TED Conversations

Curious AboutLife

This conversation is closed.

What are some big social issues that need to be discussed, but aren't?

There are a lot social issues, but which ones are the most un-talked about and important?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Dec 2 2012: Why it is necessary for someone to fail in order for someone else to win
    • thumb
      Dec 2 2012: I don't think/feel it is necessary for someone to fail in order for someone else to win Debbie. It seems like sometimes people with big egos like to see another person fail so they can feel better about winning?

      I like win/win situations, and we could all strive to create that in our lives....what do you think?
      • thumb
        Dec 2 2012: I think we may be confounding two different kinds of "winning":

        There is a simplistic kind of "winning" as in winning a contest or game where there can only be one winner (there can not be a win/win situation). If you preferred win/win situations with this definition of winning, then you would not like scrabble, volleyball, checkers, etc. (Hope that's not the case?)

        And there is a larger kind of winning where you have fun and learn no matter what. I certainly support that kind of win/win situation!

        p.s. I so much appreciate the kind nature you bring to your comments.
        • thumb
          Dec 3 2012: It's really very simple AND larger for me Danger

          I believe winning a game or contest can indeed seem like a win/win situation. I've played competive sports, and even though I sometimes lost the match, it was a win/win situation in my humble opinion because it was an equally competitive and enjoyable event. Volleyball was one of the competive sports I played, and as long as the matches were equally enjoyable for both teams, it was a win/win, even though technically one team had the better score....see what I mean? I LOVE scrabble:>)
          So, I quess I combine what you are trying to seperate.

          Thank you for the feedback Danger....I appreciate you and your comments as well:>)
    • thumb
      Dec 2 2012: It's interesting you used the word "fail" rather that the more traditional word "lose". By definition, in a contest, there is a winner and a loser, or else it is a tie. For there to be a winner, there must be a loser by definition. So it is necessary for someone to be a loser in order for someone else to be a winner - by definition.

      Losing is not at all the same thing as failing. I would say that a person has only failed if they did not try. If you tried and lost, then you succeeded in doing your best and hopefully improving. That is not failure.
      • thumb
        Dec 3 2012: I'm sure Debbie will speak for herself, and I interpreted her win/fail question as having to do with the business world? It seems common, unfortunately, for people to "step" on others to climb to the top?
        In which case, there may be a perceived winner and one on the bottom who seems to be failing?
    • thumb
      Dec 3 2012: If it is a zero sum game then yes someone wins someone loses that is the nature of a game.

      Many falsely refer to the economy as a zero sum game, it is not. In the U.S. today there are about 140 million jobs or so 100 years ago there was a tiny fraction of that with labor saving devices invented the entire time making many jobs unnecessary. If it were a zero sum game we would still have a few 10s of millions of jobs.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.