Persuasive Essay On Winning

Alfie Kohn’s article “The Case Against Competition” describes the consequences that can result from extreme competition. He writes that, “Competition is to self-esteem as sugar is to teeth.” In this quote, the author is trying to say that competition damages self-esteem in the same way that sugar damages teeth. That is partially true, but sugar is only unhealthy when you have too much of it and when you don’t properly care and look after your teeth. Sugar is actually important because it provides our body with important energy so as long as you consume a reasonable amount and have good oral hygiene, there is no problem. The same concept would apply to competition; it’s only detrimental if there’s too much and you’re not properly looking after yourself. Everything, and I mean everything, is unhealthy if there’s an excessive amount of it, but that doesn’t you can’t have anything that could have a negative consequence. If that were the case, people would never do anything because of the small risk of something going wrong. Yes, there is a risk to everything but generally speaking, most things help you more than they hurt you. For instance, we need water, but drinking too much water will literally kill you. We need sunshine because it has vitamin D, but overexposure to sunlight will cause skin cancer. Does that mean we should stop drinking water and not go outside because it can hurt us if there’s too much? No, of course not. The key is moderation. Having too much or too little of anything is not good for you, but you can avoid hurting yourself if you just find the right balance. Given these points, competition is only bad for a person if there’s an overwhelming amount of it, but nothing will go wrong with a reasonable quantity of

Alfie Kohn states that “competition by its very nature is always unhealthy” and has written an essay opposing the concept. There are various examples of competition in the world today, from sports that the world watches on television, to spelling bees children in elementary and middle school participate in. Competition is a part of our daily lives whether we’re aware of it or not; however, it does have its disadvantages that leads me to support Kohn’s opinion.

By participating in competitive sports at an early age, kids develop life skills to help them with this dilemma. They learn that when they see others being successful, that it is due to the hard work they put in and not just by chance.

In an age where everyone is expected to be recognized, there must be an understanding that the world does not progress by congratulating the “average.” I believe that giving participation trophies makes people stop competing; especially if the trophies are given at a very early age. For example, a team of small children have a terrible baseball season, but it’s okay! Because the coach gives out trophies to everyone. This in turn only teaches the child that no matter how bad life gets, they will always be rewarded. Participation trophies create future generations of entitled adults as seen by today’s generation. We need to reward kids that work hard for what they do for the sake of risk and reward. That is simply how progress is made in society. Yet I agree with one point made by the opposing side. I believe that participation should be recognized sometimes. Participation can teach kids that teamwork matters in every little aspect of society. Participation trophies should be eliminated but participation should still merely just be recognized with a pat on the back as said by Betty Berdan, a high school junior from Connecticut. Participation trophies overall hinder the growing and learning process of kids; whether it is through sports, or any other competitive involvement.

We as a people are preoccupied with the notion of greatness. Our role models are athletes, actors and actresses, and other figures in the public eye. Many of us often desire to be better off than our current state; to look better, to be in better shape, etc… We compete with each other for jobs, for mates, for grades, for parking spots, and in sporting activities. This competitive nature is a way of life, especially in sporting activities, often learned as a child and built upon throughout adulthood. But where do you draw the line? At what point do the “costs” of winning or being “better” outweigh the benefits? Maybe it’s too much when you start putting your own health in serious jeopardy

The champions of the 2015 NCAA March Madness Tournament were Duke University Blue Devils but they were not the real winners: the NCAA truly won. The NCAA is a “non-profit” organization which is “...dedicated to safeguarding the well-being of student-athletes and equipping them with the skills to succeed on the playing field, in the classroom and throughout life.” (NCAA.org). The NCAA regulates college sports, enforce rules and organize college sporting events. The NCAA more or less performs as a professional league’s governing body would do except one major thing, paying its moneymakers. Now is the time to pay college athletes because most live under the poverty line, the NCAA has enough money to, and the athletes are being taken advantage of.

Rewarding winning has been a part of human society from the beginning, we give the spoils and riches to the winner and higher bidder. While the loser finds they might need to practice a little

1. Yes, the main purpose of going to competitions is to get the best score and get first place. But in reality, I believe being successful means striving for greatness and motivating one another to their full potential.

Athletes get trophies and there is a debate over whether athletes should get trophies for participation or for winning. All trophies do is sit there and collect dust. Participation trophies just remind people of how terrible they did that year or season. Participation trophies are stupid because the professional sports committee agrees, because of how it makes kids want to only play for the trophies and because they are unnecessary and pointless.

In Hannah Pandels’s article, Healthy Competition is Good for Children, she makes the statement that it, competition, is a necessary and essential part of our society today. This article was written partly in response to numerous other articles stating the opposite but one was singled out. The American author Alfie Kohn. Now this fits into the childhood development debate that has been ongoing lately regarding the theory that today’s kids are more entitled to things and have less problem solving skills then previous generations. With that back ground she begins to vocalize her thoughts regarding the issue. Her thesis is clear, it is in the title for goodness sakes, that competition is a normal part of growing up and it is essential to the proper development of children. She states “competition breeds excellence” (Pandel) this simple statement engulfs the

Some people, such as Vince Lombardi, argue that the win is all there is. They say it motivates them to do well and will help them reach their

Source: CDC, National Center for Health Statistics, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Health, United States, 2002. Flegal et. al. JAMA. 2002;288:1723-7. NIH, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in Adults, 1998.

Do you have a passion, something you love to do more than anything? Imagine people trying to stop you from doing what you love because they think it’s not useful or a waste. Some people say competitive sports cost too much and they are way too dangerous for young kids to participate in. However, for many youth, competitive sports play a positive role. When kids play competitive sports, they are happier and they learn how to be healthy. Also, they learn life lessons that they will need for the future.

Having escaped rule from a tyrannical British government, the United States was founded on ideals of freedom and equality for all people. These fantasies of universal egalitarianism turned out to be merely that: fantasies. American history is full of stories of the oppressed struggling to get the rights they deserve and of the controversy over these issues that consequently ensues. “The Hypocrisy of American Slavery” by Frederick Douglass and “We Shall Overcome” by Lyndon B. Johnson are two speeches made confronting two of these issues. Douglass’s speech, delivered in 1852, condemns the institution of slavery and maintains that slaves are men and are therefore entitled to freedom. Johnson’s speech, on the other hand, was written in 1965 and discussed the civil rights movement. In it, he implored local governments to allow all American citizens, regardless of race, to vote. Despite the significant gap in time between these two addresses, both speakers use similar persuasive techniques, including ethos, pathos, and parallelism, to convince their audience that change needs to be implemented in America.

If a survey was made asking every person in the world whether they would rather lose or win, a resounding number of people would not think twice about it. They would pick winning over losing every time. Why would they not? Winning has many benefits: the feeling of beating a rival is full of enjoyment and pleasure; it also makes you feel great because you exceeded at something and beat it; winning also makes a person feel more powerful as if they can accomplish anything. Overall winning seems to be far greater than losing; however, there are many greater benefits in losing. To start, losing is far better for a person than winning; it makes a person stronger and makes the fight harder for the times ahead; after losing time and time again, when you finally get that win it feels so much sweeter; lastly there are far greater things than just winning.