.

That statement by that teacher is dangerously ill-conceived, rather than 
insightful.
-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

On 9/20/2011 9:21 AM, Invisible wrote:

> This teacher was clearly of the opinion that *all* competition is
> inherently a bad thing. Much like there are people who insist that
> violence is wrong, and would peacefully let somebody beat them to death
> rather than actually defend themselves.
>

I'm forced into a class currently that appears to teach that sort of 
passivity. Sorry, no ... you threaten my life and I will respond in 
defense, even if that means causing a great deal of harm to the threat.

> Myself, I happen to agree with your sentiments on the matter...


-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 12:11:31 -0500, Mike Raiford wrote:

> On 9/20/2011 5:54 AM, Invisible wrote:
> 
> 
>> Think about it. In a competition, you win by making somebody else lose.
>>
>>
> Of course, the real world is competitive. What you have done, by denying
> the existence of competition is sent someone into society who is
> ill-prepared to deal with that society. Sure, you can have personal
> goals, but somewhere someone is going to lose out where you win. The
> other applicants for a job, the promotion from a pool of workers,
> finding a mate; all competitive.
> 
> By not acknowledging that the world is competitive, that person is
> likely to experience extreme disappointment when they don't get the job.
> "But it was my personal goal, why didn't it happen?"
> 
> Or, it could swing the other way. "Hey! It was my personal goal to
> become manager. Your goals don't matter, so what is your problem? I
> achieved my goal. I'm sure you will someday, too.
> 
> Learning competition means understanding that you will not always come
> out on top. It's about learning to be fair to others. It means giving
> the other side due consideration. I for one welcome competition in our
> schools.
> 
> That statement by that teacher is dangerously ill-conceived, rather than
> insightful.

I agree.

A world where people don't know that sometimes there is a winner and 
sometimes there is a loser means that you get people who can't cope with 
losing.

Of course it's important for students (and people in general) to know 
that they often compete with themselves.

When kids who have never had to face losing hit the real world and, for 
example, don't get a job from their first interview because there was a 
better candidate then them, such a first loss is absolutely *devastating*.

I think that is something that contributes to workplace violence as well.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 9/20/2011 3:54, Invisible wrote:
> One person's challenge might be a walk in the park for somebody else

Somehow, I read that literally the first time, and thought of all the 
charities that collect $X for every mile you walk.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   How come I never get only one kudo?

Post a reply to this message

On 20-9-2011 19:24, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 12:11:31 -0500, Mike Raiford wrote:
>
>> On 9/20/2011 5:54 AM, Invisible wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Think about it. In a competition, you win by making somebody else lose.
>>>
>>>
>> Of course, the real world is competitive. What you have done, by denying
>> the existence of competition is sent someone into society who is
>> ill-prepared to deal with that society. Sure, you can have personal
>> goals, but somewhere someone is going to lose out where you win. The
>> other applicants for a job, the promotion from a pool of workers,
>> finding a mate; all competitive.
>>
>> By not acknowledging that the world is competitive, that person is
>> likely to experience extreme disappointment when they don't get the job.
>> "But it was my personal goal, why didn't it happen?"
>>
>> Or, it could swing the other way. "Hey! It was my personal goal to
>> become manager. Your goals don't matter, so what is your problem? I
>> achieved my goal. I'm sure you will someday, too.
>>
>> Learning competition means understanding that you will not always come
>> out on top. It's about learning to be fair to others. It means giving
>> the other side due consideration. I for one welcome competition in our
>> schools.
>>
>> That statement by that teacher is dangerously ill-conceived, rather than
>> insightful.
>
> I agree.
>
> A world where people don't know that sometimes there is a winner and
> sometimes there is a loser means that you get people who can't cope with
> losing.
>
> Of course it's important for students (and people in general) to know
> that they often compete with themselves.
>
> When kids who have never had to face losing hit the real world and, for
> example, don't get a job from their first interview because there was a
> better candidate then them, such a first loss is absolutely *devastating*.
>
> I think that is something that contributes to workplace violence as well.

Just a quick note: competitiveness is partly cultural. In some countries 
students compete with every other student and the percentage of students 
that pass is fixed. In other countries you pass if you meet a certain 
level.
In a mixed group, like an international organization, not being aware of 
that difference might lead to friction and even a complete shutdown of 
all functionality. What happens is that a very competitive person gets 
the top position by playing it hard. Everybody knows he got it that way 
and not by being the right person for the job. Then nobody wants to work 
with him (seldom a her) and nothing gets done.

Quite a lot of people that live in competitive countries are not aware 
that the higher you get in an international organization the less you 
can force someone lower in rank to do what you want. In a monoculture it 
works different.

Post a reply to this message

On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:27:48 +0200, andrel wrote:

> Just a quick note: competitiveness is partly cultural. In some countries
> students compete with every other student and the percentage of students
> that pass is fixed. In other countries you pass if you meet a certain
> level.

I think competitiveness is part of human nature.  Competition to find the 
'best' mate, for example - something that drives the race to continue.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> Think about it. In a competition, you win by making somebody else lose.
>
> Of course, the real world is competitive. What you have done, by denying
> the existence of competition is sent someone into society who is
> ill-prepared to deal with that society.

I think anybody who takes it to the extreme of /denying/ that life is 
competitive sometimes is, at best, misguided.

In my humble opinion, the society I see around me is too competitive. 
There's too much emphasis on beating somebody else as a way to get what 
you want. I think it's very valuable to teach children (and anybody else 
who'll listen) that your victory doesn't always have to come at the cost 
of somebody else's defeat. Indeed, sometimes your gain can be 
*everybody's* gain.

True, sometimes it can't, and you need to understand that. Sometimes 
there can be only one winner. But it doesn't always have to be that way.

> Learning competition means understanding that you will not always come
> out on top. It's about learning to be fair to others. It means giving
> the other side due consideration. I for one welcome competition in our
> schools.

No, that's "cooperation". "Competition" is where you disregard everybody 
else and beat them out of the way by any means possible so that you get 
what you want.

> That statement by that teacher is dangerously ill-conceived, rather than
> insightful.

The sentiment can be taken to unhealthy extremes. Considering only the 
statement I witnessed, it's not really possible to say whether they took 
it that far or not.

Post a reply to this message

> Just a quick note: competitiveness is partly cultural.

I hear China and Japan have more cooperative cultures, whereas America 
is the stereotypically competitive one. I have no idea whether this has 
any basis in fact.

> In some countries
> students compete with every other student and the percentage of students
> that pass is fixed. In other countries you pass if you meet a certain
> level.

This is The Real WTF.

A student's grades should *always* be based on fixed criteria. Otherwise 
the grades only compare you to your classmates. Well guess what? 
Employers aren't interested in whether you're better than your 
classmates or not. (You're probably never going to see them ever again 
anyway.) They're interested in whether you're capable of doing a given 
job. A relative grade doesn't tell them that; an absolute one could.

Post a reply to this message

On 21/09/2011 04:58 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:

> I think competitiveness is part of human nature.

It is.

So is cooperation.

The trick is to find the correct balance between the two, IMHO.

Post a reply to this message