What do we have for loosers? Interesting question to dwell upon. How many winners have you ever seen in your life I am sure you can count them on your fingers. So the world is full of loosers, that means a handful of winners rule the rest of the loosers., hence Pareto’s analogy is perfectly valid.
It has been professed by many that winning is the name of the game, but then if we have so many loosers out here. Obviously there is an inherent fallacy in this argument, as only a handful can be winners and the rest are branded as loosers. So if we take a representative sample of the society then loosers outnumber winners. So not all people can be winners although everyone aspires to be (baring a few exceptions yours truly included). So winning is a dream and loosing is a reality, in other winning is a myth or a mirage.
Consider a hypothetical situation when we donot have success (read winners) then one can argue that life would become boring and mundane. This argument is again based on the “product-process” assumption of life and success would have more weightage for people who lay more emphasis on product. After all in this game there are winners who can be counted on fingers and even in their life success comes towards the end. The so-called (or shall we say self-proclaimed) winners also loose and interestingly they loose most of the time in their life, but attain the title of a ‘winner’ through their few successes.
Ramana Maharshi professes that “Success develops arrogance and the man’s spiritual progress is thus arrested. Failure on the other hand is beneficial, in as much as it opens the eyes of the man to his limitations”. Further he says Defeat is nothing but opportunity lost in disguise so it should be welcomed. I fully subscribe to his views. Although winning could be a driver however it would be detrimental to neglect losses.
The point being if we have so many loosers and very few winners who loose most of time then why cant be rename the game as “Loosing”. Lets change the paradigm to “Loosing is the name of the game”.
Aski “De Lusser” “De Casta”
Current Music : Jo Jeeta wahin sikandar aur jo hara woh hai bandar !!
Current Mood : Cranky
It has been professed by many that winning is the name of the game, but then if we have so many loosers out here. Obviously there is an inherent fallacy in this argument, as only a handful can be winners and the rest are branded as loosers. So if we take a representative sample of the society then loosers outnumber winners. So not all people can be winners although everyone aspires to be (baring a few exceptions yours truly included). So winning is a dream and loosing is a reality, in other winning is a myth or a mirage.
Consider a hypothetical situation when we donot have success (read winners) then one can argue that life would become boring and mundane. This argument is again based on the “product-process” assumption of life and success would have more weightage for people who lay more emphasis on product. After all in this game there are winners who can be counted on fingers and even in their life success comes towards the end. The so-called (or shall we say self-proclaimed) winners also loose and interestingly they loose most of the time in their life, but attain the title of a ‘winner’ through their few successes.
Ramana Maharshi professes that “Success develops arrogance and the man’s spiritual progress is thus arrested. Failure on the other hand is beneficial, in as much as it opens the eyes of the man to his limitations”. Further he says Defeat is nothing but opportunity lost in disguise so it should be welcomed. I fully subscribe to his views. Although winning could be a driver however it would be detrimental to neglect losses.
The point being if we have so many loosers and very few winners who loose most of time then why cant be rename the game as “Loosing”. Lets change the paradigm to “Loosing is the name of the game”.
Aski “De Lusser” “De Casta”
Current Music : Jo Jeeta wahin sikandar aur jo hara woh hai bandar !!
Current Mood : Cranky
7 comments:
Why not start losing deliberately so that you always remain out of the race? It is all about you then.
You ask What do we have for loosers?
I'd rather ask what do we have lusers for?
You know, aprox. answer to the right question ...
Interesting thoughts PEA ... i guess if u remove the competitive part of the life ... it become you and only you .. but dont u think in such a case .. individual wud become more vanity consicious n in thou's own words it is a sin ... so then remove competitive element but not become inward looking is the right answer i suppose ... wat say dude .... cheers
"Know thyself."
Or do you disagree with the oracle?
Getting subjective now.
I like things in which it is you and ony you. I dont like spectator sports at all. skating, cycling etc. and not cricket and footer.
I would like to be an archer some day. Just my bow and arrow and me alone . away from the maddening crowd. I can keep on upping the level and compete with myself and it wouldn't ever end. when you compete with others what would you do when you are the best? you know what steffi graf said while quitting? "I am tired of winning"
I am saying you should be inward looking but not too much. It is good to compete against oneself it may help you realize your potential but you should be introvert altogether, you understand what i mean. If you are too inward then you become obssesed with yourself and it becomes vanity. Steffi Graf saying it at the end of her career is understandable but it should be generalized i think. Cheers
Nice thoughts....but do ya think we really need to measure relatively and brand ppl as "winners" and "losers"...dude i have seen enuf of this relative measurement to realise that in the end......real " winner" is one who is satisfied by his effort but not one measured by comparing his and others' achievements
So many factors unaccounted for...and at the end how conveniently you gave all the credit to winner. My take on this game of winning/losing is different...khel khatam paisa hajam....sounds too familiar but this is the entire philosophy. Satisfy your senses, amuse yourself either by competing with others or yourself but don't carry the result home. Does losing hurt your ego? Who are you after all? Meaninglessness personified...a dot in this infinite void of nothingness. How does it change you after all?
@ Dad:
Your simple analysis awesome but then i am always talking in achieving personal goals in personal frame of reference ... i think u misunderstood my analysis .. the idea is you can be a looser in your frame of reference also .. isnt it ... and it is more important in that context if you look at it ... and wat i m saying is we loose more often than we win .. so why are we trying to chase victories .. live life as a "process" and not as a "product" ... thats the point
Post a Comment