Competition and Cooperation, Winning and Losing

in #philosophy6 years ago (edited)

Don't you like to win? I do. There's something about winning that makes us feel good. While losing can tend to make us not feel good.


Source

We can play a game and experience wins or losses. The potential to win is attractive. If we could only lose in a game, no one would play that game, because it's no fun to always lose and never have the potential to win. Being able to win means there is a challenge.

Accomplishing a goal, achieving an objective, overcoming a challenge, is rewarding. Trying to win or succeed often motivates us past our losses or failures in order to try again. If you can't win or the deck is stacked against you, you don't have a high likelihood of ever winning. It's no fun to play when the game is rigged or cheating takes place.

In a game, we are competing with others to win, or competing against the game system to win through completing a challenge. Competition is fun in games. Losing isn't as fun. Playing a game is fun anyways, win or lose, as there is a the challenge to win. When we play a board game, we might lose, but playing the game was still fun. The game itself is usually fun, and the prospect of winning is also driving us along. We like to compete with others, and we both enjoy ourselves, usually.

As long as our survival isn't depending on it, competition is enjoyable. When our very survival comes into play, then it's a serious game where the losses are hitting us really hard. If we can't get food to survive, we die. Competition for survival can sap out any of the enjoyment or fun in competing, as it's no longer a competition for fun.

There's a lot in life that involves winning or losing. Sometimes we win, and sometimes we lose. Competition is a widespread component in the world. But so is cooperation. Air pressure systems are battling high and low to form winds and bring in weather changes. If there was no low and high pressure competition, the environment would be pretty stagnant. The high and low pressure is then also cooperating to bring a dynamic and more sustainable environment.

In pure biological terms without any psychological dimension, there is cooperation within an organism. Our cells are working together for the larger whole. But there is also competition, such as microorganisms the are beneficial for our health and those that are detrimental. They feed off of what we consume as a resource for their existence, an this helps either grow. Our cells collect recourses as well, and if we aren't eating right or healthy, then there can be a lack of resources to go around, with some cells winning and some losing in their survival.

Organisms as a whole also compete against other organisms. Plants are collecting resources from the environment, and when there is a lack of resources, they compete for those as well. This is a biological drive. Some plants are antagonistic with respect to each other, but some mutually beneficial. Plants also have chemicals that get produced, sometimes in response to external stimulus such as a threat or drought, that can be sent out through their root system to microorganisms and the mycelium in the soil for a larger cooperating ecosystem. Resource sharing happens at a biological level within and between different organisms.

Animals have a biological drive as well, but also psychological drives. We compete in many ways. Humans seems to be the best at competing, finding innovative ways to win out over other species. The complex world we have developed is the result of competition, and cooperation. We compete for resources and our survival, but also cooperate as a larger species.

Our lives aren't only about competition, but also cooperation for our own and other's benefit. We aren't purely competing in society. We engage in competition within our own niches for survival and living. An accountant will compete with other accountants to get clients. But they have also cooperated to develop better accounting practices over history. Our whole society competes, but also cooperates and shares in different tasks to get more things done.

Competition and cooperation is a dynamic that pervades many areas of the world. Winning and losing is present in many places as well. We compete to try to win, and some people win while some people lose. But we also cooperate for win-win relationships as well. Competition doesn't need to be ruthless. But those who do things well, win or succeed more. One accountant that does a better job than another will have more success, as they perform better.

Another occupation might be measured on performance of doing a job better, but money might be involved as well. If you can make money more, you are seen winning and being more successful. But simply making money a real measure of success? Sometimes it can accurately reflect how better someone is at their skillset, compared to others, but not always. Some people make more money because they have connections, they network and gain favors, their friends favor them, despite having a lower quality output or being less good at doing something compared to others.

Human society has this strong social factor. The merits of what you do aren't the only thing that represents you. Subjective evaluations of your personality, having connections and reciprocating favors, also plays a part in people wining or succeeding in life. Competition in society isn't always about how well you do something. It's about influencing others to think you do something better, or just to simply favor you because of your mutually subjective connection and favorable evaluation of each other as a person.

The objective performance is often secondary to subjective evaluations of a person. Within companies and society, it's not always the best performing or most skilled that gets ahead, but the one who can grease the social wheels and be able to influence the psychological dimension of others. Fair competition is rigged in this way. It's not about who does what better, but who is more liked and favored.

This can be seen in competition for contracts, either in the private sector or government sector. The better company won't win if another is more favored to be given a contract. The same happens when hiring someone for a job, or having someone promoted. The best person might be passed over in favor of a friend, someone that has connections and is networked more with others.

Steem works similarly. It's not who has the best content, the best product or done the best work that wins out, although that does factor in partially. It's largely about who has connections, who is networked with others, who has influenced and gained favorability in order to receive support, to succeed and win.

It's a social content platform, and the social wins out over the content in many cases. We want to win the game and competition for resources (attention and rewards). If you don't have connections and networking with others, then the work you do doesn't often matter much. Winning and succeeding in the content game is rigged, like in real life. Social connections to those with Steem Power determine a lot of what happens, unless you're buying votes from those with Steem Power. Winning and succeeding by your own work paving the way to merit rewards and attention is harder and harder to do.

It takes time to build connections. That can be done through others valuing your work to rewards you. But if you have connection and influence, people can favor your content even if it's not good. If you support someone, then they tend to support you, often despite the content being the best or any good at all. Favor for favor.

How has your experience on Steem been? Have you gained attention and rewards by the merits of your work, product or content in itself? Or did you only gain traction when you networked, connected and gained influence and favor with others?

Also, are we working to benefit ourselves and others through what's best for the platform in the long-term? Or are we just looking to win as much as we can for ourselves in the short-term, regardless of what it does to the long-term success or failure of the platform?

Sort:  

Joining the competition is either winning or losing but whatever you may get - is a win-win situation. Of course, winning is the best we can have and all of us is gunning for this but behind of it was the experience of joining the competition, our learning on why we win and lose and how we can improve it for the next contest.

My experience has been a little bumpy along the way. One advantage I had that looking back I can see helped me out is I had someone that got me onto the platform here. I don’t personally know him but I’ve watched his YouTube videos through the years and he was always talking about Steemit. Once I finally made the jump over to here he had quite a following and I just had to look to his page to see the relevant content I was already consuming. It then morphed from there to where I’m at now.

As far as the way it’s gone it’s been a trip that’s for sure; there are many intricacies that this platform has and things to understand and get used to that I will be able to share with my friends and family that come to the platform.
For one: do not expect to write posts and all of a sudden gain fame and stardom. There are countless posts that happen in the span of 30 minutes and some do get noticed so without paying for bots (which I think ruins the platform anyways) it’s difficult to get noticed.
Two: engage! Commenting on posts is good but when people write back it’s good have a dialogue back and forth in the right circumstances.

Yeah, comment when you start off, and get people's attention, otherwise trying to let ppl find you without poking into their content is near impossible...

Exactly, I just made a post about it, competition and cooperation are not mutually exclusive, but are complementary, we need to receive help (cooperation), but we need to receive it from those who can best give it to us (competitiveness).

Some people make more money because they have connections, they network and gain favors, their friends favor them, despite having a lower quality output or being less good at doing something compared to others.

Exactly, I'm just preparing a publication on incentives to compete, and that touches precisely this point.

Great Publication!

Yup, very complementary. There is a lot of hate on for competition in some circles, like New Agers or "spiritualists" sometimes... they think only cooperation has a place... Thank you, I'm glad you valued the post :)

Hi @krnel

I like the style of these posts where you explain a larger 'life' aspect and then relate this to the game we are playing at present.

The early days of the game can be tough, there is the chance of a @curie upvote, and nowadays you can #steemhunt or #dtube for example, which does negate the need for co-operation somewhat.

However, longer term I think it's important to network, but also remain focused on what's best for the platform. Blind voting, irrelevant of content, has long been an issue, and clearly this isn't what's best.

I like to think I've worked hard and with a focus on what benefits the platform, and luckily for me, this has worked in my favor at times via support from those few remaining large accounts that have the same in mind.

Cheers.

Yes, you and other do well with networking. I'm not too good at networking anywhere, my introvert side ;) Small talk and all that isn't what I like :P Thankfully I got somewhere with the content which attracted like minds for support ;)

Steemit has been hard, but no where near as hard as trying to get a blog seen on boogle.

One might actually say, it has been downright easy when looked at in comparison. But still, you look at those few people with $1000 posts and think, my post is better... but that is really not how things work in this world today.

It may be that is what the elite destroyed in creating govern-cement schools. The schooling is based on performance. Grades determine who is considered the best. But really, all those cliques, and who was the popular kids. That was the real world, not just an annoyance. We were never taught that its who you know, not what you know.

"Knowledge is Power"... yeah right. Only if you have the tools, resources and contacts to use it.

Void of personal connections, knowledge is power, but those with connection have more power with their knowledge ;)

When it's come to sport competition can be fun, but when it's come to life then losing can give many obstacles, hardships, problems and failures, and we have to understand one thing how we are watching an competition is really important and we have to understand before doing something we have to understand the game otherwise the failure is for sure. On Steemit Platform we need competition but we need healthy competition and sometimes we should compete for the good.

We have to see this Steem Blockchain as an Economy and an Economy will develop when we all are walking together towards common goal so it's really important for us to compete to develop this platform to more extent and showcase your support to them who are entered here without any knowledge about what to do and these kind of helping competition can give solid base to Steemit Platform.

Thanks for sharing this post with us and wishing you an great day. Stay blessed. 🙂

Competing for the good, yes, that would be great if everyone wanted to compete to try to exemplify what's good and bring about more good, for ourselves, each other, the platform, and the world. That is my goal ;)

Yes, our actions should reflect the goodness, and we have to collectively move forward so that we can create an beautiful world. Stay blessed. 🙂

Its all about give and take...the more you give the more you gain.....you got follower and rewards as well. Till now after 7 month stay on steemit i feel, its very hard to get noticed. ...curation is about helping minnows...i.e user which do not have much sp...helping them you will good follower but rewards can only be possible when you get noticed by any whale....and they too want to be voted on their post 100 %power and its difficult to maintain the sp to keep both of them happy

If only bidbots were gone... more whales would be forced to go out and upvote content in order to get curation and keep their accounts growing...

Agree...but looking at the automation and the number of bid bots increasing day by day...it seems to faar.....

It's not what you know.... but who you know.
But the best thing like for many other things is a combination of multiple factors. Having conections helps for sure, but if the person don't have anything to offer, no qualities, the conections will do only a little. Also if someone is realy good in something but with no concections it's very hard. But occansly someone can apear and put this person in to the light. For this to happen time and perseverance are important.

Yes, connections require some competency hehe. On Steem though, you can post 1-2 paragraphs and if you are supported by someone who autovotes or likes you, it doesn't matter what you post ;)

that was an extremely interesting post. you started out very generic then it was all about our society and finally into steemit.
Our whole society competes, but also cooperates and shares in different tasks to get more things done. i think the key here would be the healthy competition and at the same time cooperation. If the competition is in terms of how i will ''destroy'' my potential ''enemies'' then us society we are doomed but if we look at how we gonna get better from the other just by using our own strength and power and even cooperation with others then we succeed

As far as it concerns about the questions related to steemit the attention i took was both from the networking and by my content itself. At the end of the day i thing with steemit's current form everyone need to network with others and make relationships with them. Through building new friendships he/she will both earn more and make himself/herself try for better content even more as now his/her new friends are watching. At the same time if the networking is only for the sake of money then it will fail

To your final questions the answer once again is both. I believe the first one should be the step-stone but in a way the second ''tactic'' it's unavoidable. At the end of the day it's up to us to always strive for the best both for us and the platform. only that way is viable i believe. the sort term one has sort term end ;)

Well, it doesn't sound like you support the second, but you say both... odd.

Well, it doesn't sound
Like you support the second,
But you say both... odd.

                 - krnel


I'm a bot. I detect haiku.

i support what's best for the platform and community and not what is for the sake of money and self-benefit but i say it's unavoidable to have people like that, as steemit earns day by day more and more attention. Also most of the people that came to steemit had in mind primarily to earn money. Some of them discovered how good the community and tried to help it grow and make relationship with people while others stayed in the old mindset of just making money.

As me i have more influence here when my network grow up, the quality of the post is the same from the start, well maybe now are better because i use some tips but mostly my success here is based around the network and the fact that i joined some little communities.

The communities are important; the comments section is where these start in my opinion and this is where they grow and develop. That’s how I have gained followers. I started out posting but not getting attention so I focused on comments and interaction and although I am still a minnow I have gained far more in the past 2 weeks than I have in the past 2 months.

Yup, when new, get a network going by commenting, then you can earn more on posts with support ;)

Yeah, connection and networking mater a lot on Steem, just like the real world. Work doesn't speak for itself...

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.29
TRX 0.12
JST 0.033
BTC 62996.10
ETH 3122.17
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.88