I wonder are there any natural rules to competition?

I was considering the competition for energy and
resource which must surely take place at our most
fundamental levels, and wondering about the rules of
fitness we take for granted.

What would competing cells, neurons or genes do in
pursue their advantage? How is that selfish pursuit
of the advantage managed in nature?

As an example: Competing Stables are occasionally
heard to knoble the race horses of competing stables,
just so their donkeys can claim some minor prize.

The same might be true in business where competition
amongst rivals, or indeed within organizations, leads
the selfish to do whatever they feel is necessary to
achieve their personal rewards.

All this might make perfect sense to the selfish, but
it would do little to encourage the high fliers, or
achieve the long term goals sought by all.

Not sure if this will help you, but Axelrod's book is worth a read anyway:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation

TruthSlave wrote:

On May 23, 11:10 pm, TruthSlave home.com> wrote:

Hi,

Unregulated competition would be = adaptation.
Two groups strive to adapt to circumstances,
several outcomes are possible.

Group 1 Group 2
1 Lose Lose
2 Win Lose
3 Lose Win
4 Win Win
At outcomes 2 and 3 the losing group will (probably) diminish,
perhaps disappear if the loss is total.
At outcome 1, either the fight goes on, or perhaps circumstances changed
to favour a third group with very different characteristics; making it
a 2/3-scenario with (Subgroups 1,2) against (Group 3).
Scenario 4 is (probably) not probable;
either the fight still goes on, or the two groups have managed to
divide the spoils (night feeders/day feeders), or have arrived
at some form of symbiosis.

On May 24, 2:29 am, "Tron" wrote:

andy-k wrote:

Interesting read.

The article assumes awareness of, and between, the competing
parties. Awareness and a degree of communication.

To use my earlier analogy: The rival 'stables' compete for a
prize, but are perhaps unaware of the covert tactics employed
by their rivals.

Each believes his actions is justified to maintain his competitive
advantage, yet can't see the same actions, or the same selfish
measures employed by their rivals. He accepts as chance, the
'knobling' of his champion race horse.

Tit-for-tat, one of the strategies mentions, would have all
parties competing openly with equal disregard of the rules, until
some truce was agreed.

On Fri, 23 May 2008 14:10:20 +0100, TruthSlave wrote:

First the consideration of 'sides' or ones own group/team..

'sought by all' limits the rules of competition to those which best serve
the group/team. So...

What is the grouping? All humans, some humans..?

bigfletch8@gmail.com wrote: