Winners and Losers in the Game of Life

[questor]

A game is a contest between two or more people. The purpose of the game is to determine who can win by exhibiting better physical or mental skills. The game has rules and limits of time and place. Games also have a reward. The reward can be a gold medal, money, or just the satisfaction of

besting an opponent. It is human nature for you to feel GOOD when you win, or BADLY when you lose. Whatever the game, you must train and prepare your body and mind to be the best you can be. There is no other way, and

sometimes the preparation can take years. Those who do not train and prepare will almost always lose to those who do.

You and I and everyone else are playing the game of Life. This is a game that all humans MUST play. As in all games, there will be winners and losers. It is your choice as to which group you will belong. The rules are the same for all players and the time constraints exist for all.

Winners do not win every time, but if they lose they will continue to attempt to improve their performance. They know if they work longer, harder and smarter, they can become better.

Losers do not want to do the work, they give up easily. They exude negative energy, belittle the accomplishments of others, blame others, and refuse to recognize the rules neccessary to win.

All human endeavors can be looked upon in this light. The rules are the same for a business, football team, student, or farmer. They are the same for the winner as they are the loser. Each of us has twenty four hours a day. What you do with that time, the choices and effort you make will determine if you are a winner or a loser at the game of life.

[Donk]

And then there are those who are cursed with empathy.

 

If I win, I feel for the loser. Sometimes I deliberately throw the game - I feel better than if I'd bested my opponent, therefore I "win". It all depends on your definition.

 

Our civilisation has been built by a combination of competition and co-operation. With no competition - stagnation. With no co-operation - war.

 

It's quite possible to live a long, happy, profitable life without "besting" anyone else. A good business deal is one where both sides gain: the vendor would rather have the cash than the product; the buyer would rather have the product than the cash.

 

If you measure a man solely by his bank balance, you're missing some very important clues as to how successful he is at the game of Life. :)

[ChunTzu]

And then there are those who are cursed with empathy.

 

Cursed with sympathy. Blessed with empathy?

 

To me, sympathy would only serve to reinforce the class/social/level difference between winner and loser. I work to lose because I'm winning and I feel sorry for you.

 

Empathy is more like I work with you so that we both don't suffer the consequences of winning and losing. (TEAMWORK! :))

 

These are subtle, but important, differences.

[freeztar]

It is your choice as to which group you will belong. The rules are the same for all players and the time constraints exist for all.

 

I understand your point Questor, but I think you are generalizing too much. What about people born with deformities? What about really unintelligent people? What about children who are molested and tortured throughout their lives? What about the mentally insane? What about those kids that were locked away in the basement in Belgium? etc. etc.

For all these extreme cases, there's a lot more less-extreme cases that exist throughout the world.

 

There are many people who start out, or land, at the bottom of a very slanted playing field. It is not level across the board. :)

[modest]

A belief that we are connected as one people. If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It's that fundamental belief — I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper — that makes this country work. It's what allows us to pursue our individual dreams, yet still come together as a single American family. "E pluribus unum." Out of many, one.

 

-Candidato a Presidente

 

~modest

 

:) And in this endless race for property and privilege to be won

We must run - we must run :)

 

PS: you don't have to hate Americans to love America

[modest]

And then there are those who are cursed with empathy.

Cursed with sympathy. Blessed with empathy?

 

Blimey, must be that sodding British sarcasm... barmy I tell 'ya (or is it balmy:confused:). :)

 

~modest

[ChunTzu]

Blimey, must be that sodding British sarcasm... barmy I tell 'ya (or is it balmy:confused:)

 

i c wut u did thar

[Zythryn]

A game is a contest between two or more people. The purpose of the game is to determine who can win by exhibiting better physical or mental skills.

By your analogy, for each winner there must be a looser. I disagree with this when it comes to life. Why can't everyone win? No, it isn't easy, but it is a competition against oneself not against your fellow man.

 

those who do not train and prepare will almost always lose to those who do.

Hmmm, I would agree if you said 'more often than not' rather than 'almost always'.

For example, anyone born in a third world country could work hard all their life just to survive, while someone born in a more developed nation will be virtually guaranteed a much higher standard of living.

 

You and I and everyone else are playing the game of Life. This is a game that all humans MUST play.

Agreed.

As in all games, there will be winners and losers. It is your choice as to which group you will belong.

Disagree, it is not always as easy as that. Luck has a significant role to play.

 

The rules are the same for all players.

Completely disagree. Starting conditions vary dramatically. People also don't treat everyone the same. And different societies treat people differently as well (a woman in some countries has no chance for education where in others she has equal education opportunities).

 

This is a surprisingly over generalized stance which seems to have little basis in reality.

[questor]

The RULES are the same for all players. I did not say the playing field is the same. You have handicapped, injured, mentally challenged or physically challenged. No two people are equal. This doesn't mean that the challenged

cannot be winners in their own game, which is to develop what they do have to the best of their ability. Winners don't always come in first, but they have an attitude of positivity and continue trying. Contrast that with the negative attitudes of losers. You have friends and aquaintances who are winners and some who are losers, you can tell who is which. Which person would you rather be with?

[freeztar]

Ok, that's better. :)

[Zythryn]

Better yes, but I still disagree.

Some people get to 'skip ahead' in the game. Others have additional obstacles placed in their way.

I agree that those with good attitudes and a good work ethic will do better than those without given the same playing field.

I just don't see a boy born into a wealthy upper class family in the majority having the same 'rules' as a girl born into a poor homeless minority family.

Opportunities for higher education are not even for everyone.

[HydrogenBond]

There are many games and not all people are designed to be optimized for every game. The tall person has a better chance winning at basketball than as a jockey. The light person has a better chance winning at the marathon than someone who is naturally heavier.

 

The game of life is often defined by culture as to what it considers important. If one's natural propensities match the cultural rules it is easier to win. In a military society a peaceful person is a loser since they can't be competitive by default. Among terrorists the inability to kill civilians makes you a loser. A capitalist can be a winner in a capitalist culture but may not do as well in a strict religious culture.

 

Democrats and Republicans fight over the rules of the social game of life so each can optimize culture for themselves so they can win. One likes bigger government or more referees and regulations in the game so the rules shift who is optimized and also place rules to take away optimization of others.

 

The game of life is itself a game of who can alter the rules so they are the ones who are optimized. If you can't change the rules, then birds of a feather flock together for optimization. If your flock is big enough you can change the rules for everyone so your flock is even better optimized. But this makes another flock less optimized so they become the losers.

[questor]

What are the differences in the rules for the wealthy?

''I just don't see a boy born into a wealthy upper class family in the majority having the same 'rules' as a girl born into a poor homeless minority family.''

What were the rules for Oprah Winfrey?

 

''Opportunities for higher education are not even for everyone''

Is there a law against educating yourself? Can you go to night school while working? Could you accumulate credits over an eight year period rather than the usual four? Could you work two or three years to make some money for your education? Have people ever done this?

[Zythryn]

What were the rules for Oprah Winfrey?

Since you have to ask does that mean you are under the impression the rules are different for Oprah Winfrey?? Which, is exactly my point, rules are different for different people.

 

Is there a law against educating yourself? Can you go to night school while working? Could you accumulate credits over an eight year period rather than the usual four? Could you work two or three years to make some money for your education? Have people ever done this?

 

Of course there is no law against educating yourself. All I am saying is that the rules aren't the same.

And no, I don't believe everyone has EQUAL access to education. Yes, some can take the time and are willing to make the superior effort in order to get their education. And I applaud those who do.

But you can't possibly argue that it is as easy for a kid who has his college, medical school and internship paid for by his parents to succeed as it is for the kid that has to work full time to make it through community college?

[questor]

The rules are the same for Oprah and for Bill gates. Their equipment is different. Sorry you're having trouble with this concept. Winners say.. I can do it! Losers say..It can't be done!

I didn't say the playing field is level. It isn't, and the game is not played with the same equipment, but the winners have the same attitudes and the losers have the same attitudes. If you want to succeed, would you pattern yor life after a loser?

[pgrmdave]

The game of life doesn't need to be a zero-sum game. There do not need to be any 'losers', unless you are merely calling a 'loser' anybody who is not at the top of whatever particular metric you are considering. If I am happy, I increase the happiness of those around me. If I am unhappy, I decrease the happiness of those around me. If I am wealthy, I can increase the wealth of those around me without losing wealth (I make improvements to my home - my home increases in value and the people who worked on it increase their wealth directly). There is no reason to assume that the game of life has either winners or losers, but merely that it has players.

[questor]

I agree with what you said until here:

''There is no reason to assume that the game of life has either winners or losers, but merely that it has players.''

There are losers everywhere. Examples:

1. People who will not use what talents they have

2. Drug addicts

3. People who think society owes them a living.

4. Career criminals, murderers, felons

5. Negative personalities

6. People who consistently make bad life choices