The No Contest Paradox

(An earlier draft of this comment appeared in my blog on Friday, 7 March 2008.)

Although I expect to learn much from the book, when I started reading No Contest: The Case Against Competition by Alfie Kohn, I chuckled about one aspect.

In my reading of it, so far I interpret Alfie Kohn as expressing himself in an implicitly competitive way!

When he expresses his disagreements with others, it seems to me that he argues.

In this context, by arguing I don't mean merely reasoning logically. I mean declaring oneself right and others wrong.

I don't think that Alfie Kohn remains aware of this. But it struck me as funny because he sets out to make "a case against" competition. Yet by my standards, in doing so, implicitly he engages in competition!

I still feel hopeful about what I take to be his thesis. I take it that by Kohn's standards, competition qualifies as a far less than optimal strategy by means of which for human beings to interact.

Even so, all this draws my attention to something that on many occasions I've mentioned to Cherita. I've told her that if I never "argue" again, it will be too soon. I'm sick and tired of arguing.

Because of my conviction in 1) the continuum of truth satisfaction 2) the continuum of value judgment and 3) the suboptimal quality of moralistic judgment, I vastly prefer passionately compassionate dialogue to "right-wrong" argument.

I look forward to writing more about these distinctions in the near future.