...to me?!
I came across a newspaper article recently, in which Daisy
Lowe was being unfavourably compared to Emma Forbes. Both had been papped in
their swim suits whilst on holiday and were being critiqued for their choice of
swim-wear. I was a little incredulous that this sort of article still made the
news, but was reminded in the last few days that there is still appetite for
this kind of critiquing with the current flurry of award ceremonies. This is
peak time for the appraisal of celebrity fashion and the shaming of those who
commit fashion faux pas.
Despite collaboration being the buzzword in business and
education we are still fuelled by competition. I get the argument: competition
spurs on excellence and innovation. Many would also argue that competition is
part of our Darwinian heritage, but it strikes me that with the advancement of technology,
the need for competition in order than I might live or reproduce are no longer
required. Whilst I can see there will always be competition in the world of
work and sport, my concern is that I apply the same competitive nature to my
life. This leads to a false and unhealthy comparison with others.
Whilst encouraging a friend to step out into a new
project, I feel fearful I am getting left behind. I want to be the one who
rejoices at their victories and weeps at their losses but all too often
another’s victory leads to my own self-doubt and a mental side-ways glance to
see how I am measuring up.
Aristotle’s proposal for the good life is through the
development and application of virtues. He believed the flourishing of the
individual would inevitably lead to the flourishing of society. Sounds good,
but working out the reality of this is hard and even modern philosophers
disagree with how this can be achieved. One of his ideas, which I love, is the
virtue of friendship. To want the best for your friend without the motivation
to benefit oneself is a high bar to set, but I believe one worth reaching for.
Where is the place for competition in friendship? One might argue that there is
no place, surely competition would lead to jealousy, upset and perhaps even
relationship break-down. An American philosopher, Richard Kraut believes that
there is a place for competition within friendship and virtue ethics. He calls
this ‘moral competition’. This is the idea that there can be rivalry when being
virtuous. However, this does not lead to the traditional ‘winners and losers’
in competition. Everyone is a winner as when an individual succeeds in acting
virtuously, not only does that person benefit but also the people around them.
If the act is truly virtuous then it should benefit all involved.
I’m not sure I’m totally convinced – it seems so easy to
fall prey to pride or smugness in this kind of competition. It is all rather
dependent on my definition of virtuous which is something hotly debated amongst
modern philosophers.
Psychologists explain that female competitiveness is a
result of a Darwinian compulsion to be impregnated by the best man. This seems
an outdated, uncomfortable notion, yet the comparisons continue.
When our value is left in the hands of another, what are we
left with but comparison and competition? When this competitive spirit takes
hold of us we end up living in a small, limited world. The truth is the world
is bigger than we imagine and we are greater than we can conceive. In a world
without competition, without the threat of losing, who could you be?
What are the benefits of competition?
To what extent do you think collaboration a good alternative
to competition?
What tips do you have for combating the competitive spirit
that compels us to make comparisons?
Hi Suzi, the question of competition in friendship might have something to do the problem I have had with friendship in my past. It depends on what you are competing about. I'm going to try to answer your question "Where is the place for competition in friendship?"
ReplyDeleteTo be competitive requires self-centredness, which our economy stimulates and perpetuates and which is natural to the stage of infancy when we begin to socialise. So we make friends and enemies over toys in a play group, our parents probably have a view of desirable play mates and steer us, we want certain things and notions of value and judgement enter the equation automatically.
I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to be the best you can be, whether that's as a person or at anything in particular. As children, and especailly as teenagers, we compete according to our values.
My best friendship, growing up, was about sport. We would play badminton for example and play to win, to beat the other. But I'm sure that we would both rather lose in a good match, than win in a match that was too easy, or that the loser didn't care about. The competition is the interactive experience of the big picture, which is the common interest.
I'm sure it's the same with anything you want to be good at, for example, being into art and knowing as much as you can about it and finding someone who knows things you don't or who cares as much as you means that you can learn and be motivated by the same pursuit. Or for example, being fashionable, or attractive to the opposite sex, or being tough.
If anything, being competitive is a bit like "egging on". It's a challenge and it is an incentive and it is enjoyable if you pick the right friends. In some crowds, things can take a turn for the dangerous or tragic, like suicide pacts. But I can only assume that those youngsters enjoy and others in my peer group enjoyed their games, like I enjoyed ours.
Competition has attached to it some connotation of aggression, in the form of self against other. Like Andy Murray against Jamie Murray. But winner and loser in the game between friends both benefit in life, as a sort of collaboration. I'm quite comfortable with competition, but I think this is less common among women and as girls we may be encouraged to "play nicely" and get along as if this were more true to "our nature".
I'm not sure there is anything negative about making comparisons. There will always be others who are greater, more worthy, more beautiful. The point of competition is to be the best you can be, not necessarily to be better than everyone/anyone else. If you perceive someone as above you in some way, that can be inspiring.
Recently, I asked a teenager if she thinks life is always either positive or negative. I think it is, and the challenge is to be positive! Maybe she, like other girls I never understood, doesn't care enough.
Interesting thoughts E. I wonder if behind competition that leads to collaboration is a foundation of sportsmanship and understaning of identity that is not linked to achieving. Whilst we are encouraged from a young age not to be a 'sore loser', I wonder if with age we simply learn to mask that rather than rid ourselves of the feelings attached. I wonder how Jamie Murray really feels, but perhaps I am too cynical. You are right there will always be others who are greater and these people can often be an inspiration so why does it sometimes turn to frustration and insecurity rather than an enjoyment of others' achievements. I am interested in your 'more worthy' comment. More worthy of what? What makes one person more worthy than another?
ReplyDeleteJust a quick reply, Suzi. The reference is just to a person's "worthiness" of something, e.g. victory, political office etc. and not to a person's innate "worth". For example, you might view someone as "more worthy" than yourself of something you happen value very highly and are striving for, either because they have already achieved it, or you think they deserve it more than you. I guess feelings of frustration and insecurity would be due to diverting attention away from the object of value and making it personal and negative, by inadvertently turning your own hopes and dreams into premature disappointment and defeat, via impatience and conjecture. The saying goes something like:"don't take your eyes off the prize".
ReplyDelete