This week Dr. Barnes spoke with you all regarding the nature of competition---the theoretical frameworks associated with the idealistic perspective on competition and the realistic perspective on competition. David Light Shields has written a paper investigating the practical applications of these theories---"Opponents or Enemies: Rethinking the Nature of Competition". You may access this paper on-line at www.characterandcitizenship.org/research/keynote.htm. Please read the paper thoroughly and discuss in a minimum four paragraph post the following: 1.) What is Alfie Kohn's argument against competition? What is MEGA? Do you agree with Kohn's position? Why/Why not? What ethical reasoning supports your argument? 2.) What is decompetition? Can you provide a personal example of when you might have participated in sport and the concept of decompetition was applied? 3.) How does decompetition affect motivation in the participant? 4.) What is an outcome oriented perspective regarding competition? What is a 'process oriented perspective' regarding competition? Which orientation matches best with the participant who is a 'decompetitor' ? 5.)What is 'bracketed morality'? How does this relate to our competitive orientations? 6.) Are you a competitor or a decompetitor?
Grades for last weeks blog will be done this weekend. Posts for this blog should be done by 930am PST on Wednesday February 24---My Birthday! Looking forward to seeing you all in two weeks---Go Vandals!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1.) What is Alfie Kohn's argument against competition? What is MEGA? Do you agree with Kohn's position? Why/Why not? What ethical reasoning supports your argument?
ReplyDeleteIn Opponents or Enemies: Rethinking the Nature of Competition, Alfie Kohn has written a book arguing against competition, saying that it undermines performance. This argument is based on scientific studies concluding that competition makes one person’s happiness based on another person’s sorrow. If one person succeeds and the other does not he makes it known as MEGA or “mutually exclusive goal attainment”. His argument is correct in the fact that there is always one winner and one loser. However, he barely skims the surface of what competition really is.
Therefore, I obviously disagree with Kohn’s position. If winning was all about the other team losing, then winning wouldn’t mean as much as it does. A winner shouldn’t be concerned about the losing team’s feelings and the losing team shouldn’t feel intense sorrow. Competition involves losing and learning from one’s mistakes and looking forward to coming against that team again. Real competition involves underdogs claiming victory and unbelievable physical feats performed by athletes that no one knew the human body was capable of.
An example of ethical reasoning that supports my argument is that competition is about respect. The very reason humans compete everyday in work, school, sports etc. is because of their respect for one another, even if they don’t admit it or realize it. Every individual or team can be beaten at some point or another; this is what makes competition thrillingly unpredictable. Most losses occur when a team loses respect for their competition. We all have their reasons for competing and in writing his book, one could even say that Kohn was competing for the support of others.
1.) What is Alfie Kohn's argument against competition? What is MEGA? Do you agree with Kohn's position? Why/Why not? What ethical reasoning supports your argument?
ReplyDeleteAlfie Kohn's argument about competition in the article titled In Opponents or Enemies: Rethinking the Nature of Competition, is about, in his thoughts, how competition teaches people to gain pleasure from other peoples pain. It ruins self esteem and so much more. He states that children already have enough real life situations to compete in and they don't need any artificial ones. The author uses many different terms to prove his point, but doesn't seem to really explain what competition actually is.
Something that does briefly touch on what competition is is included at the beginning of the essay. Kohn uses a term called MEGA to help define what competition is. MEGA is an abbreviation for mutually exclusive goal attainment. This "means that competitors’ interests are inherently opposed. I succeed if you fail, and vice versa. ...so the failure of others is devoutly to be wished."
Through out the essay Kohn talks about how there should be a new word for competition since it doesn't mean the achievement against others it means with others. So he uses the term de-competition. It is the opposite of what competition is. Through out the essay Kohn uses these two terms interchangeably to describe how they fit into the world of sports.
I have to say that I can agree with some of the parts and disagree with others. To me competition is when people compete against each other to find the winner. To me there is always a winner and always a looser. With Kohn's view he thinks that we should all work together and not use competition in the way that we do.
I disagree with Kohn because even in competition there is a way that it can be done in the right way. People have respect for one another, good sportsmanship, moral reasoning, honesty, and more. Each of these if used in competition makes it okay for there to be a winner and a looser. I feel that this true because that way your only playing for the fun of the game instead of the winning and "kick[ing] the brains out of the other fellow”
3) How does Decompetition affect motivation in participant?
ReplyDeleteIn Kohn's paper he discusses how decompetition is happening all over out society and how it is affecting us in a negative way. It is stated in this paper that, "When the delicate balance required for true competition is upset, competition can dissolve or decompose or degenerate into decompetition." Decompetition is starting to be a problem in our society because we are unable to push through the wrong reasons to motivate ourselves.
Competition has changed over the years to be more of an ugly, embarrassing part of sports. The true competition is being proud to play the game and to be a part of what is going on in the game. It is always good to want to win but when the competition becomes too great and athletes feel the need to cheat so they can be more competitive. I think we are slipping into Kohn's idea of decompetition.
An example of decompetition in this day’s society is baseball and steroid use. Athletes have become so competitive with stats and performance they have given up on the integrity of the game. These athletes have been obtaining these huge stats with the help of steroids are part of why our society is moving towards decompetition. These baseball players have lost the true meaning of the sport and the true meaning of competition. The definition of competition is the act of competing and the test of skill or ability. Are the baseball players true competitors if they for go their natural ability to use steroids to get the better stats?
I do think that decompetition is a bad thing and that it is beginning to happen in our society. It does affect the motivation of the athlete because competition has now started to push the athletes to cheat and for go their own integrity and the games integrity. Competition and winning have become too important in our society and the decompetion is going to start happening more and more.
Kohn’s argument against competition focuses on his theory that all competition is inherently bad. He believes that “competition does not lead to improved performance or production” and that it is bad from both a psychological and moral standpoint. He believes that “sometimes competition can lead to devastating feelings of humiliation and shame that stay with a person throughout life”, and that “competition makes one person’s happiness dependent on another’s sorrow”. All of this is true to some degree but in no way is it how competition should be looked at or valued. Competition is what drives many people to be great and or successful. COMPETITON IS NOT FOR EVERYONE!
ReplyDeleteMEGA stands for mutually exclusive goal attainment which according to Kohn, simply means: One person succeeds only if another does not. Once again, this is true in some instances but should not be viewed as a relative fact.
In many instances where competition is prevalent, such as a high paying job interview, many “competitors” might apply for a job and only one will get hired. This does not mean that the other job candidates failed completely. They gained valuable experience they can take to their next job interview. Another example (in sport) would be when a team loses a close game. Even though they lost the “competition”, the players on that team once again gained valuable experience for future contests.
Decompetition is essentially the evil twin of all the good characteristics of what competition can be. Competition, at its best, involves a mutual respect between two “competitors”. With decompetiton, respect and all the other positive parts of what makes competition great, are thrown out the window.
test post
ReplyDeleteKohn's agreement states that competition is bad in his theory presented in the article. He feels that it makes people undermine their opponite to gain superiority over the other competitors. It makes others feel better about themselves, and can lead to devastation and humiliation for the others. And leaves ones happiness on the others sorrows. He feels that competition is bad from a moral and ethical standpoint.
ReplyDeleteMEGA stands for mutually exclusive goal attainment. From his stand this means that I succeed only if you fail. I find this to be true as far as the agreement is presented. It is that in competition one is trying to defeat the other in order be more successful.
Decompetition is the opposite of what competition is meant to be. It states that people will go outside their norms to defeat the others. They seek to find anyway possible to bend the rules to and even break the others down to come out on top. The decompetitor seeks to be motivated by the things he or she can get out of the game, either being praised, material rewards or the pure feeling of superiority over others at their expense.
I agree with some of his beliefs but not all, I feel that competition should be about respect for the people you are playing and respect for the game. Yes everyone wants to win but there can’t be two winners, I think it can be done it a form that puts one on top of the other with class and respect for the others efforts.
As I read this paper it is talks about competition and how it can relate on us from bad side.Kohl thinks that all competition is bad and he gives us reasons.It is bad from instrumental and psychological standpoint.It is also lowered self steem.It can lead to be shame and have this bad feeling through the whole life.Also he thinks that win somebody it means make pain to your opponents.It is also bad from moral and ethic standpoint.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Kohn’s paper because I think competition is help us just to get mentally stronger.I do not think it is bad at any points.Competition is only for strong people because.If people are winning they should not be feeling sorry for the opponents.Everybody is winning and losing and it just helps us to study on those mistakes and win next time.
Sometimes even if you lose you can lose with and show your best play.Sometimes you can win and show you worst game.Anyway you have to be respectfull to your opponent all the time.That way you can lose or win but you will do it honestly.Some times people are winning by cheating which I do not think is right and it is does not look good.
6.) Are you a competitor or a decompetitor?
ReplyDeleteI am more of a true competitor now, than a decompetitor. As a high school athlete, I loved to run but one of my main motivations in running was to perform well and achieve a university scholarship. I had an extrinsic motivation for running my senior year, making me more of a decompetitor than a true competitor. I wasn’t simply loving running for intrinsic values but also using it to my advantage in achieving an affordable higher education through it.
Although, I wasn’t a complete decompetitor in high school. I still loved to run, because really how can you be a distance runner if you don’t like running? There is no way. Bettering my skills and learning more about my sport was high on my list, along with cooperation and challenging my opponents. A funny thing is, the best race I ever ran wasn’t one against a big rival but one against my best friend. We cooperated and brought our best to the track that day and pushed each other to running personal bests.
Since high school I am really a true competitor, it is crazy how much my love for running is growing so rapidly. I still want to do well but winning is not my main goal. I do it now because I love it. Of course I would love to win a conference ring, but who wouldn’t? I like a challenge and I’d rather not have a huge rivalry with someone. It might be bad how nice of a racer I can be, but I don’t care to cut some one off or box someone in. I just want a good clean race, to see who has the most guts, not to see who has the most tricks or what ever.
After experiencing my first indoor track conference this past week, I realized how much of a true competitor I am. I was upset by the huge rivalry between each team and each racer. There was a lot of unescessary elbows, and cut offs in every race. Even more upsetting, it seemed like our team captains only cared about winning and when they did bad they just gave up on the rest of us. We have a really young team and all of us freshman were out there running 3 and more races as hard as we could. When we came second by a few points a lot of the seniors were really mad. All of us youngsters were pretty proud of how much we supported the team with all our events and it hurt that our own team mates were so mad when they should have really tried to co-operate and support us more if they wanted to win that bad. True compitition is so important within a team because if there is just rivalry everyday it just tears you apart. I love to run and I am sure I will be one of those really old lady’s that still runs when she gets the chance. I will always be a true competitor.
as we learned in class kohn feels that all types of competetition is bad, and i have to disagree with that. in fact i am the complete opposite of him.
ReplyDeletei feel that competition is healthy, and it helps a kids childhood a lot better. when you take your kids out and put them on a sports team it helps them get a better understanding of what they are expected in life. they realize that winning isn't everything, but when you try your hardest and give everything you have then you should ultimately feel happy about yourself.
when i was younger mos of my favorite memories are from sports. i hit a game winning home fun, i scored a game winning basket, and caugh a game winning touchdown.
i am glad that my parents brought me up with being competitive beacasue i was able to translate it to my school work, chores at home, and in my everyday life.
6) Are you a competitor or a decompetitor?
ReplyDelete- Both competitors and decompetitors want to win. If nobody plays to win, there is no point of competing. I am a competitor myself because I always show up to a competition and hope my opponent shows up also with his game on so we can compete to play to win. Sometimes, I lose a tough match because at the end of the day, my opponent performed better than me but at the same time, I played my highest potential so I don't feel depressed that my opponent defeated me. The reason I play tennis because I get to compete with my abilities against other players in the process of competition. If I defeat my opponent who has handicaps such as an injury, I won't feel proud of myself for winning because there is no process of winning that match but if I defeat a player who is fresh and has his game on, I will feel proud of winning.
Alfie Kohn's belief on competition is that it is bad and is wrong when it comes to performance. MEGA is an abbreviation for mutually exclusive goal attainment. This means that there is one winner and one loser, basically I succeed if you fail. I disagree with Kohn's views on competition because the sport wouldn't be a sport if there was no competition. You shouldn't be worried how the other team feels after the win or lose either. Competition is all about making yourself better and learning from your mistakes. If there was no competition then people would not care about getting better.
ReplyDeletePersonally I love competing and leaving it all out on the court, and play to win. If I competing and played my hardest and lose, well there is nothing you can do and thats the part of competition. You learn from it and you see how it makes you feel, and never want it to happen again. Thats what competition is all about.
Kohn’s define that competition tend to be bad and wrong when is applied to sport performance. But our society has a dramatic focus in winners then losses; basically I will succeed if you fail… I don’t necessary agree with Kohn’s point views on competition because the sport wouldn't be a sport without competition. Competition only benefits the few skilled participants. In most sporting events, it is the skilled minority who will have the most contact with the ball and the gamest experience even if all participants have the same amount of playing time. He’s point out that in a competition, only one wins while the rest fail. In “The Case against Competition,” Kohn argues that competition leads children to define themselves by the outcome, tying their self-esteem up with their ability to beat others. Competition can causes anxiety, interferes with learning, and causes to an individual to view others as obstacles to their success.
ReplyDeleteReading this paper that talks about competition and how can be relate on us from bad side. Khon thinks that all competition is bad because is a instrumental and psychological standpoint. it is also lowered self stem. It can lead to be shame and feels bad for the whole life. He thinks that win someone it means make it hurts to the opponents. It is also bad for ethic standpoint and moral.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion I think competition is very helpful for us, because that makes our mind stronger. I do not think it is bad at any way, competition is only for people that is stronger and can handle pressure, another think is people are winning they should not be feeling sorry or bad for the opponents. Everybody win or lose in life, and it just helps us to learn from our mistakes and win the next time. Sometimes you lose but you showed your best performance and sometimes you win but you showed your worse game. Anyways you still have the respect from the opponents all the time.
Alfie Konhs arguing that the competition instead of helping us to grow up as human beings and perform better, it undermines qualitative and quantitative performances dimensions. He got this conclusion for years of investigation about of human behavior related to the competition, he support his claim by saying there are many kids who compete for prize. MEGA means if one person get the victory another get defeat, so we have winner and loser. I think, this view point is right, we always going to have to side of the coin. However, I disagree because loss and win have others views.
ReplyDeleteThere are some values related to the victory and defeat like loss with dignity and win with humility. I think, MEGA is not deep enough about to reach the victory or get the defeat. I think, to loss sometimes bring you going better experiences. When we loss we can learn from our mistakes to head a get in our sports and improve our skills that is real essences of the competition.
There are some athletes who compete to get ahead as a person. However, there are others who think that competition is a war or battle. Thus, Decompetition is the wrong perspective about competition; it is the opposite side of coin. Back in my homeland, when I was running, there were some athletes who use drugs to win because they had the wrong concept of competition which is reach the excellent and mastery that could not be achieved in isolation. These guys did want to grow up as athletes, instead of they wanted win at any cost.
Decomapettion affect in athletes motivation because bring the sadness and desperation to the loser because these loser are not able to see their mistakes to improve their own limitation because these kind of athletes have a narrow concept that it is real essence of the competition.
Being a competitor runs through my family. I feel like if I was not a competitor like my family than I would kind of be the odd person out because everyone in my family is a competitor. The thing is though is I love competing. There is nothing that makes me play hard than winning. Nothing matters to me more than winning during a game. I am a great Competitor though because I love to compete. Wen I do lose though I am a great sport. That is the thing about being a competitor. Not only can you be a great competitor but you can be a even better sport.
ReplyDelete1. Alfie Kohn’s argument against competition is that he believes it’s bad from a purely instrumental standpoint. He argues that competition doesn’t lead to better performance or production by any means. Kohn also believes that competition is bad from a psychological standpoint. Some of the things he thinks competition affects psychologically is, it increases anxiety and lowers self-esteem. Kohn’s main argument against competition is he believes its bad from a moral or ethical standpoint. According to the article MEGA stand for; mutually exclusive goal attainment, which means one person exceeds only if another doesn’t. Being a college athlete I don’t believe in Kohns argument. I believe that in order to bring the best out in someone you need competition. I believe that competition is fun and in the end win or lose you take a valuable lesson from it. You learn from competition from your mistakes to your highlights. However I do agree competition is bad when it reaches the levels of win at all cost. Ethical reason that supports my argument is justice, if you do what is fair and play by the rules competition is a good thing ethically and morally.
ReplyDelete2. According to the article decompetition affects motivation in participants by taking away the love for the game and using the game. For example playing the game so you can feel superior rather then trying to build a legacy. According to the article a decompetitor is motivated by values extrinsic to the game.
3. According to the article Bracketed Morality is simply a playful deviation from everyday life with no real world consequences. I believe bracketed morality relates to our competitive orientations if you’re a competitor or an decompetitor. I believe that what the author is trying to conclude by his explanation of bracketed morality is if you are a decompetitor you will do whatever it takes at all cost to win, which is morally the wrong thing to do.
4. I would consider myself a competitor because I play the game for the love of it. I play the game for the ups and downs for the good and the bad. I play the game to better myself as a human being. I play the game for the sweat and the tears. I play the game for the team concept and for the memories that are made. I don’t play the game so I can be looked up upon or so I can be better then someone. Many people today are decompetitors but I am definitely not.
Kohn's argument against competition states that competition both undermines qualitative and quantitative dimensions of performance, but also creates a heightened anxiety and lower self-esteem because it leads to dependence on external evaluation, and performance-based standards of personal worth. MEGA is mutually exclusive goal attainment, which means I only succeed if you fail, and vise versa. This is true in competiton when it deals with sport. I do agree with Kohn's position to a point. I don't think that art class should be a competition for kids. I see no benefit in that. But when it comes to competition in sports, I believe he has it wrong. Ethically, competition in sport is not the same as competition in every day life. Sport can let competition take the athlete to a place of release in a way that it can't for every day life competition.
ReplyDeleteDecompetition is essentially the opposite of sport competition. If focuses on extrinsic values and will bend the rules because it can. Competition focuse on positive intrinsic ways to leave sport better than it was before. Competition views those rules as necessary structures to create this world of release. A personal example: hockey, again... Our coach put 6 skaters on the ice for the last 2 min without pulling the goalie. He did this to give us the advantage and to test the refs. This is not in the "pure" nature of competition. It is bending the rules and tryig to outsmart the officials. It didn't win or lose the game for anybody, but it gave the impression that that's an okay thing to do. It's in the nature of decompetition. Decompetition in this example didn't affect the motivation in the more experienced players. We all knew it was somewhat wrong and therefore didn't feel that was the "right" or best way to play the game. For newer players on the team, they saw this and thought it was the best way to do things. It was taught, indirectly, that decompetition was okay, and their motivations from then on out were "the easy way, the tricky way, the let's see how far we can get without getting caught way". So, it really depends on experience and how you were taught. One instance of decompetition doesn't make everyone participating a decompetator, but it can influence the younger ones that way.
The outcome oriented perspective regarding competition is such that winnind and losing are both required because it enables the process. For the process, Competators do want to win, but they focus more on the striving, and the uncertainty, and the play, and the part of the sport that is set up bt MEGA, than the rewards part of winning. For a decompetator, the process is more or less ignored as much as possible, and only the winning or losing aspect is important. The decompetator wants to win at any cost.
Bracketed morality refers to the world of release that sport can enter us into. You have your morals, but not the same set that you have in everyday life and everyday situations. The structural set up of sport lets the competator think more about themself or thier team than all the others around them. They get more freedom than in everyday life. The rules and the officials and coaches are there to initiate, judge, and uphold the rules that the participant is supposed to abide by. This gives the participant a lesser relative responsibility. It's "bracketed" because it's not completely withdrawn from morals of day to day life. If a moral dilemma arises that is not outlined in the regular rules of the game, the competator will up hold the moral set before insisting that it should be ignored because it's not spelled out. The decompetator will do the opposite.
I'd like to say I'm a competator, or at least mostly a competator. Sometimes I don't view my opponent as an equal positive factor. I realiZe that I could not play like I do if there were no opposing team to give good competition. I do know it feels better to win when it was a good, hard, competative game, than when we dominated because our opponents did not give good competition. I feel like it's more of a victory when the game is hard to win. I'd rather have it that way. So, I know I'm not always a competator. Sometimes I'm a decompetator, but mostly, I'd like to believe I'm the competator.
I love competing and leaving it all out on the court nd play to win. If I compete nd play my hardest and losethere is nothing you can do and thats the part of competition. You learn from it and you see how it makes you feel, and never want it to happen again. Thats what competition is all about. But when lose though I am a great sport. That is the thing about being a competitor. Not only can you be a great competitor but you can be a even better sport.
ReplyDelete1.) Kohn’s argument against competition is that is bad from a psychological standpoint as it leads to heightened anxiety, lowered self-esteem, dependence on external evaluation, and performance based standards of worth. Kohn also notes that competition is bad from a instrumental standpoint as well as a moral or ethical standpoint. MEGA stands for mutually exclusive goal attainment. I do not agree with Kohn’s argument for several reasons. How we would know what our optimal level is in virtually any setting, uncluding those outside the world of sport, without competition. Are we supposed to just imagine and day dream about optimum levels without testing them? Kohn must argue that stockbrokers are in the wrong line of work, and that it would be bad from a psychological as well as moral and ethical standpoint. His statements are not fully grounded in real life situations, as most competition occurs outside the world of sports. I agree that not all tasks should carry a connotation of competition for self-esteem issues, but I think all jobs are evaluated to how things could be done better and more efficiently.
ReplyDelete2.) Decompetition is the polar opposite of competition and mean striving against one another and not seeking to bring out the best in each other. I think the best example I can give of decompetition is when Terrell Owens has his flare-ups with his quarterback. Although, I do not know exactly what he says, it appears that winning is about going through him to achieve victory. He want to conquer others, and it would seem that T.O. would be more satisfactory with a great individual game in a loss than a poor individual game by him or his qb in a win.
3.) It motivates others to seek individual means rather than strive with one another. It works to motivate others to use the game for their own purposes and what they can take from the game. This may be monetary, media attention, or feelings of superiority.
4.) An outcome oriented perspective is playing for the result of the event, wanting to win. Process orientation mean playing for the process of the game such as sticking to the game plan, playing your role. Process involves sticking to the gameplan. Decompetition makes the outcome the only perspective, and the voids the process to victory.
5.) Bracketed morality is a playful deviation from everyday life with no real world consequences. It is a morality that allows for people to be playful in their intentions, although those playful moments may not occur in our everyday morality.
6.)I am a competitor because I like to strive with others and I like when everyone is playing well, because you usually win and have more fun.
Kohn believes that all competition is bad when it comes to sports. MEGA, this term means when one person succeeds and the other doesn't(winner/loser). I strongly disagreed with his belief, what would sports be without competition? If you're not playing to win or compete then why would you play any sports? I'm a competitor so there has to be some form of competition in order for me to play. Everything about competition gets me amped. I hate to lose so I give it my all in any competition. I can take a loss if I honestly did all I could do to win but still came up a little short. I would still show good sportsmanship even though I loss. Sports would be super lame if no one competed. I feel like this theory of Kohn applies to those who don't like to compete.
ReplyDeleteAlfie Kohn’s argument regarding competition is that it is all bad. He states that competition is not the reason for increased performance or production. It is actually bad from the psychological standpoint as well. He believes it increases anxiety and lowers self-esteem. MEGA stand for: Mutually Exclusive Goal Attainment (winner/loser). I disagree with Kohn's argument because competition brings out the best in an athlete. It makes the athlete push them mentally and physically to a level that them may not have been able to reach without the competitive nature of the sport.If the game is played right, and rules are followed, then no ethical and moral boundaries are crossed.
ReplyDeleteThe article states that decompetition effects motivation by changing the love of the game to what the game will do for you.For example, rather than playing the game because it is something that makes you happy, you play the game so that it makes you look good, because you're better if you're an athlete. rather then trying to build a legacy.
The article states that bracketed morality is simply a "playful deviation from everyday life." There are no real life consequences. If you are a decompetitor you will do whatever it takes to win. This is the wrong thing to do morally.
Because I play for the love of the game, I am a competitor. I know there will be good days and there will be bad days, but regardless I play because I want to better my skills for achieving personal goals.
1. Kohns argument against competition is that too much competition can lead to stress and anxiety. According to him it can cause dependence and external evaluation.
ReplyDelete2. Decompetition is the thought of “the love of the game” being something of the past and no longer something that is looked forward too. Sometimes at 5 in the morning when you have to go to conditioning or work outs you think to yourself, “why am I doing this?” is this fun? But in the long run it always ends up working out ok.
3. Like I said in 2 decompetition can take place and can for sure effect the motivation of an individual and team. If the desire to work hard and the love of the game is gone then the motivation diminishes.
6. If I had to choose to pick myself as a competitor or decompetitor I would defiantly say that I am a competitor. Being a walk-on on the football team I have no reason to keep playing other then the love for the game and the desire to compete.
Stress anxiety it all goes in the game, there are a lot of diffrent emotions. You have to deal with them when it comes to sport really all you have to do is center yourself and come to a peace, don't listen to the crowd focus yourself on your talent that way you are in control.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, Kohn believes that competition is bad in all forms, whether it be from an instrumental, pyschological or moral standpoint.
ReplyDeleteIt's also stated in the article that MEGA (an acronym for Mutually Exclusive Goal Entertainment) is where success in competiton can only be found by the expense of others. Where there is one winner and one loser, and the loser will suffer over time from this loss.
I don't agree that competiton brings out the worst outcome for people, I actually think it's the polar opposite and that it's a great measuring tool to use to see what someone is really made of.
I do agree with the term used to describe decompetiton as "competition that has devolved into something that is really the antagonist of the original." The word 'competition' and its root meaning is broken down in the article as being "to strive with", and that competitors should strive with each other to seek excellence. The concept of decomposition touches on Kohn's theory that to succeed your competitor must lose and fail.
An example of this is where a competitor might do something immoral in sport to gain an advantage, like taking steroids. This is going on in the sports world today, specifically track and baseball.
I think we as athletes are both "competitors" and "de-competitors." As competitors, we all strive together to be the best, and at times in competitons i've told my opponents (after the game of course) some tips on how to get better at the sport. As a decompetitor, I know I for one love to win, and sometimes you do whatever it takes in the moral boundaries of sport to come out victorious. If I have to pound away at my opponent until he gives in to defeat on the football field, I'll do that for my team and the win. playing hard and striving for excellence is both the intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for the game.
Kohn argues that competition undermines performance. His argument was based on scientific studies that state competition will make one person’s happiness based on their opponent’s sorrow. MEGA is “mutually exclusive goal attainment.” This is when one person succeeds and the other does not .
ReplyDeleteKohn feels that all competition is bad and as an athlete I would have to disagree with his beliefs. Actually I’ve been in favor of competition every since I could remember. I have been involved in sports all of my life. If it wasn’t football it was track, basketball, or baseball. I could not imagine the game without competition. It is, in my opinion, the force that makes the game fun and entertaining. Competition builds mental toughness, character, and patience.
Kohn’s argument against competition focuses on his theory that all competition is inherently bad. He believes that “competition does not lead to improved performance or production” and that it is bad from both a psychological and moral standpoint.I don't like this because i believe competition is how the worlds works you have to compete for almost everything. Competition is what makes all championships worth while if it was a drawing at the end of every season no one would really want to play. competition makes you mentally strong and can be a big part of your character as a person.
ReplyDeleteKohn's talks about how decompetion. I feel that we need competition in all aspects. in order to make this world a better place we need to push eachother to do better at everything not just sports. If we can get better at sports because of competitioin then we can get better at life itself by using competition.
ReplyDelete