Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Grouping to compete

  1. Aug 19, 2004 #1
    Everything that everyone does is ultimately rooted in
    the self preservation of ones interest and values. In
    other words, everything that everyone does is selfish,
    in that the choice or action is taken to maximize a
    person’s interest and or values, culminating in a
    reward. One can be seen as a Saint, as in the case of
    Mother Teresa, for their apparent sacrifices made
    on behalf of others. However, the actions of Saints
    are equally as selfish as those of callous sinners.
    The only difference being their hierarchy of values
    and subsequent rewards based upon choices emanating
    from those values. This all works to the benefit of
    the first law of nature, which is self preservation.

    Now that we have established a selfish motive for
    everything humans do, we must note the fact that
    humans are a socially and economically interactive and
    interdependent creature. Thus, it is the norm that our
    interests are often at odds with the interest of other humans, while in concert with the interest of yet others. This invariably leads to the creation of competition and
    alliances whose ultimate functionality is the
    promotion and success of individual member’s shared interest.

    If two or more males have an interest in one alpha
    female, the natural resultant is a competition. If two
    separate population groups expand to the borders of
    the others territory, then a competition will result
    over the land, because it is the land that is
    providing the individuals from both groups the ability
    to survive.

    In light of all this, it should be fairly obvious as
    to why we humans affiliate ourselves with groups. Everyone is part of some group, either by choice, by birth or by both. These groups then often become a way for
    individuals to compete with other groups for the goal
    of maximizing the individual interest of its members.
    The reason being is that there is strength in numbers
    and individuals often can further their individual
    interest more effectively by joining with those of
    similar interest and or needs. Also, an individual, by
    virtue of birth and or choice, may be a member of
    several different groups, some in conflict with
    others. In such a case, that individual will rank the
    memberships in order of their ability to promote
    whatever the individual values most.

    Our group memberships are a strategy designed to
    promote the offensive and or defensive needs of
    individuals against other competing human groups whom
    we feel either threaten us or have something that we
    covet. Consequently, we divide ourselves by nations
    and borders, religion, political systems, economic
    systems, political parties, ethnicity, race, tribe and
    far lesser affiliations, mostly for the purpose
    competing for the actualization or preservation of our
    interest as individuals, which are shared by the

    More often than not, our interest and values are
    learned. Often we simply inherit them from our
    families, communities and nations. It is often part
    and parcel with socialization and acculturation via
    emulation. Thus, more often than not, interest and
    membership becomes self perpetuating through birth.
    However, people do break the mode of their
    environments training, but it is generally an
    exception to the rule. Also, propaganda from a
    powerful source can shape individuals beliefs and
    values, by appealing to certain emotions that triggers
    the need to become offensive or defensive to another

    Not all groups are morally equivalent however. As I
    mentioned before, some groups arise as a defensive
    reaction to offensive actions by other groups. The
    black struggle or the Pan African struggle cannot be
    viewed in the same moral light as the Aryan or
    skinhead movements. The former being the defensive
    reaction to centuries of offensive racial oppression
    and attacks from others, while the latter being a
    movement to preserve the status gained from past
    offensive attacks against others. In other words, one
    is a movement to defend and uplift itself up from
    inferior treatment and status, while the other is a
    movement to preserve itself as a privileged superior
    entity in juxtaposition. In spite of this huge
    difference, people often try to draw a moral
    equivalence between the two.

    One does not have to be a proactive member of a group in order to receive the benefits or detriments of group membership. There are many whites who are not proactively white and offensive or defensive toward now whites. However, that does not mean that these whites do not enjoy the benefits created from past and present group activities. Indeed, the true test of character can only truly be measured during stress. Thus, many whites who are not proactive in white membership may become so if the point in time comes where they see their selfish interest not being meet due to the rise of another race that it sees a threatening to its previous superior raking and lifestyle.

    So, are these groupings and competition a good thing?
    Yes and No. In nature, competition or resistance
    produces advancement, through adaptation, mutation and
    evolution. Thus, the absence of competition produces
    stagnation. Hence, it can be argued that this division
    and competition is actually advancing humanity (via
    exploiting and harming humanity). However, “too” much
    competition becomes destructive and ultimately
    threatening to humanity. Therefore, competition needs
    to be infused with its opposite phenomenon, which is
    cooperation, in order to create the proper and most
    efficient equilibrium for humanity.

    Cooperation requires placing a high value on
    collective interest. In order to increase the value on
    collective interest of humanity, the trade off must
    come from reducing the value and emphasis placed on
    individual interest. The only way that this can be
    done, since humans can only be selfish beings, is to
    convince the masses that it is ultimately in their
    best interest to do such, if they are interested in
    the world that their descendants will inherit in the
    future (fat chance?).

    Ultimately too many competing groups (the natural
    consequence of promoting individualism) and not enough
    cooperating groups will sink humanity. A key aspect of
    cooperation is that those with the most need to help
    promote those with the least, in order that they can gain the ability to compete. However, it must be recognized that such threatens the absolute and relative status of the elites, who can currently only remain elite via the existence and juxtaposition with those with less, in a relative world.
  2. jcsd
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Can you help with the solution or looking for help too?
Draft saved Draft deleted