乐播传媒

Competitive mindset is a losing proposition, argues sociologist Francesco Duina

Americans are among the most competitive people in the world 鈥� but they鈥檙e far from the happiest. And that鈥檚 no coincidence, as Associate Professor of Sociology Francesco Duina explains in his new book, (Princeton University Press). He talked with staff writer Doug Hubley.

What inspired the book?

Various things. Seeing Michael Jordan flashing his fingers, minutes after winning his fifth NBA title, indicating that he鈥檇 go after No. 6. The first lines in the movie Cars 鈥� 鈥淚 eat losers for breakfast.鈥� George Bush鈥檚 insistence on 鈥渨inning the peace鈥� in Iraq. The book challenges the assumption that most of us share: that winning is a worthy objective in and of itself, and we should avoid losing at all costs.

Instead, I argue that there is much more behind our desire to win besides simply wanting victory or avoiding loss. We鈥檙e looking for things like differentiation from the crowd, proof that we鈥檙e right, a sense of space, even looking for our place in the world.

This worldview sounds like an addiction.

Each big win leaves an emptiness that craves another win. We鈥檙e not cognizant of what we鈥檙e really after. Why do we care so much about Indiana winning the basketball game against Illinois? What鈥檚 in there for us? We need to discover what we鈥檙e really after as we compete, and it takes some introspection. We don鈥檛 have to justify it, it doesn鈥檛 have to be legitimate, but then we know what we want.

You do allow that the American obsession with winning has some upside.

The advantage is that, obviously, it motivates people a great deal, especially if you are not clear why you鈥檙e doing something. You will push yourself, get to know yourself differently, if you subject yourself to such stress and pressures.

The disadvantage is that, because we typically do this in a mental fog, we鈥檙e not truly at peace with what we鈥檙e doing. And that creates tensions within ourselves, and with the rest of the world.

Nature is full of winners and losers. What makes the obsession that you describe different?

The lion may or may not get the zebra, but if you ask the lion, 鈥淒id you win or lose?鈥� that鈥檚 not how the lion thinks of it. The lion is after something and either gets it or not. But Americans鈥� construction of winning and losing is relatively novel in the way it is dominant in our society. 鈥淲inning the peace鈥� is an absurd concept. How can you win the peace? And if you do think of it that way, it comes with certain baggage. It might not be the baggage you want.

Has this research turned up in your teaching?

I think 乐播传媒 students are really thirsty for this kind of stuff 鈥� more than half are on one type of team or another. Most of them are very competitive, but not all, and some of them have reacted negatively against this stuff. We read a draft of this book last year, and some kids were like, 鈥淚 don鈥檛 see myself in this. I don鈥檛 know what you鈥檙e talking about.鈥� And that鈥檚 good.

The book includes a sort of field guide to types of winners and losers.

For instance, you could win all the time. Or lose a lot, but win once, a big one 鈥� the Red Sox in 2004. They became big-time winners for that year, and all the losses were forgotten. There are patterns. You can actually be a loser all the time and still be considered a winner. And why? You fought very hard, and that鈥檚 a little bit of our mythology too 鈥� you know, the underdog who never wins anything but goes down fighting.

OK, but what does that mean? It means that we鈥檙e separating the outcomes, which were negative 鈥� 鈥渉e never won anything鈥� 鈥� from the mental processes within that person, which we tended to ignore in other cases when victory was realized. We say, you鈥檙e still a winner in our hearts.

You can also fall from grace quickly 鈥� Pete Rose, Al Gore. With Gore, it doesn鈥檛 even matter that he won the Nobel Prize. He had won all his life, but people see him as a loser because he should have won the election, because his opponent was perceived as weaker. That鈥檚 a type 鈥� the loser who throws away what he should have won.

According to one set of measures, Denmark is the happiest of industrialized countries. Yet the Danes, socially speaking, are governed by a set of principles that would strike Americans as soul-crushing 鈥� basically, sit down, shut up, and play along.

It鈥檚 called Jante鈥檚 Law, his 10 principles. They literally tell you, don鈥檛 stand out too much, don鈥檛 stick your neck out, don鈥檛 boast. It has some advantages and some disadvantages. If you are of average ambition, average intelligence, the Danish system is wonderful for you. If you have ambitions and are driven and you want to really succeed, the American system is better.

I think the Danish system is more civilized, but it does deprive people of a lot of freedom in the end. They say that they are the happiest, but I know that they鈥檙e not the happiest 鈥� but they are content. That鈥檚 the difference.

Are you a winner for having published this book?

Of course, you could construe it that way. I had to compete to get this book published, the press only publishes a certain number of books. But did I beat anyone? The right way to think about it is that I had a concept and I wanted to get something done, whatever that was, and I got it done. That鈥檚 a feeling of empowerment, a good feeling, and that鈥檚 where I want to leave it.