"Competition is ultimately more beneficial than detrimental to society."
Darwin suggested that the process of evolution is one based on competition. This deadly competition weeds out the weak and only the fittest of the species survives. Humans, being the product of millions of years of evolution, are by nature, competitive beings. Yet, humans are also social beings. Like the bees in the hive, we are not very successful living completely on our own. We need to cooperate with other individuals for our survival. Thus, a conflict ensues, between our innate competitiveness, and our need to cooperate. There are pros and cons associated with both. However, it is my belief that overall, competition, is more detrimental than beneficial to human society.
First, let us try to identify why there is competition in the first place. In an environment abundant with resources, where supply outstrips demand, there is very little need for the inhabitants to fight with each other over them. This is not the case on planet earth. Resources are limited, and there is constant jostling to get to the front of the queue to get acquire them. For example, thousands of prospective students apply to gain entrance to top universities around the world, but there are only a handful of places in those
universities. Thus, there is competition to get into to these hallowed institutions of higher learning.From a utilitarian perspective, competition is a good thing. In evolution it is responsible for the elimination of "weak" genes. In the business environment, it gets rid of the weaker players. In politics, it weeds out unpopular candidates. In academia, it gets rid of weak students.
Furthermore, competition leads to self improvement. Businesses will strive to offer better products and services at lesser prices. The consumer reaps rich rewards from this competitive spirit. Politicians strive to do the utmost for the people, so they would get reelected. Students excel in there studies, trying to outdo each other.
Thus, ostensibly, competition is responsible for the betterment of the society as a whole. However, this is just the superficial view. Underneath the surface, competition, in every aspect, is slowly eating away at the very fabric of the society.
While it is true to say that competition in corporate world has brought great benefits to the consumer, the society as "Missed A here"whole is playing a great price for it. Most businesses are exploiting cheap labour in the third world to maximise their profits. There are thousands of sweatshops run by well known western corporations in countries like Indonesia, Bangladesh and China. People are forced to work in squalid conditions, often 16 hours a day. They are lucky to receive a dollar a day for there labours. The moment a government in any of these countries try to improve the working conditions of the employees, these multinational giants flee the country, often leaving whole communities facing financial ruin. The corporations are aware that there are plenty of other labour markets that could be exploited with gay abandon.
That is just the human cost. What about the environmental costs? Competition has forced many corporations to "stream line" their operations. Environmental standards are normally the first victims of this "stream line" process. A significant amount of environmental pollution and land degradation has been blamed on industry, yet the factories keep producing more and more. Thousands of items go unsold each year due to competition. Only a fraction of this merchandise is recycled. The rest goes to the already overflowing landfills.
Although innovations such as video，computers，and the Internet seem to offer schools improved methods for instructing students，these technologies all too often distract from real learning.
Nowadays there is a growing concern about the role that innovations have played in the field of learning. While most people think that innovations benefit learning process in various ways，different opinions arise that these technology advancements actually distract students from real learning. On balance，according to my personal observation，whether innovations can be beneficial or detrimental to real learning depends on the students and the teachers，not on these innovations themselves.
To begin with，technological innovations do help teaching and learning in various ways.With the aid of these technologies，the process of teaching and learning can be shorter and easier than before. For instance，if a student want certain published papers of an academic discipline，he/she may look through considerable catalogs to find the ones he/she needs. However，with the help of Internet innovation，at present most of these papers are published online. Consequently，to find certain paper the procedure is much easier and shorter， the students just type the key words and other information of the paper，and then the system will search the database，and the papers are there waiting for them. As this new approach can save a lot of time for the students，he/she could have more time reading the papers and absorbing the knowledge rather than checking and looking for the papers that could be a waste of his/her time. This example aptly illustrates how technology advancement benefited the students and their learning process.
Secondly，while innovations can help learning in various ways，it is more important that the central role of the pursuit for knowledge and wisdoms are maintained. What real matters is not the approach but the purpose of learning. In India，where modern technologies are less applied to the learning process than in the US and other developed countries，still a lot of distinguished students achieved their academic goal with their hard work and desires to knowledge. In the US，where the software engineering students are given the most advanced facilities and apparatus for their learning and research，however，it is wildly accepted that they are far less outstanding compared to the Indian students of software，who may share computers in groups. From this comparison we can see that the real and core push of learning is the desire for knowledge，not the help of innovations.
In addition，if not guided properly，the technology advancement might inhibit learning.In other words，innovation can distract the students from real learning than helping them. It is obvious that a computer can help students of science to calculate mathematical equations but can also be used for recreation such as net surfing or computer games. It is highly possible that these students can spend more time and energy on recreations rather than learning when using a computer. Thus，learning is inhibited. Under this circumstance，guidance and restrictions are needed to ensure the right use of innovations for learning，or the consequence may be on the contrary to the students and teachers' desire.