Competitiveness

[apathy maybe]

Humans are competitive! At least according to economic right wingers. It means that they want to be able to compete with one another in such things as spouses and work. Now if true, this competitiveness could well be channelled into 'good works', such as who can be the first to build a wall. Or it could be that humans are only competitive in some things.
Either way, I think that this should not stop us from building a fairer society.
(Humans are not a 'blank slate' at birth, there are many things that are 'hard wired' into them. These include such things as part of a persons intelligence potential (not all, just part), and if they are likely to be gay or not. This 'hard wiring' may happen in the womb, be a result of genes, or just a part of 'natural instinctive'.)

[ComradeRobertRiley]

I say "bullshit!"


Maybe its just me but I have and never have been competetive or have any desire to be competative.

[New Tolerance]

actually, social pyschology studies has indicated that competitiveness has something to do with culture. In the western world there is a low of cooperation (opposite of competition). Japan has the lowest level of cooperation. There are cultures with extremely high levels of cooperation, but unforunately those are all dying cultures such as the rural Mexicans and West Coast Indians.

[Rasta Sapian]

do you think that the trait of competitiveness could have been increased in certain people's instinct's by evolving in distinct geographical locations of the planet for hundreds of thousands of years where the lack natural resources ie: food combined with emerging tribes dependant on survival, could in-turn affect a modern day person's competiitve nature? :huh: :)

[@[email protected]@]

Competitiveness and the cooperation all is humanity's social attribute. Emphasis competitiveness comes from humanity's natural instinct is one-sided. This is has the necessity thorough research very much the topic. Has the necessity indeed very much¡£ :rolleyes:

[DEPAVER]

Competitiveness of this sort is a learned behavior.

A biologically driven predisposition to human behavior (gathering food, sex, finding shelter) is not the same as "human nature." The argument has always been that human nature prevents any successful anarchist society. The human nature that is pointed to is "need for authority," hierarchy, greed, competitiveness, desire for leaders. No one has ever demonstrated that these characteristics are inherent, genetically determined behaviors.

Humans do indeed have genetically determined behaviors: fear of falling, suckling, sex. These are exhibited by infants. Behaviors not exhibited by infants, including language, are learned from the dominant society. In
language acquisition, infants make all sounds possible then stop making sounds that are not reinforced by their society. The same is true for all learned behavior. Therefore, the behavior observed in authoritarian,
centralized, hierarchical societies is learned within that society and is not genetically determined.

An anarchist society is a group defined by free association, decentralization in politics and economy, anti-authoritarian decision-making, non-hierarchical social organization. There is nothing inherent in genetically determined human behavior that guards against such a social organization. In fact, such social organizations have been attempted in the past, most notable Barcelona during the Spanish civil war, and have functioned quite well until overthrown by external military force.

Since human beings lived for tens of thousands of years in decentralized, non-authoritarian societies before the development of state society and capitalism, one cannot claim that human nature prevents the development of such a society today.

[apathy maybe]

nice post!