3 ms·

The assumption that "competition [...] is an important part of everything that life touches" seems at least as questionable.

aloisdg 4y ago
Indeed and was questioned by Peter Kropotkin in his essay collection Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, which argued that cooperation, not competition, was the driving mechanism behind evolution. He would go as far as theorizing a whole kind of organization around this.
- ixtli 4y ago
  Further he was famous while he was still alive amongst scientists for his writings on this topic. It wasn’t until later that he became an icon of the Mutualist / Anarchist movements.
- Jensson 4y ago
  Competitive evolution is seen everywhere, from plants evolving poison to deter animals from eating it to foxes evolving to hunt rabbits and rabbits evolving to avoid foxes. Cooperative evolution is definitely a thing, but you can't say that competition isn't a massive part of evolution.
ixtli 4y ago
It was roundly disproven by many schools of naturalism in the 19th century. The notion that competition is somehow inherent to life is convenient to justify zero sum games but not observable, especially within a single species. Peter Kropotkin was famous during his life as a scientist because of how rigorously he demonstrated this.
- goatlover 4y ago
  Capitalism isn't a zero sum game, and competition along with cooperation has existed throughout human history. Even with eusocial insects like ants, there is still competition with other colonies. Lions and hyenas are cooperative in their prides/packs, but they certainly compete for food and territory with each other.
  - v-erne 4y ago
    >>Capitalism isn't a zero sum game Maybe at this moment not, but I suspect that it has tendency to become one (when the tempo of inequality increase surpass increase of total wealth)
  - mordae 4y ago
    You confuse capitalism with trading. Capitalism tends to monopoly and no amount of regulation can fix it, because politicians can be bought or coerced given enough cash.

aloisdg 4y ago

Indeed and was questioned by Peter Kropotkin in his essay collection Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution, which argued that cooperation, not competition, was the driving mechanism behind evolution. He would go as far as theorizing a whole kind of organization around this.

ixtli 4y ago
Further he was famous while he was still alive amongst scientists for his writings on this topic. It wasn’t until later that he became an icon of the Mutualist / Anarchist movements.
Jensson 4y ago
Competitive evolution is seen everywhere, from plants evolving poison to deter animals from eating it to foxes evolving to hunt rabbits and rabbits evolving to avoid foxes. Cooperative evolution is definitely a thing, but you can't say that competition isn't a massive part of evolution.

ixtli 4y ago

It was roundly disproven by many schools of naturalism in the 19th century. The notion that competition is somehow inherent to life is convenient to justify zero sum games but not observable, especially within a single species. Peter Kropotkin was famous during his life as a scientist because of how rigorously he demonstrated this.

goatlover 4y ago
Capitalism isn't a zero sum game, and competition along with cooperation has existed throughout human history. Even with eusocial insects like ants, there is still competition with other colonies. Lions and hyenas are cooperative in their prides/packs, but they certainly compete for food and territory with each other.
- v-erne 4y ago
  >>Capitalism isn't a zero sum game Maybe at this moment not, but I suspect that it has tendency to become one (when the tempo of inequality increase surpass increase of total wealth)
- mordae 4y ago
  You confuse capitalism with trading. Capitalism tends to monopoly and no amount of regulation can fix it, because politicians can be bought or coerced given enough cash.