17 replies to this topic

[RandomNameIgnoreIt]

Competition and success are pretty simple concepts.

In a competition, one or more competitors compete against one or more other competitors. It may be one on one, it may be one team vs. another, or it may be every man (or woman) for themselves. Whatever the case, every individual is trying to do better than the opposing individuals.

The ideal winner of the competition is obviously going to be the individual or team that did better. Everyone else is typically referred to as a loser. They did not win, therefore they lose. Now some wacky competitions may adjust that somewhat, but the general principal remains that someone did the best and someone did the worst.

At least in the US, there has been a trend lately, especially with children, to eliminate competition where it normally existed and instead try and make everyone feel like a winner.

Here are some examples:

1) Two baseball teams play each other. No one keeps score. Rules are adjusted so that everyone, good or bad, gets an equal amount of play time. At the end of the game no one is declared the winner, or both teams are declared winners and receive participation awards.
2) A group of students are assigned an art assignment. All student work will be displayed with equal prominence regardless of how good it is. No work will be put above another in any way even if some are very good and others are very bad.
3) A club is formed. This club is formed for the purpose of doing a particular activity. Rules state that anyone must be allowed to join, and their membership will be maintained at their discretion regardless of their ability to do the activity, even if they can't do it at all.

Some people in the states refer to this as "the pussification of America." Others, on the other hand, think that individuals, children in particular, need to be encouraged wherever they can and should never be made to feel like they can't do something or that they did it poorly.

Those against this sort of thing say that it will basically make everyone weaker, and give them unrealistic expectations when they grow up. If you are bad at your job, you will not get promoted. If you are a poor painter, no one will buy your paintings. If you are bad at a sport, you will not make a team. Also, not only will those without ability be given unrealistic expectations, but those with potential will have no reason to get better and win, thus overall ability amongst even those with an aptitude for the activity will be lower.

On the other hand, some thing that participation in activities like sports, art, clubs, and the like is a right of anyone. They also feel that we shouldn't ever make them feel bad. This means we can't declare winners and losers, or deny anyone membership because it would make them feel bad. There should be no standards because if there are standards, that means there are people that won't meet the standards, and that means there are people that won't be able to participate.

Which is better? Discuss. Cite examples if you have them.

Edited by BrknPhoenix, 17 September 2007 - 04:26 PM.

[Ives]

It can be traced down to an anti-market bias. Capitalism/competition is not a natural state of humanity: people are suspicious of it at first glance. By teaching kids everyone wins, you're worsening the chance of them losing, if you ask me. That shit gets instilled in their head, and if you need proof, go to Los Angeles and count the number of people who think theyre gonna be a famous star, and count the number of people who have realistic goals. The ratio is inane. It can also be traced to suburban myths and subculture that lack the work ethic which can get them somewhere.

[pyke]

It can be traced down to an anti-market bias. Capitalism/competition is not a natural state of humanity: people are suspicious of it at first glance. By teaching kids everyone wins, you're worsening the chance of them losing, if you ask me. That shit gets instilled in their head, and if you need proof, go to Los Angeles and count the number of people who think theyre gonna be a famous star, and count the number of people who have realistic goals. The ratio is inane. It can also be traced to suburban myths and subculture that lack the work ethic which can get them somewhere.

Capitalism/competition is definitely the natural state of man! It's basic human nature to try and be the top dog in any instance. Even in socialist societies where everyone is ideally equal (the USSR for example), people end up wielding more power and using it against everyone else.

It's great to build confidence and encourage young children, but there needs to be a point where somebody loses.

[phalkon]

i'd have to agree with the whole "pussification" idea.

if they don't learn the meaning of competition then chances are they just won't succeed at all in life.

[Tetiel]

Believe it or not my old school system in Maryland took away Fs and made them Es just so kids wouldn't feel like failures if they failed their classes. That and they defined it with "Doesn't meet passing standards." When it goes to the extent of saying to a kid it's alright that they failed their classes and things like that... not a good idea. Not a good idea at all.

[Akira]

Do you know what happens when you take away competition? Morons are born.

Hell, just scope the neopets boards. There's always some kid begging for a free item or money, and then they get really mad when they don't get it. Yes, laziness is involved, but if a kid has been raised on that feel good 'everyone's a winner' crap, they might think that they should get the same amount as everyone else-even if they put forth no effort to get it.

It's not so much pussification, as it is Americanization. Think about it. Greedy American fatcats get to make money only when people are fat, lazy, and stupid. A fat person gets fat from overeating. A lazy person wants a bunch of stuff to make their lives easier. A stupid person will vote for whatever the fatcats want. Hence, corporate killings.

If the loser in a game sees that he is a winner, then he will not strive to become a winner who is no better than a loser. If he does not strive, then he becomes lazy. If he becomes lazy, then he starts to become fat. Once he does this, he loses all motivation to try harder, as he has been conditioned to think that hardly trying is the same as trying hard, so his grades will slip. He'll manage through because of easier classes, never go to college, and hence become stupid. Therefore, we'll have fat, lazy, and stupid Americans to feed the greedy corporations.

...But, that's just my opinion.

[Sweeney]

Do you know what happens when you take away competition? Morons are born.

Hell, just scope the neopets boards. There's always some kid begging for a free item or money, and then they get really mad when they don't get it. Yes, laziness is involved, but if a kid has been raised on that feel good 'everyone's a winner' crap, they might think that they should get the same amount as everyone else-even if they put forth no effort to get it.

It's not so much pussification, as it is Americanization. Think about it. Greedy American fatcats get to make money only when people are fat, lazy, and stupid. A fat person gets fat from overeating. A lazy person wants a bunch of stuff to make their lives easier. A stupid person will vote for whatever the fatcats want. Hence, corporate killings.

If the loser in a game sees that he is a winner, then he will not strive to become a winner who is no better than a loser. If he does not strive, then he becomes lazy. If he becomes lazy, then he starts to become fat. Once he does this, he loses all motivation to try harder, as he has been conditioned to think that hardly trying is the same as trying hard, so his grades will slip. He'll manage through because of easier classes, never go to college, and hence become stupid. Therefore, we'll have fat, lazy, and stupid Americans to feed the greedy corporations.

...But, that's just my opinion.

Bit of a jump with the whole corporate killings link, there
Anyways, I don't believe people become stupid. People are born stupid, or clever, or somewhere inbetween.

[Akira]

Bit of a jump with the whole corporate killings link, there
Anyways, I don't believe people become stupid. People are born stupid, or clever, or somewhere inbetween.

Not really, haha. You take a look at places like the FDA in America, and you see the useless, and often deadly, crap that gets pawned out and circulated because stupid people don't care.

Maybe...maybe not. I really wouldn't know if people are born stupid. I know that mental disease can afflict people from birth, but they are some of the smartest people out there, in my opinion. Furthermore, some of the smartest people out there are real dunces when it comes down to basic things.

My friend, for example, could easily tell you about any one point in history, and she can ace every class that she takes, but she can't cook anything that doesn't come out of a box.

Maybe people are born with a certain IQ, but I think that laziness can contribute to their intelligence more. There could be someone with an IQ of 150 that just never bothers to do anything, and a person with an IQ of 80 that pushes their limits every day and tries hard.

And then there's the difference between book smarts and street smarts. A lot of kids today are real whiz kids when it comes down to school, but none of them know how to start a fire or cook an egg. And in the end, all of the knowledge in the world won't save you if you can't function in the wild.

The average American, however, lacks both street smarts AND book smarts, so really, survival in either jungle is difficult.

...And, I'm rambling again...and not making sense. Oh dear.

EDIT: Unless you thought I meant literal killings o.O I meant that they were raking in a lot of cash, haha. If there was a miscommunication there, I would see why that would be a jump.

Edited by Akira, 18 September 2007 - 12:54 PM.

[Tetiel]

IQ cannot be compared to laziness. And how the heck do YOU know what the average American is? I tell you it most certainly not that. Saying that we lack both intelligence and common sense is not only wrong but an insult to any American on this board. I can tell you that I have known many very intelligent and hard working people in my life and to insult America like that just because we have some bad eggs - just like ever country does - is wrong and a bad assumption.

It's not so much pussification, as it is Americanization. Think about it. Greedy American fatcats get to make money only when people are fat, lazy, and stupid. A fat person gets fat from overeating. A lazy person wants a bunch of stuff to make their lives easier. A stupid person will vote for whatever the fatcats want. Hence, corporate killings.

Now that is downright insulting. Typical Americans are extremely competitive by nature and we are NOT greedy fatcats. Honestly it's a really bad idea considering the amount of Americans on this board to say something so entirely ignorant.

[RandomNameIgnoreIt]

Akira... why all the America hate? It's really a stretch to say this debate topic has anything to do with the intelligence or "laziness" of Americans, as you perceive it. Seems just randomly thrown in there to be insulting... And very rude. To say the average American lacks both street smarts and book smarts is a pretty disrespectful and untrue statement, considering you don't throw down any supporting evidence and just blurt out a blatant troll against an entire nation. You've really taken this debate to a place it didn't need to go -_-

Edited by BrknPhoenix, 18 September 2007 - 01:08 PM.

[Sweeney]

I did think you meant literal killings, Akira, yes You used it colloquially in a way I hadn't come across before, my bad

[Ives]

Capitalism/competition is definitely the natural state of man! It's basic human nature to try and be the top dog in any instance. Even in socialist societies where everyone is ideally equal (the USSR for example), people end up wielding more power and using it against everyone else.

It's great to build confidence and encourage young children, but there needs to be a point where somebody loses.

Are you kidding me? Capitalism in its purest form is hardly the natural state. If it was the natural state, the world would have been in a classical liberal state long before John Locke or Adam Smith. Authoritarianism and collectivism seems to be what humans naturally go towards: They have the goal of equality, but all they end up doing is making us equally screwed. The rich can survive in any system, and in the purest form of competition they have the least advantage because the consumers have a pure form of direct democracy to choose whether they live or die, regardless of income. Unfortunately they know such is a terrible idea and theyd rather hide under feudalistic, primitive societies which put them as the nobles and keep them protected.

Do you know what happens when you take away competition? Morons are born.

Hell, just scope the neopets boards. There's always some kid begging for a free item or money, and then they get really mad when they don't get it. Yes, laziness is involved, but if a kid has been raised on that feel good 'everyone's a winner' crap, they might think that they should get the same amount as everyone else-even if they put forth no effort to get it.

It's not so much pussification, as it is Americanization. Think about it. Greedy American fatcats get to make money only when people are fat, lazy, and stupid. A fat person gets fat from overeating. A lazy person wants a bunch of stuff to make their lives easier. A stupid person will vote for whatever the fatcats want. Hence, corporate killings.

If the loser in a game sees that he is a winner, then he will not strive to become a winner who is no better than a loser. If he does not strive, then he becomes lazy. If he becomes lazy, then he starts to become fat. Once he does this, he loses all motivation to try harder, as he has been conditioned to think that hardly trying is the same as trying hard, so his grades will slip. He'll manage through because of easier classes, never go to college, and hence become stupid. Therefore, we'll have fat, lazy, and stupid Americans to feed the greedy corporations.

...But, that's just my opinion.

While I do agree that the lack of checks and balances on the mental state of the people has led to relying of the government far more than the government should and putting them in a trap, I don't think its nessecarily a bad thing that we're getting slowly lazier and might not be trying as hard. It's a sign that capitalism is working. We've moved towards a predominant service industry and have made it easier for poor in other countries not to starve/do an alternative job such as child prostitution which is far worse than working at a factory. The problem is we're relying a bit too much on government and theres way too much regulation. One example of this shown is the complete utter failure of the education system which has led to more dropouts and a worse distribution of jobs and skill level/education level of the general people.

Edited by Athean, 18 September 2007 - 01:53 PM.

[Akira]

Wow....o.O I offended some people with my distaste for America.

Guys, I cam from a wee little country bumpkin town in Maryland. That's in America. I'm well aware that it is a broad generalization. However, I want you guys to honestly tell me that you know more scrawny, active, and intelligent people than lazy, fat, dumb barks. I really do.

In my town, this was the breakdown:

Fat kids: Not many, since it was a backwater redneck town that was much easier to walk around in.
Lazy kids: Nearly all of them, since there was nothing to do but sports, and even the sports kids were lazy.
Stupid kids: If they weren't 'cousin banging' smart, they were 'oh my God I don't know how this paperclip works but I know the answer to this complex calculus problem' smart.

There were a few kids that weren't fat, lazy, and/or stupid...but it was a clear minority.

And, if you get too high up in the corporate food chain (I.E, anything that isn't local only) then you are bound to find corruption.

But hey, why not call me out as being blatantly insulting to America? I mean seriously, guys! We scored lower on tests than third world countries did! Our leader says 'we're kicking ass'! We have 'fad concerns' and our top headlines are usually either Iraq or some celebrity getting drunk!

Honestly, how much of a stretch was it for me to look at that and think: dumb? At what point was that NOT considered idiocy?

Normally, I'm not one for making broad generalizations...but seriously, people...look at the facts. We're fat, we're lazy, and our biggest representatives are ridiculously dumb. Am I just reaching too far for these insults?

Athean, I do have a problem with Americans getting lazier. Yes, our economic system is working, but at this rate, voting will become a boring sort of waste of time. 'Freedom' will be a loose term, and we'll move closer to a dictatorship. Eventually, a big empire has to collapse...I just wonder why everyone denies that America ever will. When it does, if Americans are generally fat and lazy, then what? They will not have the willpower to rebuild, and we'll just get conquered and absorbed by some country or another...like Canada o.O Or, more realistically, China, which pretty much owns our asses.

EDIT: And, regardless of competitiveness, if you can't tell the difference between a spork and a spoon (not even making that one up), then you need to sit down and read a book. Seriously. I certainly won't sweep through other countries with generalizations when I KNOW Americans in real life. Hence why I kept to America. Or would it satisfy people more if I just changed it all to the world? If anything, that would be far more presumptuous, since I haven't lived in the entire world and I don't see enough from other countries to even assume about them. I have relatives sprinkled about the country, and I've traveled from east to west...there's just different 'flavors' of dumb.

Edited by Akira, 18 September 2007 - 05:04 PM.

[Ives]

Athean, I do have a problem with Americans getting lazier. Yes, our economic system is working, but at this rate, voting will become a boring sort of waste of time. 'Freedom' will be a loose term, and we'll move closer to a dictatorship. Eventually, a big empire has to collapse...I just wonder why everyone denies that America ever will. When it does, if Americans are generally fat and lazy, then what? They will not have the willpower to rebuild, and we'll just get conquered and absorbed by some country or another...like Canada o.O Or, more realistically, China, which pretty much owns our asses.

EDIT: And, regardless of competitiveness, if you can't tell the difference between a spork and a spoon (not even making that one up), then you need to sit down and read a book. Seriously. I certainly won't sweep through other countries with generalizations when I KNOW Americans in real life. Hence why I kept to America. Or would it satisfy people more if I just changed it all to the world? If anything, that would be far more presumptuous, since I haven't lived in the entire world and I don't see enough from other countries to even assume about them. I have relatives sprinkled about the country, and I've traveled from east to west...there's just different 'flavors' of dumb.

And thats a problem with a failed system. We rely off the government too much. If you go back to the 19th century, when liberalism was in its purest form, we had a working ethic and a competition ethic. Now instead of competing we complain and instead of working for our dough we ask for the reliance of government and otherwise. Its a problem with the death of liberalism, not the people in general. Regardless, however, theres no reason to be pessimistic about it. We're slowly moving back in that direction. The likes of Hong Kong and Singapores rich economic freedom is setting an example in Asia, which if China keeps Hong Kong in the current capitalist state forty years from now, will certainly return to liberalism and the work ethic that made this nation strong to begin with. Yes, capitalism can lead to laziness, but the government putting regulation on the people, the sheer number of bureaucrats, escalates the apathy.

[RandomNameIgnoreIt]

Well Akira, even though you're obviously a lousy troll for making such a poor transition from a completely unrelated topic to your American self-hatred, but I'll
bite anyway.

Wow....o.O I offended some people with my distaste for America.

Wow... You trolled 300 million people and someone got upset? Who could have seen this amazing turn of events?

Guys, I cam from a wee little country bumpkin town in Maryland. That's in America.

Thanks for the Geography lesson. Being a dumb and lazy American, I never knew that Maryland was in America. Your sheer display of pure brilliance has awed us all.

I'm well aware that it is a broad generalization.

And yet you keep on talking...

However, I want you guys to honestly tell me that you know more scrawny, active, and intelligent people than lazy, fat, dumb barks. I really do.[

I wouldn't be stupid enough to presume I have that great a knowledge of everyone, most of whom I've never had much of any sort of personal contact with, unlike some people. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't know "whoever you know" qualified as a valid random population for a valid statistic. Once again you bring us more joy with your copious knowledge of statistics! Amazing!

In my town, this was the breakdown:

If any population is fit to represent the entire United States of America's population of 300+ million people, it's a wee bumpkin town in Maryland. Carry on, Mr. Wizard.

Fat kids: Not many, since it was a backwater redneck town that was much easier to walk around in.
Lazy kids: Nearly all of them, since there was nothing to do but sports, and even the sports kids were lazy.
Stupid kids: If they weren't 'cousin banging' smart, they were 'oh my God I don't know how this paperclip works but I know the answer to this complex calculus problem' smart.

There were a few kids that weren't fat, lazy, and/or stupid...but it was a clear minority.

The one statistic you could have actually gotten a semi-valid statistic for was for "fat" Americans (I'll concede that we do pretty poorly there) and yet you concede straight away that this does not apply to your town. Yep, your town is a better sample by the minute. Also... kids that play sports are lazy? Tell you what... I've got a spare ticket to the logic train, and I'm going to give it to you. You could use it.

And if "cousin banging" was the pinnacle of intelligence where you lived, have you considered that maybe you just lived in a really barked up place? Have you thought hey, maybe people that sex their cousins and can't figure out paperclips aren't normal? Do you live in the radioactive valley from "The Hills Have Eyes"? Are they disformed mutants running around raping and pillaging? It sounds like you live in the movie Deliverance as opposed to a real place.

And, if you get too high up in the corporate food chain (I.E, anything that isn't local only) then you are bound to find corruption.

Random ass quote of the post here. That has nothing to do with anything, and is especially not unique to America, but whatever. I'll humor you and continue reading.

But hey, why not call me out as being blatantly insulting to America? I mean seriously, guys! We scored lower on tests than third world countries did! Our leader says 'we're kicking ass'! We have 'fad concerns' and our top headlines are usually either Iraq or some celebrity getting drunk!

Honestly, how much of a stretch was it for me to look at that and think: dumb? At what point was that NOT considered idiocy?

You're right, I shouldn't have called you out. Your logic is infallible. Most that I know from Maryland are ignorant and egotistical people who don't know anything about the world except what they can see from their window, so I should have just assumed that, instead of going through all the trouble of reading this.

Normally, I'm not one for making broad generalizations...but seriously, people...look at the facts. We're fat, we're lazy, and our biggest representatives are ridiculously dumb. Am I just reaching too far for these insults?

You didn't state any facts. Which ones am I supposed to be looking at again? I recall when you talked about how lazy, dumb, and inbred everyone was where you lived, but I didn't quite catch the part that applied to American intelligence and activity as a whole and not just your hick town.

EDIT: And, regardless of competitiveness, if you can't tell the difference between a spork and a spoon (not even making that one up), then you need to sit down and read a book. Seriously. I certainly won't sweep through other countries with generalizations when I KNOW Americans in real life. Hence why I kept to America. Or would it satisfy people more if I just changed it all to the world? If anything, that would be far more presumptuous, since I haven't lived in the entire world and I don't see enough from other countries to even assume about them. I have relatives sprinkled about the country, and I've traveled from east to west...there's just different 'flavors' of dumb.

Wow, you know the difference between a spork and a spoon? With those kinds of credentials it's no wonder that you are an authority on intelligence.

Also, recent UN study put America in 2nd place amongst all nations when it came to productivity in the work place. Lazy? Indeed.

[Akira]

Alright, Brkn, I'll back off. I don't need a breakdown of my 'uber-intelligence' and a slap on the hand for something. Essentially, I had been saying that a lack of motivation for winning since there was no need to eventually leads to laziness, obesity, and stupidity...but I guess the 'American' part of that statement was enough to completely ruin any attempt of that observation being close to valid.

So, let me just state this for you: You can train a mouse to find the end of a maze with a piece of cheese. But if you reward it for finding dead ends instead of the end, it will continue to not succeed since that is much easier and gives them the same prize.

Similarly, if competition is removed, then why try?

And...now I'll leave you be. Because I don't much feel like being called a 'troll' for something silly. And yes, it is silly to consider someone a troll for continuing on with a statement, which was that no reason to win leads to laziness, etc.

In fact, rereading my initial post, I still have yet to see what the hell made it so terribly nasty. Was it because I spoke about greedy corporations using stupid Americans? The stupid Americans I was referring to were the ones that happened to be conditioned that way from the start. Hence, the lazy kid becomes the fat kid, who eventually becomes the stupid adult for not trying, who then buys a bunch of useless junk because of commercials promising to make his or her life easier. Hell, that wasn't even a broad generalization. I stated that someone who is lazy and fat eventually becomes stupid because they are too lazy to work hard in school, so they aren't smart enough to know when something is bad. I didn't even say 'all Americans'. However, that was what was picked up from it, and hence I was called a troll. Honestly, if I removed the word 'American' from there the two or three times I used it, there wouldn't even be a reason to call it a broad generalization; unless you were stereotyping, of course.

But yes, I am done here. I don't want to start a really pointless fight, and I certainly don't want to have to argue the content of my post instead of my post itself, if that makes sense. Reread my first post on this topic, and maybe you won't see a troll. I dunno. I know that I'm not one, and that counts enough for me to want to back off and leave this discussion be.

EDIT: And no, it was not completely unrelated. You chose to make it that way. And honestly, if I'm talking to a kid and they don't know the difference between a spork and a spoon, I don't call them a genius. But, whatever. Call me anti-American or whatever you want. Hell, call me a complete idiot for looking at my town and seeing what caused stupidity. An observation, even if it is small, is still an observation. I am guessing that you have gone all over the country and sampled thousands to determine that America is full of brilliant minds that would make Einstein look dumb?

Edited by Akira, 19 September 2007 - 12:28 AM.

[RandomNameIgnoreIt]

Verbal Warning:

Brkn, please can you try and keep things impersonal, you're getting far too close to flaming for it to go unchecked.

If your debate points are good enough, you wouldn't need to resort to insults.

Any further insults will be warned regardless of who has said them.

Verbal warning for me? Oh hell to that. He can fluff up his posts all he wants but in the end he was just being a troll.

Fine, I'm out of this argument if you are just going to support him. I'm not "debating him" because what he's saying has nothing to do what my initial topic. "Americans are dumb and lazy" is not a response to the question I posed in the topic. But I guess if it's people insulting Americans it's okay?

Right. Just close this.

Edited by BrknPhoenix, 19 September 2007 - 02:12 PM.

[Tetiel]

Topic closed. I'll be... discussing this elsewhere.