As you may know about me, I love me some wordplay. And I love to muse and ponder about colloquial phrases that we use, often without thinking about what we are really saying, meaning, or avoiding.
Yesterday, I took a break from activity and watched TV yesterday for the first time in a long time. I was surprised at how the "friendly competition" idea seemed to be everywhere (conflict is the stuff of good plots after all!) and I didn't experience any of it as friendly. (and no, i wasn't watching reality shows!). Whether spoken or unspoken, competition seemed to be part of the War model - where there is a winner and a loser. And once we put competition in motion, there is going to be a winner and a loser. And who likes to lose? What does it mean to be a "good loser?"
I've heard that a little competition is "good for us" in that it helps us better ourselves. It helps us go further, faster, than we normally would. This in an of itself poses some interesting questions: Why do we need something else to "push" us? Why is it about the external motivator? Is it because at some level we don't believe in ourselves? Is it because at some level we are constantly comparing ourselves to those around us and measuring our selves, our successes, our failures in relationship to our externals?
Yesterday, I took a break from activity and watched TV yesterday for the first time in a long time. I was surprised at how the "friendly competition" idea seemed to be everywhere (conflict is the stuff of good plots after all!) and I didn't experience any of it as friendly. (and no, i wasn't watching reality shows!). Whether spoken or unspoken, competition seemed to be part of the War model - where there is a winner and a loser. And once we put competition in motion, there is going to be a winner and a loser. And who likes to lose? What does it mean to be a "good loser?"
I've heard that a little competition is "good for us" in that it helps us better ourselves. It helps us go further, faster, than we normally would. This in an of itself poses some interesting questions: Why do we need something else to "push" us? Why is it about the external motivator? Is it because at some level we don't believe in ourselves? Is it because at some level we are constantly comparing ourselves to those around us and measuring our selves, our successes, our failures in relationship to our externals?
So this "friendly competition" - is it really friendly? When we look at how many likes we get on Facebook, or how many comments or reactions we get on whatever other social media outlet we use, when does it feel friendly? And if I'm "friends" with all these people, why wouldn't I just "Like" (or love or react), in other words acknowledge, every single comment or photo?
What I started thinking about was how we defend this model of competition, making it OK, and even desirable. We justify our need to see things as greater than or less than by smiling and saying things like - "a little friendly competition is good for you." Why not just say "competition is good for you"? Why not just call it "competition?" If we do it in a "friendly" way, it's OK? And is it? There is still a winner and a loser. And if we are ok with winners/losers and survival of the fittest, than no problem! Let's just admit that we love a good fight and we are OK with someone else going down as we rise up! What I question is the label of "friendly" which tells me there are some "good" and "bad" competitions. Are we sugar coating something to make the medicine go down a bit easier? To "elevate" our animal/survival instincts? Isn't competition just the act of competing?
The definition of compete is to "strive to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others who are trying to do the same." And what is friendly about that?
No comments:
Post a Comment