Competition is wicked


Vort
 Share

Recommended Posts

Me: Winner/loser is determined by the rules of competition. Good/bad is determined by each competitor.

Okay, I agree with you there. Success or failure in a competition (aka winning or losing) is independent of whether the outcome of the competition is good or bad.

Though for the record I do find myself agreeing with Vort that competition isn't something that's celestial inasmuch as I think in the Celestial kingdom you have a perfect unity of wills and competition requires disunity of wills on some level (for example a sparing match I want to win and he wants to win). So I find Vort's arguments compelling there.

Though I'm not sure I'd call it wicked except in a technical sense (not being of the celestial kingdom). Medicine is not something needed or practiced in the Celestial Kingdom but that doesn't make it bad, even if it has downsides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Though I'm not sure I'd call it wicked except in a technical sense (not being of the celestial kingdom). Medicine is not something needed or practiced in the Celestial Kingdom but that doesn't make it bad, even if it has downsides.

And that's all I'm trying to say. If the definition of wicked/evil is something that doesn't exist in a Celestial state, then we'll have to agree to disagree because I don't use the Celestial bar to describe something as wicked/evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'd heard 'competition is wicked' from my missionaries, this competitive capitalist would have shown them the door. Maybe I should stop giving grades? And is it the process (the grade giving) or the actor (the grade giver) that is wicked? You wanna call me wicked for giving grades? For telling myself, my students, my son that we can all do better? For telling students that they freakin' better be better than the competition or they might not get a job?

C'mon. There is nothing inherently wicked about competition. If one wants to be a wicked person while competing, that's another thing. And while I'm here, I'm going to take issue with the word 'wicked.' WTH? Unless you're from Boston, OP, and the phrase you meant to type was 'wicked good,' I'm going to say there are a lot of wicked things on earth, but competition ain't one of them. As far as whether it is celestial, I've got more important stuff to worry about here in this life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I read the OP I was in agreement. I really, really, dislike competition. I don't like losing, and I don't like winning to the detriment of someone else losing. I have such a hard time with winning, I am willing to give up my winnings to the loser. For example, I took a quilting class. There were about ten of us in the class, and we quilted a quilt that we then raffled off among the class members. I won the quilt. I felt so bad about winning the quilt, that I told the class that I didn't really want it, (but I really did), and so I suggested we draw again for someone else to win the quilt.

My husband and I have worked in a side business that is very much into competition. There are trips given away and other perks to those that perform the best. I understand it's to help motivate people. I just have a really hard time with it. Even if I'm one of the winners--I'm uncomfortable with it. But, how else can you motivate people? In the world we live in, how can we not have a society that is competitive? I just don't see our society working without competition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I read the OP I was in agreement. I really, really, dislike competition. I don't like losing, and I don't like winning to the detriment of someone else losing. I have such a hard time with winning, I am willing to give up my winnings to the loser. For example, I took a quilting class. There were about ten of us in the class, and we quilted a quilt that we then raffled off among the class members. I won the quilt. I felt so bad about winning the quilt, that I told the class that I didn't really want it, (but I really did), and so I suggested we draw again for someone else to win the quilt.

My husband and I have worked in a side business that is very much into competition. There are trips given away and other perks to those that perform the best. I understand it's to help motivate people. I just have a really hard time with it. Even if I'm one of the winners--I'm uncomfortable with it. But, how else can you motivate people? In the world we live in, how can we not have a society that is competitive? I just don't see our society working without competition.

Raffles/Lottos and the like is not competition. It's a game of chance. I'm not comfortable receiving something I didn't earn.

Performance reward is competition. And part of what you learn in competitive settings is how to be a graceful winner as well as a graceful loser. Each has its own place and purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right Anatess. I was lumping everything that involved winning or losing into competition.

But, for me personally I still have a hard time with competition. Even when I win, on my own merits, I still have a hard time with it, because I know someone else lost. That's the way I feel in our side-business. I hate winning a trip and knowing that our coworkers didn't win it also.

Another area where there is competition, is with school. Subjects in school (except for math) came easy for me. I could ace tests without even studying. My best friend would study for hours for a test and come away with a B, and I didn't study and would get an A. That just didn't seem fair. But, I did not get A's in math. In college, with Calculus and Physics I would study for hours and hours, do my homework, and the best I could get was a C. I even retook Calculus and Physics, and still could not get an A. I had to learn that for me, a C in math was okay, and that was a hard pill to swallow. People are not created equal. We have strengths and weaknesses. For some, no matter how much effort is put into something, they won't "win"--the ability/talent simply isn't there.

Edited by classylady
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's all I'm trying to say. If the definition of wicked/evil is something that doesn't exist in a Celestial state, then we'll have to agree to disagree because I don't use the Celestial bar to describe something as wicked/evil.

I wouldn't normally define things that way either. Vort kinda goes in that direction with his OP though, which is why I mentioned it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, competition is synonymous with opposition and struggle. It is a means for making our weak things become strong. Without it, we would not grow or become "perfected". It is a part of our "fallen state", because it was necessary for our eternal progression. Our struggle to overcome the Natural Man is a "competition" of the soul. Why were we sent to this earth in the first place? 1. To receive a body like God's. 2. To learn mastery over that body (besting the Natural Man). 3. To experience true opposition and so reinforce our decision to follow Christ in the premortal existence by choosing to do so again in an environment where we would have to "work" at that choice.

Both two and three involve "competition", at least in the sense that I think of competition. There was no opposition or competition in the premortal existence, and as far as we know it will not be necessary in a Celestial state. Scriptures speaking of the lion and lamb lying together are, to me, the most suggestive of that- as the two will no longer have to "compete" with one another for food and survival. Yet here is where I see a real divide between my view and Vort's:

Just because it is part of the fallen state, does not mean it is bad, or wicked, or evil. The "opposition" itself is not bad. Opposition is like a coin with good on one side, evil on the other. Or like a magnet with opposing charges. The coin or the magnet is not bad. There is wickedness present, yes- but that does not make the "tool" wicked. If everything about our fallen state were wicked, why would God place us here? If there was nothing good about our experience in this life, why do it?

Now it seems to me, Vort, that you are saying it is only really a competition if you are pitting one person against another. This, in my mind, is only one aspect of competition, but this is where is can most easily become a "wicked" practice. When the person who "loses" the competition is humiliated, made to feel worthless, and just cast aside- while the person who "wins" becomes puffed up in pride and arrogance- the competition has gone wrong. Since, I believe competition is meant to make weak things become strong, competiton becomes bad when we equate people in the "weak" and "strong" categories. When a "loser" is left in the dust as "weak" and the "winner" glorified as being "strong", then and only then has competition become something wicked. But it is still not the competition that is wicked- only the people who have misused it.

I see competition as a Godly tool meant to be used for our betterment, just as this we are given this fallen state so that we may learn, grow, and draw closer to God. It is the misuse of that tool that is- just as the misuse of anything else Godly is- wicked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is an issue of purpose behind the opposition. Competition or opposition can help us to grow and be more like God. However, it is also used as a tool by Satan to twist the soul of men into being devilish.

Just as a loaded gun can be used for both good and evil, we cannot say the gun is evil or good in and of itself. It is just a potential good or evil. Opposition or competition creates potential. It can exalt or it can ****, free or enslave, depending on how it is used.

Competition used in a good way can bring about marvelous things. Look at how competition has revolutionized the world in just the last century, or even the last 30 years! Because of competition, more people live in freedom. More people have food to eat. More people have clean water. More people have better lives.

Prior to competition, kings and overlords kept the people living in squalor. The feudal system allowed for little or no competition, except between kings and lords. Most people starved, had short lives, and suffered the most when plagues or other tragedies hit. Now, most people living where freedom is available, have enough to eat, a home, and hope for a decent future.

So, for me, competition is NOT wicked. It is a potential. It requires sentient human intervention to create good or evil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as a loaded gun can be used for both good and evil, we cannot say the gun is evil or good in and of itself.

And that's really the reason why I send my children to competitive arenas. It's part of their learning - how to be a good sportsman. How to win with humility and how to lose with pride.

And about that grades thing. That's also what you learn from competitive exposure. You learn your strengths and weaknesses and where to apply them for the best potential.

So that, in the end, you learn that "life isn't fair". And that's just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think of competition as a check that we have in our current system. I think it can be used for evil (to build up pride and whatnot, dividing parties against each other).

I think it can also be used to "keep people honest" as it were. What's to keep my local grocer from gouging me with prices? Well, I hope my grocer is honest and considerate enough to do the honorable thing. But not all grocers are so virtuous, so America's economy is built on the principle of competition. If my grocer starts gouging me, a competitor will open with lower prices and take the business. I don't think this is necessary wicked, but I do think if my grocer were honest it would be unneccessary.

I think competition can be used for self-betterment. Let's say I enjoy cooking. My motivation (as a hobby) to be a better cook may be the blue ribbon at the county fair. Or my motivation (professionally) is that I have to outperform the next chef to "win" the customer. I would hope that at some point, I start improving myself for the satisfaction of a job well done. In the case of MMA described above, I may need to trophy to motivate me to improve myself, or I can go to a sparring match instead of a tournament because I don't care about winning/losing. In this case, I don't think competition is wicked, but I do see it as a less-desired form of motivation.

(It reminds me of religious folk who say "without God in my life, I would ..." I don't think that's the case with everyone (and I'm glad it isn't), but if what you say is true, then I'm glad you have God. Similarly I hope there's something more to motivate you to improve yourself than being better than another, but if that's all that will motivate you, then I'm glad you have it).

So in summary, I can think of a few cases where competition is definitely not good (in some cases, wicked), but I think overall it is a beneficial part of our current system given that we're not all virtuous, self-motivated people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe competition is wicked, the very definition of the telestial, Darwinian world in which we find ourselves. Competition is about being "the best". It's not about being particularly good, just better than everyone around us. It is the very definition of pride. It is the very antithesis of Christlike behavior. Jesus never said, "Be ye therefore better than your neighbor."

So are you saying that all competition is prideful?

It leads to jealousy, discontent, and lack of unity. You cannot love and support your brother or sister as you ought if you're constantly striving to be better than they are.

Do you believe this is true in all cases?

Do you look at life in general as a sort of competition? Perhaps not, since you say that competition is only when you try to beat someone else- not when you're just trying to reach a certain goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps this is the essence of my feeling on the matter: I am not sure that competition does motivate us to be better, at least not in any meaningful eternal sense.

Perhaps not generally, but if we participate in the competition in the way we should, then would we not be motivated to better in an eternal sense?

I suppose it depends on our goals we have for the competition- if our goal is only to defeat the other person, then that's bad. But if our goal is to motivate and receive motivation from the other, then that would be good. If our goal is to practice and get better, then that would be good. But I know that kind of goes against your definition of competition. I personally don't like to narrow the definition down that far, to say it's only when your primary goal is to beat your opponent.

I also wondered-

I noticed some have posted that they play to win. Does that come across as a prideful statement? If I were to say that, does that imply that I play to win at any cost?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are you saying that all competition is prideful?

Not exactly. I'm saying that the goal of all competition is to beat the other competitors. It's not to be your best self or to refine your skills, it's to be recognized as better than the other guy. In many cases, this manifests itself as pride; in others, it is perhaps merely a manifestation of the desire to survive. In all cases, it is telestial behavior.

I do not believe anyone can give an example of our Father in heaven striving to be better than someone else at something. Perfection? Yes. Being better than someone else? On the contrary, the Father and the Son strive for exactly the opposite.

Do you look at life in general as a sort of competition? Perhaps not, since you say that competition is only when you try to beat someone else- not when you're just trying to reach a certain goal.

I think our lives are defined by competition. I think competition is the natural order of things in this fallen sphere. But I also believe the natural man is an enemy to God.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps not generally, but if we participate in the competition in the way we should, then would we not be motivated to better in an eternal sense?

Probably, but that is not relevant to my point. The same could be said about, for example, torture. I think torture is wicked, but someone might respond, "But isn't it really our reaction to the torture that matters? Aren't we supposed to have opposition in all things? Torture serves an important purpose. Therefore, torture isn't wicked per se."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not exactly. I'm saying that the goal of all competition is to beat the other competitors. It's not to be your best self or to refine your skills, it's to be recognized as better than the other guy. In many cases, this manifests itself as pride; in others, it is perhaps merely a manifestation of the desire to survive. In all cases, it is telestial behavior.

I do not believe anyone can give an example of our Father in heaven striving to be better than someone else at something. Perfection? Yes. Being better than someone else? On the contrary, the Father and the Son strive for exactly the opposite.

I think our lives are defined by competition. I think competition is the natural order of things in this fallen sphere. But I also believe the natural man is an enemy to God.

This is a very narrow and communistic view of life that I just cannot agree with. There are a whole host of countries who have tried to eject competition and take away risk. They are now failed experiments that have gone the way of the dinosaurs. Now, this no-risk, noncompetitive lifestyle is trying to make a comeback and it is destroying economies, families and people.

There was a competition in the pre-existence, it has spilled over to this earth life. There are bigger and better people out there in all aspects of life. Want to have that good job? Get an education. Compete with yourself to see how good you can get in a field of study, or at your employment. Learning to be a gracious loser is not learning to hang your head in defeat, but in defeat, learning where your weaknesses are and strengthen them. Winning does not mean gloating with pride, but accepting the award for having worked harder and refined your technique so that you can be ahead of the pack.

Life is a competition with the Adversary, ourself, the natural man and others who would pull us away from the straight and narrow. There is no way to get away from competition. So to say that anyone who is in competition is living the Telestial life and thus can only hope to attain that glory is shortsighted at best. Pres. Monson, when he was an Apostle and a Counselor in the First Presidency described life as a race to be won:

Each of us is a runner in the race of life. Comforting is the fact that there are many runners. Reassuring is the knowledge that our eternal Scorekeeper is understanding. Challenging is the truth that each must run. But you and I do not run alone. That vast audience of family, friends, and leaders will cheer our courage, will applaud our determination as we rise from our stumblings and pursue our goal.

...

Let us shed any thought of failure. Let us discard any habit that may hinder. Let us seek; let us obtain the prize prepared for all, even exaltation in the celestial kingdom of God.

So yes, competition is good; we are all in one. So let's not dismiss it because there will be losers and that's not nice. Let's call it what it is and get on with it. If you don't want to compete for the ultimate price of Exaltation, that's your choice. But don't call it Telestial behavior, when it's not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a very narrow and communistic view of life that I just cannot agree with. [...] So yes, competition is good; we are all in one. So let's not dismiss it because there will be losers and that's not nice. Let's call it what it is and get on with it. If you don't want to compete for the ultimate price of Exaltation, that's your choice. But don't call it Telestial behavior, when it's not.

I rest my case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a very narrow and communistic view of life that I just cannot agree with. There are a whole host of countries who have tried to eject competition and take away risk. They are now failed experiments that have gone the way of the dinosaurs. Now, this no-risk, noncompetitive lifestyle is trying to make a comeback and it is destroying economies, families and people.

What if we burned all the telestial people so that there was a only a 4 Nephi kind of world. Let's say everybody was self-motivated because of the good it brings. Would the non-competitve systems still be failed experiments?

There was a competition in the pre-existence, it has spilled over to this earth life.

What was the pre-mortal competition?

There are bigger and better people out there in all aspects of life. Want to have that good job? Get an education. Compete with yourself to see how good you can get in a field of study, or at your employment.

I'm having a hard time following this. How do you "compete with yourself"? I would think of that more in terms of measured progress. There is some fixed standard set, and you strive to achieve it. I think that's a very different spirit from the standard being someone else's skill set.

Learning to be a gracious loser is not learning to hang your head in defeat, but in defeat, learning where your weaknesses are and strengthen them. Winning does not mean gloating with pride, but accepting the award for having worked harder and refined your technique so that you can be ahead of the pack.

It's this moving ahead of the pack that makes it a competition. Why not just hand out trophies for having worked hard and refining your technique? Why does there have to be a loser? In my mind, it's only because we're in a "fallen world" with pseudo-scarce resources. (I say pseudo-scarce because let's face it, there's no shortage of programming that needs to be done, so there's no reason why you should have to compete for work).

Life is a competition with the Adversary, ourself, the natural man and others who would pull us away from the straight and narrow. There is no way to get away from competition.

What are we competing for? Satan is not competing with me for my soul - I already have my soul and always will. I am striving for the Celestial Kingdom. I'm not aware of any shortage of thrones. Satan, the Natural Man, Recessions and Depressions do not have their sites on the same goal as I do. So they are not competitors at this point - they are obstacles (opposition as others have put it).

So to say that anyone who is in competition is living the Telestial life and thus can only hope to attain that glory is shortsighted at best. Pres. Monson, when he was an Apostle and a Counselor in the First Presidency described life as a race to be won:

So yes, competition is good; we are all in one. So let's not dismiss it because there will be losers and that's not nice. Let's call it what it is and get on with it. If you don't want to compete for the ultimate price of Exaltation, that's your choice. But don't call it Telestial behavior, when it's not.

How is the race to exaltation competitive? Have I lost the crown because you won it? Or do I lose the prize because I'm not fast enough, according to a set standard (not a comparison with the other racers)? There will be losers, but they don't lose because others win.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will be losers, but they don't lose because others win.

Bless you, mordorbund. Whether or not you agree with me, it's nice to know there is at least one person who actually understands what I'm trying to say.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bless you, mordorbund. Whether or not you agree with me, it's nice to know there is at least one person who actually understands what I'm trying to say.

It has become obvious that neither one of you read my whole post. That you two are only out for the argument. If you read it, you would see what the jist of it was, including the quote from President Monson. All I can say is "Whatever, Have a good time spinning your wheels."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has become obvious that neither one of you read my whole post. That you two are only out for the argument. If you read it, you would see what the jist of it was, including the quote from President Monson. All I can say is "Whatever, Have a good time spinning your wheels."

Oh... your... word...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slamjet, why are you taking offense? This is an Internet forum, where no one can see your facial expressions, know you, or know how you use the English language. Lighten up. If you post a very long post, why do you feel that others are obliged to read all/some/any of it at all? Of course, that goes for short posts, as well.

If they didn't get the gist (note the correct spelling) of your post, then shorten and clarify. Don't take offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe there is a very fine line between healthy competition and wicked competition.

Healthy competition is where all involved have fun, all are happy for the winner(s) and the winner(s) doesn't boast or try to put down those who didn't win. Look at the BYU sports teams for examples.

Wicked competition is where the winner(s) make fun of those who didn't win, those who didn't win get so upset that they bring in the spirits of contention, anger, jealousy, and /or resentment. I don't watch professional sports, but from what I've heard the teams themselves don't participate in wicked competition. But that it is their fans who do these things - not all, but enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably, but that is not relevant to my point. The same could be said about, for example, torture. I think torture is wicked, but someone might respond, "But isn't it really our reaction to the torture that matters? Aren't we supposed to have opposition in all things? Torture serves an important purpose. Therefore, torture isn't wicked per se."

I sure wouldn't say that- I wasn't talking about our reaction to competition- I was talking about the way we participate in competition.

I would never participate in torture.

I think you're just dead-set on looking at competition as a bad, evil thing so that's how you define it.

You're defining competition as a winner taking something good away from the loser - is that right?

I don't define competition that way, so that's why I don't see competition as an inherently evil thing.

Perhaps it would help if we look at what sort of consequences come from a competition, then we can decide if those things always happens in a competion, or not, and whether those things are good or bad... Sorry if I'm repeating past posts- but this helps me to list them out.

Consequences of a competition:

Good consequences:

pull down our pride / ego lose self-esteem / self-worth / self-respect

motivated to become better

have fun :)

improve relationships/share common hobbies

gain respect from others

get a prize :)

improve talents & abilities

improve ability to relate with others

get exercise

Bad consequences:

lose self-esteem / self-worth / self-respect

lose motivation?

don't have fun :(

lose good feelings toward / relationship with the opponent

lose respect from others

didn't get the prize :(

diminish in our of talent or ability to a degree?

get angry

get hurt

As you can see, I ended up having opposite sides of the same things under both good and bad. I actually can't really think of something that goes only one way- it could always go one way or the other... I guess where it might differ is in how often or how likely it is to go one way or the other.

I just realized that you might dismiss my list as "missing your point". I understand your point- that you actually define competition as winning at the expense of the loser. So, yes... if you define it that way, then I agree that is evil / wicked. I also understand your point that all those good consequences can be had without having a defined winner and loser- but is it also true that all those bad consequences can be avoided by not defining a winner and loser?

Perhaps yes to a degree. But your point that the good consequences can be had without a winner and loser is also only true to a degree. It's because of what everyone's kind of been saying already- there must be opposition in all things, i.e., a winner and a loser, or else we would not know the fullness of the positive outcomes of competition.

I thought of one more point- there actually will still be good and evil for us to deal with after we reach the celestial kingdom. Remember, eternal progression = continuation of our seed for all eternity.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share