Metaphysical Musings-#2 Competition
Birth in India guarantees one thing that Indians have most likely faced : “Competition”. A simple Google search yields this — “Competition is the activity or condition of striving to gain or win something by defeating or establishing superiority over others”. The definition in itself instills the gain of one over loss of many as you “gain or win something by defeating others”. While this does crudely capture what competition is, but it’s nothing but depressing to define it in this way.
When you read that “defeating others” part your fear of falling onto the “other” side [losing side] of the competition immediately causes you to feel the pressure. Many people say — “Competition is good”. My reply to all those people is — “It’s easier said than observed.”
Let me explain :
Competing requires you to first choose a “game”. But choosing a “game” requires you to know something about it. Here’s the catch! There are many who commit a mistake at this level itself. More often than not many choose the wrong “game”. This can happen if they succumb to their surroundings or if they form a wrong idea about the game. This further leads us to two cases :
1. When the person fails to cross the initial few layers of competition.
2. When the person crosses the initial layers of competition and reaches a stage where going back is not an option.
Situation 1 is favorable for the person if one considers it in the right way i.e. it gives him/her another chance to look back and reflect. And change his or her “game”. This time, with a better understanding of oneself. But again, in many cases it is seen that people get depressed and often choose to move with the flow even when they have an option to change the path. This is very common in the Indian scenario where one choose to feel “safe” and stay on the most trodden “path”. Sadly, these (most trodden) paths are also the paths which have seen most dreams get eventually crushed. Let me tell the harsh truth :
“Being on the statistically optimal path doesn’t guarantee a happy ending”
Situation 2 has been partially explained in the latter lines of Situation 1 wherein a person crosses the point where the options to go back or change tracks exists. It’s just like disturbing a system in meta-stable equilibrium beyond the safe limit.
So how should one choose the “game” ? I would suggest anyone to stay in that sweet “meta-stable” state. It’s evident from the diagram that meta-stability is the most optimal state. This is because you’re neither in equilibrium or in a transition stage. It’s a “state of stability which is open to changes”. The meta-stability guarantees the achievement of an equilibrium someday. Until then you keep improving and going through those tough “transition” stages in between.
Well said, but when will one come to know that equilibrium has been reached? It’s simple! Here’s the catch :
“You know you are getting closer to that equilibrium where you have less frequent transition states.”
So competition is good, but only when you are in the “right” game or you’re not too deeply involved in the “wrong” game. At the end of the day, it is the person who chooses it : whether to compete in something or not. It is usually very hard to stay in that “meta-stable” state due to compulsion, pressure or fear of failure. But, it is those few people who dare to follow their immediate interests and if required, change tracks after failing or realizing their mistakes are the one’s who get closer to the “equilibrium”.
And what helps them realize that the “game” they chose was wrong or right?
“Observing and Analyzing the Competition”
And for those who are wondering why I did not discuss about the “field” ?
The “field” is in general, automatically decided by the difficulty, type and other characteristics of the “game”.
