Timeline for Is winning/competition inherently unethical?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 28, 2022 at 11:33 | comment | added | Jim stoke | but because competition is dramatized and exaggerated in sport, where it is publicly reinforced and approved, the characteristics of competition are best seen in sport." | |
| Mar 28, 2022 at 11:33 | comment | added | Jim stoke | As he sees it, competition is a vice, the very antithesis of cooperation - a virtue.21 For him, competition is intrinsically immoral it is selfish and egoistic; it involves treating others as means or as obstacles thwarting one's victory. Further, the consequences of competition are harmful; in aiming for success, competitors view their opponents as enemies, and focus on winning by whatever means possible. Sports may not hold a monopoly on the 'win at all costs syndrome' nor on the harmful effects of competition | |
| Mar 28, 2022 at 11:32 | comment | added | Jim stoke | @JohnWu Thanks for your comment. The reason I suggested "harm" was that beyond possibly causing direct harm, the paper that made me question competition as virtuous described it as inherently treating the other side harmfully by treating them as means/objects/enemies. "One of the most controversial features of our society is competition. It is condemned by Marxists, championed by capitalists, deemed a necessary evil in education, and is necessary to and dramatized in sport. Alfie Kohn argues that competition is bad both psychologically and morally. | |
| Mar 28, 2022 at 7:19 | comment | added | John Wu | Clearly, I [am] causing the other party "harm" by winning That is not clear to me at all. It'd be one thing if you were gladiators fighting to the death, or poker players with your own money on the line. But a job interview? If they don't get the job, that takes nothing from them, only denies giving them something that they want. If they want $500 from me, is it unethical for me not to give it to them? Even if it would really help them out? I don't think so. At least, not the same way as taking $500 from them, which would be an actual harm. | |
| Mar 27, 2022 at 18:41 | answer | added | E Tam | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 26, 2022 at 20:41 | comment | added | J D | Not if people operate in a competition with consent. The social contract, for instance, dictates that we may lose a competition for a job, but that interviewing is better than plundering and raiding. | |
| Mar 26, 2022 at 15:54 | answer | added | SonOfThought | timeline score: 1 | |
| Mar 26, 2022 at 12:10 | comment | added | Futilitarian | Is it you causing harm to the other party? Or is the harm caused by an established system in which you likely must participate in order to find employment? Or is it some combination of both? If free will is assumed for a moment, perhaps the level of responsibility you acquire is proportionate to the degree of free will you are able to exert in the process of maintaining a reasonable quality of life for you and your family. (All these points assume certain obvious goals, of course). | |
| Mar 26, 2022 at 11:20 | answer | added | Michael | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 26, 2022 at 5:51 | review | Close votes | |||
| Apr 1, 2022 at 3:01 | |||||
| Mar 26, 2022 at 3:49 | comment | added | causative♦ | What is ethical is what leads to a better functioning society (according to your chosen measures of end results, such as happiness/health/productivity/education/discovery/empowerment/etc.). Does competition lead to a better functioning society? Whatever your definition of "better functioning," the answer to that question is "yes." We can't even imagine a society without any competition at all. Even in a centrally planned society, some people would be better suited to some jobs than others, and should get them, to the detriment of some of the others who wanted those jobs and did not get them. | |
| Mar 26, 2022 at 0:47 | history | asked | Jim stoke | CC BY-SA 4.0 |