[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference quark::human_relations

Title:What's all this fuss about "sax and violins"?
Notice:Please read all replies to note 1
Moderator:QUARK::LIONEL
Created:Thu Jan 21 1993
Last Modified:Fri May 09 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:133
Total number of notes:1901

11.0. "Feeling Good (for nothing)" by QUARK::LIONEL (Free advice is worth every cent) Wed Jan 27 1993 15:28

The following item by John Powers appeared in the "New England Magazine" 
section of the Boston Globe on Sunday, January 24, 1993.  I'd be interested
in people's comments and observations on what Powers said.

					Steve


Feeling Good (for nothing)
by John Powers

When I was in high school, shortly after the sputnik scare, a certain teacher
would announce the best weekly quiz grades to the class.  "And now," he would
proclaim, with mock pomp, "the highest marks among those who failed."

It was a joke them, but Americans don't seem to get it these days.  Maybe
because nobody fails anymore.  We don't even underachieve.  The only standard
that seems to matter is whether we feel good about ourselves.  Self-improvement
has given way to self-esteem.

Instead of setting exacting standards and challengung ourselves to meet them,
we've created fuzzy ones with which we get to grade ourselves and proclaim
ourselves winners.  We get to decide what "doing our best" means.  We act as
a judge, jury, and appeals court, with the right to set aside any verdict
we don't like.

Once upon a time, those verdicts were handed down by others.  You passed or
you failed.  You made the team or you didn't.  If you fell short, if your
ego was bruised by getting a D or by seeing your name on the cut list, then
you buckled down and you made it next time and felt good about yourself.  You
had achieved something worth having.

Somewhere along the line - maybe when schools started handing out social
promotions - that idea was turned upside down.  Somehow, competition became
a dirty word because it implies winners and losers, and losers need something
to feel good about.  So we name them Miss Congeniality or Mr. Photogenic.
We give them the sportsmanship award.  We add them to the honorable-mention
list.

This is Alice in Wonderland stuff.  "Everybody has won, and all must have
prizes," the Dodo ruled after the caucus race.  So we have become a nation of
"winners," our shelves lined with consolation trophies and certificates of
participation.  There is no fifth-place finisher in the Miss America pageant.
She's fourth runner-up.

If the bar is too high these days, we lower it.  We abolish academic tracking
because it makes the lower-level kids feel inferior.  We don't cut people from
teams, because their feelings would be hurt.  Or else we rig the deal.  For
years, we kept foreigners out of the Little League World Series because they
might beat our kids at our own pastime.  Now, we've fixed it so that the
Americans automatically play in the championship game.

Rigging the deal may make our kids feel better about themselves, but it doesn't
make *them* any better.  Deep down, they know what they can do and what they
can't.  The truth is, we can't give people self-esteem.  They have to develop
it for themselves.  Giving them trophies just for showing up, cushioning them
from disappointment, marking them generously on an ever-sliding scale - all
of these gestures do them a disservice.

People secretly want to know how good they are on an absolute scale.  Last
summer, when the Dream Team was taking it easy yet burying the rest of the
world by 30 points at the Olympics, their beaten basketball rivals were
actually disappointed.  They'd wanted Larry and Magic and Michael to play
all out, to win by 70 if they could.  The Croats and Lithuanians wanted to
know exactly where they stood - and how much they had to improve.

Failure can be a terrific motivator.  Michael Jordan was cut from his high
school basketball team.  Thomas Edison was pulled out of school because his
teacher thought he was "addled".  Bill Clinton was turned out of the
governor's office in 1980.  Germany and Japan, reduced to smoking rubble,
signed unconditional surrenders in 1945.  They didn't ask for runner-up
trophies.

A funny thing happens when you raise the bar.  People find a way to get over
it, once they realize it's expected.  Human beings can do amazing things -
if they're asked to.  But human nature is to do as little as necessary.  The
temptation in setting our own standards is to set it knee-high, then award
ourselves laurel wreaths for life.

But as we're finding out, to our disappointment, somebody else eventually
applies his own - higher - standard to what we do.  Harvard does, or the
Celtics do, or the marketplace does.  And they don't ask how we feel, but what
we can do.
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
11.1REGENT::WOODWARDI'll put this moment...hereWed Jan 27 1993 16:0121
    I hate to disagree with John Powers, but I feel we've progressed in
    schools by eliminating the need to "win."   During a kid's formative
    years, his/her self esteem needs as much support as possible.  Teachers
    and coaches should do everything in their power to help kids feel good
    about themselves.  I am glad to see sports such as Little League
    being replaced by sports such as Outward Bound.  Little League
    challenges person X to be better than person Y.  Naturally, there'll be
    disappointment there.  Outward Bound, on the other hand, lets the
    person challenge his or her own abilities.  To reach a little higher
    than yesterday, to go an extra step, to do something that he/she never
    dreamed he/she could do.
    
    I am sure everyone has stories about how awful they felt in school
    because they were teased about not being smart enough, fast enough, 
    rich enough, coordinated enough, tall enough.  
    
    Kids need all the credit they can get.  I'm all for eliminating
    "competition" among children.
    
    Kath
    
11.2SCHOOL::BOBBITTpools of quiet fire...Wed Jan 27 1993 17:4411
    
    I'm kinda with Kath.
    
    For me, the bar gets higher, and I vault over it again and again.
    
    It *still* feels like it's not good enough, nor will it ever be.
    
    The message was ingrained early that I can't do it, whatever it is. 
    And it's a mighty tough message to eradicate.
    
    -Jody
11.3XCUSME::HOGGEI am the King of NothingWed Jan 27 1993 19:456
    The only thing he's got RIGHT in that, is his name.
    
    I never read someone so OUT of touch with the 'problems in this country 
    today' in my life.
    
    Skip
11.4ELESYS::JASNIEWSKIWhy not ask why?Fri Jan 29 1993 10:107
    
    	Anyone see the recent TV documentary on modern methods of
    schooling? They stressed the development of the individual traits
    each child inately possessed, rather than the development of traits
    some adult deemed as "what's valuable".
    
    	Joe
11.5XCUSME::HOGGEI am the King of NothingFri Jan 29 1993 11:5915
    Joe, 
    
    Unfortunatly I didn't see the documentary... but it makes good sense.
    Every child has unique abilities and if we were to take time to
    concentrate on those skills when teaching and raising them.  Overall I 
    think we'd be in a lot better shape... less frustration and stress 
    trying to develope skills to satisfy other peoples impressions of 
    what is necessary and valuable... heck we'd even move on toward jobs 
    that would utilize our skills to the maximum and leave us feeling more 
    content in our jobs.  (I forget the statistics but an overwhelming
    number of people are doing jobs that they are not content with for 
    various reasons which boil down to feeling that the job doesn't 
    utilize their abilities or potentials.)  
    
    Skip
11.6ELESYS::JASNIEWSKIWhy not ask why?Fri Jan 29 1993 12:5518
    
    	Skip,
    
    	I'm sure you would have liked it! They implied that it was the
    schools job to find out what it was that each kid had as an inate
    ability, and put time and energy into nurturing it, so each kid
    would end up with something for themselves that they knew they were
    "good at".
    
    	This is in contrast to running each child through a "mold machine"
    and having them come out with various levels of ability across only
    one set of curricula. There might be a kid that's terrible at reading
    and writing and math and sports - but put a *trumpet* in her hands
    and she can play any melody once she's heard it.
    
    	Now I dont know anyone who's like that, but it's that kind of thing.
    
    	Joe
11.7Turn it around!!COMICS::SUMMERFIELDWalk on sunny side other side wetFri Jan 29 1993 15:0918
	I believe that Mr Powers has it *totally* the wrong way
	around!!

	If you feel good about yourself then you can achieve 
	amazing things - I used to have no self respect and
	whatever I tried was always a complete disaster.  I
	always knew it would be before I even started...  So
	I made it come true, thus reinforcing the belief that
	I was useless....  But I've worked on that.  I now 
	believe in myself and now when I just decide I want to 
	do something I just get on with it without even 
	thinking if I can or can't - and I'm pretty gobsmacked 
	at some of the stuff I've achieved.  I'm quite amazing,
	really!  


	Julia
11.8DSSDEV::RUSTFri Jan 29 1993 15:2117
    Weeellll... while I don't think the article in .0 expressed it very
    well, my first take on it was that it espoused more honesty; that is,
    don't go telling all the kids that they're excellent ballplayers if
    they're not. Now, that's a very different thing than trying to play up
    a kid's strong points, or to teach kids to value all sorts of different
    skills rather than just being good at sports or getting good grades,
    etc. To that degree, I agree with .0 - it does nobody any good to be
    given the same "that's fine, dear" smile for every single thing they
    do.
    
    I certainly agree with others here that the emphasis on competition is
    often too strong, too pervasive, and misplaced. But I don't think that
    there should be NO absolute comparisons of skill - just that excelling
    (or failing) at one thing should not be taken as an indication of a
    person's overall worth...
    
    -b
11.10Worf "Then why keep score?"CSOA1::HOLLANDI *AM* the bass playerFri Jan 29 1993 16:0924
    I'm in agreement with most of the replys.  To tell someone that they
    are great compared to the greatest is a lie if they aren't. To tell
    someone how much better they did this time over the last time is
    goodness.  Maybe what people need to compare with is their own past
    performance.  We usually are in the biggest competetion with ourselves
    if there is enough self-esteem.  When we give a damn about a sport,
    project or whatever, we want to do "our" best and hope that it's better
    than the rest.  When we get recognition for our efforts, our self
    esteem increases.  The biggest killer of creativity is zero
    recognition.  Even negative recognition is appreciated - observe
    troubled children.
    
    On a Star Trek episode Worf was participating in a competion and could
    not understand why the humans liked it only for the fun.  He shut them
    up by asking the question "Then why keep score?"
    
    In real life there are winners and losers.  Our challenge is what do we
    do next?  How many times did Thomas Edison "lose" as an inventer?  Why
    couldn't Einstein tie his shoes in grammar school and why did the
    teachers think of him as stupid?
    
    IMHO.....
    
    Dave
11.11XCUSME::HATCHOn the cutting edge of obsolescenceFri Jan 29 1993 16:1123
    I guess I'm not in to the touchy feeling stuff, because I agree with
    the author of the article. It is a disservice to let kids and adults
    rest on their laurels thinking they are as good as anyone else. Let's
    get real, when it comes to certain skill sets we are not all created
    equal. What is so wrong with admitting that?

    I remember getting picked last at gym classes, was I worrying about my
    self esteem, I don't think so. I learned how to be competitive. I
    yearned to be one of "those people" that where the best. Had I been
    rewarded for my inferior attempts, I'd have had no motivation to become
    better. Is it any different in the "grown up" world?

    When everyone on the team is praised in equal portions, how do the
    player who are better feel? They feel like they are wasting their time
    trying harder. The team need not be sports, think about work too.

    By evaluating people against each other, they can know where they stand
    and what they could improve on. With that lesson needs to come the
    lesson that perhaps this isn't their strong suite. Teach the child that
    their strengths may lie elsewhere.

    
    Gail
11.12Hey! It works.REGENT::BROOMHEADDon't panic -- yet.Fri Jan 29 1993 17:057
    In the TV special alluded to, one interesting fact was presented.
    
    If a child is given the time to do something s/he does well and likes
    (and there is a strong correlation between the two), the child does
    better in her/his other studies as well.
    
    						Ann B.
11.13PASTIS::MONAHANhumanity is a trojan horseSun Jan 31 1993 09:1916
    	The school attitude here is completely different. The exams are
    designed to discriminate. A good exam has half the children getting a
    score of 50% or below, and 50% or below is regarded as failure. Maybe it
    lessens the impact if 50% of your colleagues are also failures.
    
    	The parents also are fiercely competitive. My 13-year old daughter
    gets a couple of hours of homework per day, but at the parent-teacher
    meetings the French parents are always demanding more, particularly if
    their child is in the less than 50% group.
    
    	For my daughter it works well. She made it into secondary school at
    the age of 10 (normally 11), but a boy the same age as her who used to
    live next door is still at primary school. He just seemed to give up on
    school work five years ago, and doesn't seem to have had much help. My
    daughter needs the challenge of being in a class a year ahead of her
    age group, but he needs real assistance.
11.14WAHOO::LEVESQUEPsychic Steroid AbuseTue Feb 02 1993 18:5524
 I tend to agree with the opinion expressed in the basenote, though I do find
value in what some of the dissenters have to say. I personally consider the
deemphasis on competition to be detrimental to many, myself included. Some
people require competition to perform at their best. Without a need to push
one's limits, it is frequently easy to simply float along and underachieve.
Unfortunately, this attitude carries over from academics to business, to
the collective detriment of our companies in the world market. We are satisfied
with mediocrity.

 When mediocrity is not accepted, it is abandoned in favor of impressive
achievement. Witness the inner city school where AP calculus was taught to
average students to such an impressive degree that the college boards people
believed that the students were cheating. They weren't cheating, of course, 
they were rising to the challenge.

 DEC itself has been satisfied with mediocrity for too long, and those
birds have finally come home to roost. We are now finding that quantum
leaps in achievement are possible, since we didn't push ourselves for
so long. It took a serious financial kick in the pants to get us moving
in the right direction, and stopping at this point would be devastating.
Like it or not, we'll survive as a company only by doing it better than
our competitors. The same goes for our nation. It's about time we realize 
this and put this knowledge to work for us instead of watching our
competitors bury us alive. 
11.15A New World Order?CSOA1::HOLLANDI *AM* the bass playerTue Feb 02 1993 19:407
    Did everyone notice how our auto industries have come along and
    produced better cars? Even though most cars are either duplicate drive
    trains and different shells / full of "world" parts?
    
    Things that make you go "Hmmmmm"
    
    dlh
11.16XCUSME::HOGGEI am the King of NothingTue Feb 02 1993 20:1167
    Okay I've read along enough... and enough is enough.
    
    Compitition is NOT a solution to a problem.  A need to achieve is.  
    
    ANd there is a BIG difference and neither one can replace the other.
    
    To force a competitive nature on a child is bulk horse manure... to 
    instill a need to achieve the best to their potential is not only 
    something a child needs to learn, but it's something that the previous 
    note should consider as the 'answer' to the automobile. 
    
    It is not in sports, or anywhere else the desire to achieve ones best 
    comes from... it is not in putting oneself against the other.  It is in 
    measuring ones OWN abilities and then pushing a little harder.  
    
    Maybe I should explain it differently... compitition is crap.
    
    I'm not interested in the guy next to me.  I could care less if he's 
    better or worse then me at say running a 100 yard dash.  Because I'm 
    not any good at running a 100 yard dash.  I might be more interested in
    if I could improve with practice my time at the 100 yard dash.. but 
    not if I have to continually run against that guy next to me.  I don't 
    like to humiliate myself against another person in something I couldn't 
    care less about.  
    
    Now if you want to put him up against me on glass engraving... I'll 
    teach him things he never knew.  But that's only because I have an 
    interest in glass engraving.  
    
    I can ACHIEVE my best potential in glass engraving... I'll never
    achieve any potential in running 100 yards.  
    
    Why?
    
    Simple enough.... I had some minor leg problems as a kid, I couldn't
    run very well... and was humiliated by other kids because I was LAST...
    or at best middle in running.  Never got any praise for it... more like 
    I got picked on for it instead.  
    
    BUT.............
    
    I learned to draw on my own... I was born to it... from it I developed 
    an interest in art, and eventually learned to engrave glass with a hand 
    held diamond point.  At 16 I was as interested in scratching glass as 
    other kids were in playing football (a running sport to my mind).  
    
    I received HIGH PRAISE for my drawing skills, from the moment I first 
    took a picture of a squiqqly line to my parents through to the present.
    I've ALWAYS been praised for my skill.... then one day, I realized that 
    I was GOOD... suddenly I realized that I was not only GOOD but with a
    little learning and studying I could be BETTER... Hell, I could be
    BEST.  I don't need to enter compititions for my abilities, I KNOW I am 
    good.  I strive to ACHIEVE the best I can do.  I don't compete have no 
    desire to compete and could care less about competeing with anyone else
    in it.  
    
    A child who is praised in those areas that he is good at, desires to 
    achieve more in those areas... to learn and improve his skills, not out 
    of some wierd desire to compete against the world or to judge himself 
    against someone else, but out of a desire to achieve the best he can.  
    
    I'm sorry, I don't agree with the guy... in my book he might be on 
    to something, but he's running along on the next track over.  
    
    
    Skip
    
11.17Competition is necessaryCOMET::COSTAGetta Grip, dude.Wed Feb 03 1993 01:0219
    
    Good, better, best? The need to compete is still in you Skip. See the
    previous words. Even if the competition is in your mind with yourself,
    the need to compete, even if against yourself, was learned from
    competing with other in venues that you may have not been good at.
    
    I see nothing wrong with being supportive and nurturing to children for
    the first 4-5 years they ar ein school. Let them develop and find a
    niche that they enjoy, are good at, etc. Then as they get older, allow
    them to compete with those skills in whatever fieled it may be that they
    feel they excell. If they fail, then they move on to other fields,
    realizing that what there are other things they may be better at, as
    Skip illustrated. If he had been any good at running foot races, he
    probably never would have chosen to excell in glass etching. No he has
    a nitch with which he can compete with anyone who choses the same
    field.
    
    TC
    
11.18Trophies for WINNERS!MYOSPY::CLARKWed Feb 03 1993 03:4924
    Agree TOTALLY with the basenote. I am not sure at what time the system 
    developed where even losers get trophies but it sure cheapens the
    trophy in my eyes. Trophies are for winners, NOT losers. Kids play
    sports because they WANT to, they WANT to compete, they WANT to WIN,
    not lose. Part of my little league/high school baseball experiences
    was learning how to lose even after giving it your best. It's what
    used to be referred to as the school of hard knocks and/or a lesson
    in life. A few years ago I went to a Little League game in quite 
    a big-money town and was appalled to see the so called league champions
    with kids in the outfield who couldn't even catch an easy fly ball. My
    friend explained that it was so their feelings wouldn't be hurt if they
    did not get to play outfield. Seems to me the humiliation in missing
    an easy fly ball would be much worse. I laughed out loud about it. The
    coach we had made us run so many laps for missing fly balls he thought
    we should have caught and laps for not getting down in front of
    grounders. Hey, which would you rather do, run laps or get down and
    take a grounder in the chest if necessary. And, sensitive ones, we were
    out to WIN. MUCH better than losing. This everyone's a winner crap has
    unfortunately carried over into pro sports. Now we even have loser's
    shares in the World Series and the Super Bowl. Let's really tighten up
    the desire to win in the Series and Super Bowl.  Here's my plan: Each
    player puts up $50,000 of his own money into a pool and it's winner
    take all. Bet that would increase the old competitive spirit quite a
    bit. Trophies for losers? Don't make me puke.
11.19XCUSME::HOGGEI am the King of NothingWed Feb 03 1993 11:3341
    Re.18
    
    I NEVER played sports because I wanted to... I HATED playing sports
    and STILL do.  I'd rather read a good book, then go out and get 
    slammed in the middle,hit by a ball, run, jump or anything else.
    I excercise to stay fit, and that's enough for me.
    
    Re.17
    
    No I don't compete, I improve.  Again, a big difference.  
    
    
    Don't misunderstand, I don't necessarily believe trophies should be 
    handed out non-discriminatly... BUT, I see no harm in recognizing the 
    kid that makes to every game without fail for doing that, nor do I 
    see anything wrong in recognizing the most improved kid, so long as 
    the recognition is legitamite I see nothing wrong in Trophies being 
    handed out.  The so called "Good Sportsmanship" is a catch, I don't 
    buy it.  But if the kid supports his team, and works hard at it, I 
    think he's intitled to a little recognition for it...  He has enough 
    disappointments comming to him in life, I don't see the harm in his 
    learning that if he works hard at what he does, he'll get recognition 
    for it.  
    
    No I still disagree alot with what is said in .0  I don't believe 
    compitition is the answer or problem... 
    
    I think self pride and individual achievement are.  I can't see how 
    crushing a person's self esteem by 'suggesting' that they aren't any 
    good is going to give them a desire to compete and improve.  The only 
    thing it ever did for me was make me go look somewhere else for
    recognition.  The thinking being "I'm a failure at it, why bother going 
    further."   IF I had been given some encouragement instead, maybe I'd 
    have persued it more.  But agressive compitition?  I don't care what
    the other guy does.  So long as I'm doing the best I'm capable of, and 
    manage to learn from it so that I can improve my own skills and
    abilites, then the only thing I care to say to the "other guy" is 
    "Go away and leave me alone."  (Unless of course he's teaching me
    something.)
    
    Skip
11.20WAHOO::LEVESQUEPsychic Steroid AbuseWed Feb 03 1993 11:4022
>    Maybe I should explain it differently... compitition is crap.

 "Crap" or not, it is intrinsically part of the human experience.

>    Now if you want to put him up against me on glass engraving... I'll 
>    teach him things he never knew. 

 Now wait a minute. On the one hand you claim that competition is "crap,"
in the next breath you boast that competing on your terms in the activities
you choose will provide you with a forum to demonstrate the superiority of
your abilities. That is the very nature of competition. 

>    A child who is praised in those areas that he is good at, desires to 
>    achieve more in those areas... to learn and improve his skills, not out 
>    of some wierd desire to compete against the world or to judge himself 
>    against someone else, but out of a desire to achieve the best he can.  

 This is not universally true. Many people will not push themselves unless
the occasion warrants it. Some people require competition to inspire them
to achieve.

 The Doctah
11.21WAHOO::LEVESQUEPsychic Steroid AbuseWed Feb 03 1993 11:421
 So, Skip, you've never exhibited your glass engravings at a craft fair/show?
11.22QUARK::LIONELFree advice is worth every centWed Feb 03 1993 12:3533
The main message I got from the article was not that "winning is the only
thing" or even that "competition is good" (though I believe the author
agrees with the latter,) but rather "accepting mediocrity is bad".  Or,
as Charles Osgood so delightfully put it, "pretty good just isn't good enough."

When we tell our children that they're "winners" for just playing the game,
we send two very bad messages.  The first, for those who don't do very well,
is that there's no need for them to try harder, as what they've done is good
enough.  The second, for those who do well, is "it's not worth trying harder".
Both of these messages are extremely damaging, perhaps not to the self-esteem
of the mediocre, but to the children's ability to survive in a real world 
that doesn't hand out prizes to all.

Those of you who say you overcame obstacles in your youth to excel; would
you have done so if you were patted on the head and told "That's ok, being
a C student is good enough"?

It's certainly possible to go overboard; many parents are disappointed when
their child brings home anything less than absolute perfection, and this is
extremely harmful.  But what I see more and more is that we are becoming
a mediocre society (in the US at least, not so in many other countries.)
We graduate high-school and even college students who can't balance a
checkbook or read at a 6th grade level.  The schools are now moving away from
"ability-based grouping" to "heterogeneous grouping" where everyone is
encouraged to be average and the child who is able to do better is stifled
because nobody wants to take the time to challenge her.

I believe we should pay less attention to making everyone feel good and more
to getting everyone to do the best they can.  Experiencing failure is part
of the way we learn.  Let's not become a society with permanent training
wheels.

					Steve
11.23WAHOO::LEVESQUEPsychic Steroid AbuseWed Feb 03 1993 13:071
 Exactement!
11.24XCUSME::HOGGEI am the King of NothingWed Feb 03 1993 14:2665
    Re.21
    
    Yes I have, with the sole intent of recouping the moneys spent on them
    with a minor profit to improve on the materials I use for the hobby.
    
    Someday I'd like to make it a sole business venture with which to
    support myself... unfortunatly the economy is bad for such to happen 
    just now.  
    
    This isn't out of a desire to compete it's out of a desire to clear out 
    the stock pile and do something I enjoy that pays for itself with
    enough extra money to purchase more and better equipment for it.  
    
    (Among other things, I need a good glass band saw which are extremely 
    expensive to own and operate, the blades on a very small one run 
    $80.00 apiece because they're diamond impregnated.)  
    
    If I compete it isn't out of a need to prove myself better or worse,
    it's because in todays business market a string of 'successes' are 
    necessary to improve your standing in the eyes of the purchaser.  I'd 
    rather they simply look at my work and judge it for it's own merit.
    
    In response to the statement of 'competing' by showing someone things 
    in the craft... I don't see where my teaching someone my skills is 
    considered 'competition'.  
    
    I guess what I'm trying to say is that I don't agree with the
    statements given in the article because I don't feel that teaching 
    compitition is the answer... I think that pride in one's skills and 
    abilities are.  I don't think we as a society should push a need for 
    compitition to show that we have the skill and abilites desired for 
    the skill... we should simply be able to show the skill and let the 
    person who is interested in the skill decide if it meets the needs 
    they have or not.  
    
    In other words instilling a need for competion isn't the answer, 
    instilling a pride in owns skill to the point that the person is 
    learning as much as possible around that skill for it's own sake
    and curiosity, using the knowledge and practicing it with the desire 
    to improve oneself in that skill set... that's where the answers lay.
    
    THe desire for competition can be pushed to far.  I rather graphic 
    example would be the begaining scene of "The Last Boy Scout" where 
    the desire to win the touch-down reached the point where the player 
    pulled a loaded gun and shot down the opposing team.
    
    I've seen real examples that border on this 'succeed at all costs, beat 
    the competition attitude'  
    
    It's scary to watch a kid who's desire to win at "red rover" is so 
    overpowering that he doesn't stop until he breaks another kids arm.
    
    Or during a soccer game he 'accidently' kicks the opposing team member 
    in the knee hard enough to put the kid out of the game.  
    
    The 'competition' drive becomes so great that the kid starts cheating
    to win.  
    
    Nope you won't convince me that 'competition' is going to cut it.  
    Dishing out unearned rewards may not be the answer either, but
    recognizing worthwhile attributes and skills, giving an award for it 
    is a different story.  So long as the awards are real.
    
    Skip
    
11.25XCUSME::HOGGEI am the King of NothingWed Feb 03 1993 14:307
    Steve,
    
    I agree with the way your presented your comments.... 
    I think you've presented some of what I wanted to and was trying to say 
    in an excellent manner.  
    
    Skip
11.26HDLITE::ZARLENGAMichael Zarlenga, Alpha P/PEGWed Feb 03 1993 23:4612
    Anyone ever see Stuart Smalley's Daily Affirmations on Saturday Night
    Live?  Yes, Virginia, there really are people like that in the world.
    
    I happen to agree with Mr. Powers (the author of the article in .0).
    
    It may feel good to convince yourself that "I am good, I am important"
    for no real reason at all, but it's just one big self-delusion.
    
    Without accepting when you fail and when you aren't good and aren't
    important, you can't really appreciate those times when you are.  It
    may not be pleasant to admit when you've just made a big mistake or
    when you really are insignificant, but it's honest.
11.27XCUSME::HOGGEI am the King of NothingThu Feb 04 1993 12:234
    Just out of curiosity, how old is Mr. Powers of the article/speech in 
    .0?
    
    Skip
11.28QUARK::LIONELFree advice is worth every centThu Feb 04 1993 13:445
Re: .27

I have no idea.  Why?

	Steve
11.29XCUSME::HOGGEI am the King of NothingThu Feb 04 1993 15:486
    Well, if he's the right age, it might be worth noting that HIS
    generation is the one raising the generation he's complaining about.
    
    Which would fill me up with just ALL kinds of quesitons.....
    
    Skip
11.30CCAD30::LILBURNEso much to learn ...Thu Feb 04 1993 23:169
I did not agree with the article in .0 and empathise with those who in some of
the earlier replies argued against it. However the .26 reference about being 
honest made me think. I am sure we've all met the person who thinks the world 
of themselves but who is actually a *real* pain in the butt. That person is not 
facing up to reality about themselves. I find this difficult to fit into
my tendencies against the article.  

Linda
11.31XCUSME::HOGGEI am the King of NothingFri Feb 05 1993 11:1327
    There is nothing wrong in feeling good about yourself.  (Isn't that 
    what self esteem is all about?)  But, the secret to it is to find those
    things WORTH feeling good about.  People who think the world of
    themselves but are a *real* pain in the butt fall into a slightly
    different catagory.  Self esteem is not Self Delusion... going back to 
    my glass engraving... I *KNOW* I'm good at it, but I've never felt that 
    I was so good at it that I couldn't afford to listen to someone else
    about it, try to learn something new about it, or when asked, pass on 
    information about it.  I've taught it to a couple of people, and
    they've developed their own level of skills at it.  Like drawing
    everyone has certain aspects of it that they can be good at, (One
    person is fantastic at monograms and lettering, something I do okay, 
    but won't ever 'brag' about doing and even try to avoid doing if I 
    can.) I'm good at doing animals in general at cats and birds
    imparticularly.  
    
    There really is nothing wrong in feeling good about something you ARE 
    good at, it's a different matter if you are deluding yourself and 
    convincing yourself that you're good at it but not.  
    
    I can effectively point out every error made on any one of my glass 
    engravings.  I pay as much attention to them as I do those parts that 
    are absolutly perfect.  Why, I don't know, maybe to keep it all in 
    perspective.  
    
    FWIW
    Skip
11.32A Question of BalanceBROKE::BNELSONFloating, falling, sweet intoxication!Fri Feb 05 1993 20:39138

    	This article *really* rubbed me the wrong way.  And I think it did
    so in so many dimensions it may take me a bit to sort them out.  My
    blood is roiling and the passions are flowing...that's my way of saying
    this might become long-winded.  ;-)


    	On the issue of settling for mediocrity, let me just say that I
    don't believe it is right for *me*, in general.  If I achieve a certain
    level, and I *want* to do better, then I must do several things:  first
    accept what I've done without reproach or remorse; second, look at why
    I achieved what I did, and try to figure out what I could do
    differently to achieve better; and lastly, set about the task of
    attempting to do better.  Always realizing that I may in fact never
    achieve as high as someone else or as high as I'd like; but it's not
    the end goal that's important, it's that I continue to try.


    	However, this is MY choice!  This may not be right or appropriate
    for someone else.  We cannot appoint ourselves judge and jury for
    everyone else.  For goodness sake Mr. Powers, take care of yourself and
    allow the rest of us the same luxury.  If someone wants encouragement,
    then by all means give it; but do take care *how* you give it.


    	For I believe there are *ways* to encourage someone -- and most
    especially children -- to do better.  Ridiculing them in a public forum
    (as in a classroom setting) is NOT the answer.  If they have good self-
    confidence, they *may* react positively and work harder; but for
    someone who is lacking this in the first place it will only affirm the
    belief that they can't do better.  But whether the individual reacts
    positively or negatively, it is *wrong*.


    	Mr. Powers says that "Americans don't seem to get it these days."
    Last I knew, Americans were actually rated one of the highest -- if not
    THE highest -- productivity-wise in the world.  I heard just the other
    day that our productivity jumped 2% (in the last quarter or year, I'm
    not sure which) -- the highest jump in 20 years.  That's the American
    worker I'm speaking of; management, well, that's something else again.


    	When will our achievement be good enough for him?  And who set him
    up as having the end-all scale to judge by?  What incredible arrogance.
    When all is said and done, each of us must judge our achievements by
    ourselves -- not by what someone else says.  You can't really compare
    people in an apples to apples comparison, because we're so different --
    what may be easy for me might be difficult for you, and vice versa.


    	I think what's important is to have a direction in life and to
    always keep moving in that direction, always trying to improve.  But
    don't be obsessive about it, and certainly don't rate yourself
    according to what people like Mr. Powers say!  If you do, you're just
    setting yourself up to fail.  Sometimes, little steps must be taken
    before big ones can come; and while these little steps may seem very
    small and trivial to others, YOU'LL know just how big they are.  That
    they are important to you, and you feel good for having taken them, is
    all that matters.


    	Mr. Powers is right about one thing:  we cannot give self-esteem to
    others.  But we CAN show them, especially if they're children, HOW to
    get that self-esteem for themselves.  And I don't think Mr. Powers'
    method is the right one.  Self-esteem only comes from within; it can't
    be given, and neither can it be derived by pointing out that we
    achieved better than someone else.  Yes, Mr. Powers, WE DO get to act
    as "judge, jury and appeals court".  This is the way it must be.


    	This need to compete in the global marketplace reminds me of the
    arms race.  Where does it end?  When will our achievement be good
    enough?  If it keeps on like this, it will never end.  And we'll have
    more people growing up miserable and unhappy; but we'll be competing
    better in the marketplace so it's okay (he says with thinly veiled
    sarcasm).


    	And like the arms race, I think there will come a time when people
    will wake up and realize they can't keep it up.  Strive hard, yes;
    compete to the exclusion of everything else in life, no.


    	I was shocked recently when I heard that commercial that said the
    average American's vacation has dwindled down to 4.something days.  Who
    says we're not working hard?


    	Don't get me wrong, some level of competition is good.  But you
    have to know where to draw the line.  When I step onto a volleyball
    court, I'm not competing against my teammates, nor against the other
    team.  I'm *really* competing against myself.  Can I do this thing?
    Will I be able to do that thing?  I go out, give it my all, but when I
    walk off the court if I know in my heart I did my best then I'm happy.
    And I sincerely thumb my nose up at Mr. Powers and others of his ilk.


    	Mr. Powers says that "People secretly want to know how good they
    are on an absolute scale."  If they do, I feel sorry for them.  What a
    miserable existence they must lead, to always wonder if they're as good
    as the person next to them or on the other side of the fence.  I suffer
    no such insecurity (for that is what I believe it is).  If I do my
    best, and I know in my heart I did everything I could, that is enough
    for me.  It doesn't matter what arena in life it is.  To wonder if
    we're better or worse than anyone else is simply self-deprecating and
    energy uselessly spent.


    	I would be willing to bet that Mr. Powers is of the previous
    generation, for they were raised with many of these tenets.  Actually,
    my generation was too but little by little we're learning to throw off
    the yokes suffered by previous generations.  I do not hate Mr. Powers,
    he cannot help how he was raised nor when he was raised; but I abhor
    many of the things he attempts to trumpet from his lofty perch.


    	More positively, I believe we are just entering a new enlightened
    age.  An age where sensitivity to others is the norm and and not the
    exception.  An age where people who are raised in a harmful
    environment, or simply an environment full of out-dated ideas (as in
    the ideas espoused by Mr. Powers), find out later that they don't have
    to live their lives as their parents did.  Maybe -- perhaps -- there's
    a better way.  An age where caring about and helping others is at least
    as important as how we rate in the global marketplace.


    	Clearly, in a world filled with violence, abuse, and domestic
    outrage we have not gotten very far into this age.  At this point it is
    probably only one small candle -- a tiny beacon of light by which we
    navigate the stormy, wind-swept waters around us.  But as a moth is
    drawn to flame, so is our path irrevocably drawn to this flicker of
    light.  The old ways have failed us; they must make way for the new.



    Brian

11.33MR4DEC::MAHONEYTue Jul 27 1993 20:4935
    Marriage is not "as DJ describes it" at all! take it from a woman who
    has been married, "happily married" for 29 years... I should know what
    I am talking about! Believe me, don't bring kids to this world in your
    situation... I can almost guarantee that your "marriage" has a very
    short life and there is no guarantee that your babies will have the
    house, the home they are entitled to...
    
    As .1 pointed out, you had a wedding, (social affair) not a marriage. 
    For what I can see in your entry you were, are, attracted to each other
    and love each other, but you are NOT in love, that is clear.  For a
    marriage to last through thick and thin you need to be REALLy in love
    with your spouse, only then you can withstand any difficulty, any
    problem, any change, anything that life brings along... and you take it
    all because you are fulfilled, with full support from your spouse and
    those changes, difficulties, etc do NOT threaten your future because
    you KNOW that your future, whatever it is, will be acepted, shared, by
    your partner and that means being together...
    
    Society has made us choose to marry at a certain age, to do things we
    ARE supposed to do like choose a family, but honestly, you cannot
    choose a family! Life chooses you and put you in the path of the right
    person for you, (some people are lucky to find their 'right' halfs,
    others aren't, and they keep on trying and trying, the sad thing is
    that mistakes do hurt)
    
    If you see statistics, children are so often the sufferers of our
    mistakes... (and they are the ones that don't have a choice.) If you
    are reservations about having kids... DON'T have them till you are
    ready, when you are... you'll love it!
    
    I wish I had a magic solution to improve your marriage but I don't,
    it takes a lot of give and take, (more "give" than take) to adapt, to
    make a marriage work, I don't know how, I only know that you must LOVE
    your spouse and give anything, go anywhere, and take whatever it takes,
    to be together and enjoy together... and grow old together! 
11.34GRANPA::MWANNEMACHERNRA fighting for our RIGHTSThu Oct 12 1995 13:209
    
    
    What I rell my kids is that they should be proud as long as they did
    their best at an activity and that with practice they can get better if
    they are having trouble in an area.  There are extremes to both sides
    of this issue.  I think that the secret is finding balance between the
    two.
    
    Mike