Register

  • Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
    It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)

Competition

aphilso1 said:
Agreed that intrinsic and instrumental value are not mutually exclusive. I stated as such above with regards to the value of work.
Your views are not unique. They are shared by some very intelligent philosophers (Korsgaard and Dewy, for example), but frankly that line of thinking has always seemed intentionally ignorant to me. And I don't mean ignorant as in uneducated, I mean it as in ignoring what is readily apparent and overwhelmingly accepted, but unprovable.
Joy is good. Self-efficacy is good. Pleasure is good. But regardless of how hard people try, they can't "prove" that they are. Items and activities that are intrinsically valuable have a direct connection to good. A sunset or sunrise, for example. While there is indeed an instrumental value as well (warming or cooling the earth), most people would readily agree that the beauty of a sunrise is valuable for its own merit. If you're in the Dewey camp, then I recognize there is no way to convince you of this. But again, my opinion is that that is just willful ignorance.
Competitive leisure is intrinsically valuable in the same way that a picture of a deceased relative is. To someone who enjoys it for its own sake, it is good. But to someone who doesn't, it's not. You can look at a picture of a deceased grandmother and receive joy; if I look at your grandmother's picture I won't. That doesn't make the picture any less intrinsically valuable, just because I don't appreciate it. But it does mean that I personally won't keep a picture of your grandma in my house. And just because you don't enjoy competitive leisure, doesn't mean that others don't enjoy it. But it does mean that you probably shouldn't waste your time pursuing it.
Click to expand...

I don't read philosophy, and I'm not trying to get too abstract. I reckon I figured that if there are tangible negative aspects of competition, that maybe there were tangible positives that I was unable to perceive.

I accept that not everything can be proved or demonstrated. What is obvious to you may not be naturally evident to me. But is the fact that many people enjoy competition irrefutable evidence that it is good? Other examples indicate other possibilities. To use an extreme illustration, many people enjoy adultery, at least for a time, yet it has the potential to devastate the lives of others, and cannot, no matter one's personal moral convictions, be called good simply because it is fun.

So maybe recreational competition is inexplicably good, and I will have to carry on without that good or the understanding of it in my life. Or maybe it is partly good and mostly bad, and I'm spared something by not being involved. I don't know. I believe that hyper-competitiveness in sports and games is partly an extention of our societal structure which is not designed to serve healthy individual or communal needs. But I don't know.

What I know is this:

I can happily play a million innings of baseball without giving a single thought to the score.

I once met an old ballplayer called Bill Lee at a beach in Maine to try and sell him an antique limestone table. We talked a little and started throwing rocks at the the distant boulders in the water. And we talked and threw and threw and threw and never once competed and had a good old time.

I like to climb trees more than I like to win at disc golf.
 
Armus Patheticus said:
I don't read philosophy, and I'm not trying to get too abstract. I reckon I figured that if there are tangible negative aspects of competition, that maybe there were tangible positives that I was unable to perceive.

I accept that not everything can be proved or demonstrated. What is obvious to you may not be naturally evident to me. But is the fact that many people enjoy competition irrefutable evidence that it is good? Other examples indicate other possibilities. To use an extreme illustration, many people enjoy adultery, at least for a time, yet it has the potential to devastate the lives of others, and cannot, no matter one's personal moral convictions, be called good simply because it is fun.

So maybe recreational competition is inexplicably good, and I will have to carry on without that good or the understanding of it in my life. Or maybe it is partly good and mostly bad, and I'm spared something by not being involved. I don't know. I believe that hyper-competitiveness in sports and games is partly an extention of our societal structure which is not designed to serve healthy individual or communal needs. But I don't know.

What I know is this:

I can happily play a million innings of baseball without giving a single thought to the score.

I once met an old ballplayer called Bill Lee at a beach in Maine to try and sell him an antique limestone table. We talked a little and started throwing rocks at the the distant boulders in the water. And we talked and threw and threw and threw and never once competed and had a good old time.

I like to climb trees more than I like to win at disc golf.
Click to expand...
Ah, Bill Lee aka the Spaceman...he was a dandy.
 
Armus Patheticus said:
I don't read philosophy, and I'm not trying to get too abstract. I reckon I figured that if there are tangible negative aspects of competition, that maybe there were tangible positives that I was unable to perceive.

I accept that not everything can be proved or demonstrated. What is obvious to you may not be naturally evident to me. But is the fact that many people enjoy competition irrefutable evidence that it is good? Other examples indicate other possibilities. To use an extreme illustration, many people enjoy adultery, at least for a time, yet it has the potential to devastate the lives of others, and cannot, no matter one's personal moral convictions, be called good simply because it is fun.

So maybe recreational competition is inexplicably good, and I will have to carry on without that good or the understanding of it in my life. Or maybe it is partly good and mostly bad, and I'm spared something by not being involved. I don't know. I believe that hyper-competitiveness in sports and games is partly an extention of our societal structure which is not designed to serve healthy individual or communal needs. But I don't know.

What I know is this:

I can happily play a million innings of baseball without giving a single thought to the score.

I once met an old ballplayer called Bill Lee at a beach in Maine to try and sell him an antique limestone table. We talked a little and started throwing rocks at the the distant boulders in the water. And we talked and threw and threw and threw and never once competed and had a good old time.

I like to climb trees more than I like to win at disc golf.
Click to expand...

Do you try to make good throws or do you just throw the disc in the air to wherever? Do you bother aiming? Do you try to select an appropriate disc for the shot? Do good shots satisfy you at all? Answer yes to any and you are competing, even if it is against your self. Competition is not always about winning and losing, just about trying to do things to the best of your ability. I know you may not care if you a make a putt, but I am damn sure that you try to make them.
 
ballgolfconvert said:
Do you try to make good throws or do you just throw the disc in the air to wherever? Do you bother aiming? Do you try to select an appropriate disc for the shot? Do good shots satisfy you at all? Answer yes to any and you are competing, even if it is against your self. Competition is not always about winning and losing, just about trying to do things to the best of your ability. I know you may not care if you a make a putt, but I am damn sure that you try to make them.
Click to expand...

Take a look at the ol' dictionary when you get a chance.
 
If you've never seen his documentary, it is it at least was on Netflix and is fantastic.

I agree that disc chucking of any type can be fun, competition satisfies a different urge.'if you don't have that, it's fine.
 
Moose33 said:
If you've never seen his documentary, it is it at least was on Netflix and is fantastic.

I agree that disc chucking of any type can be fun, competition satisfies a different urge.'if you don't have that, it's fine.
Click to expand...

Whose documentary?
 
Seems old patheticus has gotten enough mileage from this nonsense with his nonsensical ramblings. I'm done with this one. What happened to the good threads that I used to read all the time on this site?
 
Moose33 said:
Bill lee, think it's called Spaceman. Talks about his career, how it ended and his adventures after. Trip to Cuba was a hoot.
Click to expand...

Have owned his book for many years. It's called The Wrong Stuff. His career could have lasted longer but he was a non-conformist in a era when it was definitely not tolerated to go against convention.
 
Armus Patheticus said:
... a joke not only has a narrow scope (human) ...
Click to expand...

Has your fox friend ever taken a dump on one of your discs? I have seen evidence of this happening.

If that's not a joke, I don't know what is.

I suppose it could be a joke that's over your head, happens to me sometimes.
 
Keller said:
I think Armus was home schooled, and this is his way of playing with other children.
Click to expand...

There's something of truth in that. The only disadvantage of not going to school is that certain social skills are underdeveloped. Add to that a lifelong pattern of relative solitude and I don't really know how to converse with grace or care about fitting into a social structure.

There are two purposes to these posts: to introduce a possibly new way of seeing things to an audience that seems exceptionally stagnant, and to see what angles I might have missed. That so many of the responders are unwilling to offer anything useful and waste time poking at the unprovokable is disappointing but at last inevitable.

Competition in sport is viewed, almost universally, as a positive. As the essential root of sport.

Can anyone recognize any negatives? If so, is reconciliation with the positives of sport possible? The question as always: what is the net value? If it is negative, do we have the guts to decline that transaction?
 
IMO (just one man's..) competition can bring out the incivility in people faster than just about anything else. There's a place and time for everything but people's insecurity "forces" them to TRY to 'prove themselves better' (than others) in the most trivial things - like sports - with the delusion that it carries over to all aspects (and more important aspects) of their lives. The fact of the matter is that one can be great...even for just a moment...at something and still be a turd at that which REALLY counts.
But having said that, my gut feeling is that the "net" benefit / detriment of competition is a 'moderate net benefit'. We are - like it or not - an evolving species, and "competition" (of some sorts and extents) are IMO innate, essential, and probably unavoidable for us to continue as a species. What KIND of competition (and how intense, etc.) can be debated...and regulated, if we deem it to be needed.
 
IMHO you're talking about service to self; vs. service to others; and how service to self has been the primary driver of this particular round. That's not really a discussion you're going to have much success with here (or, very many places really); which really kind of/part of the service to self ethos in the first place. I.e. service to self implies competition in everything.

(One of the questions there could very well be; "was this intended" as perhaps the single biggest experiment of this round itself. ...in the picture of the bigger round; which seems to have a major component of individualism involved.) I.e. I AM!

If anyone has taken the rough road of service to others; then, a competitive round of disc golf is rather reasonable way to engage in some competition (primarily) with oneself. Side benefits of exercise, engagement with others, seeing new country; etc., can be a major piece of it as well.
 
Armus Patheticus said:
I don't read philosophy, and I'm not trying to get too abstract.
Click to expand...

Armus Patheticus said:
Most of the time there's limited space to work with. So I reckon the right number of holes is the number of good, non-redundant ones that the land can comfortably and rightly allow. The What would Emerson sayre's no sense in ruining a good 15 hole course to make a lousy 18 hole course, or in making a boring 18 instead of a fun 25. Magic numbers are irritating. What would Emerson say?
Click to expand...


To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. - Waldo Emerson

But then again...

To be great is to be misunderstood. - Waldo Emerson
 
Information about Narcissistic Personality Disorder:

https://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/courses/materials/Narc.Pers.DSM.pdf

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/conditions/narcissistic-personality-disorder


Also, some information on empathy:

https://dictionary.apa.org/empathy

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/why_the_world_needs_an_empathy_revolution


Go ahead, call me dumb, stupid, unintelligent; I don't really care. I can assure you, I have been called worse by much better people.
 
Armus Patheticus said:
There's something of truth in that. The only disadvantage of not going to school is that certain social skills are underdeveloped. Add to that a lifelong pattern of relative solitude and I don't really know how to converse with grace or care about fitting into a social structure.

There are two purposes to these posts: to introduce a possibly new way of seeing things to an audience that seems exceptionally stagnant, and to see what angles I might have missed. That so many of the responders are unwilling to offer anything useful and waste time poking at the unprovokable is disappointing but at last inevitable.

Competition in sport is viewed, almost universally, as a positive. As the essential root of sport.

Can anyone recognize any negatives? If so, is reconciliation with the positives of sport possible? The question as always: what is the net value? If it is negative, do we have the guts to decline that transaction?
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but it seems to me that you are confusing the root with the byproduct.

You seem to be suggesting that first the impulse comes to compete. Something like, "hey, I want to beat that other guy. Now how to create a situation where I can take him down?"

However, I believe the motivating impulses of sport are fun, exploration, and mastery. Competition simply emerges as a natural result when you have others engaging in the same activity.

And competition is completely neutral. It can reveal positives or negatives in the participants, but so too can every interaction. This is not something unique to competition.

I was super competitive early in life and then developed an aversion to it. I did not like what it revealed in me and then naturally went the other way, becoming anti-competitive. Eventually I learned that it was not competition that created my negative state, it was already there. Now that I have a healthier psyche, competition is a blank slate, something to be enjoyed as any other activity, because life is short and why not?

The problem comes in because people are too attached to particular outcomes. This is the root problem, not competition, imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top