The Way of the Competitor
about what makes the competitive view of the world so unique
revision 1.0 12/03/00 - the text and ideas presented at this site may be freely used and reproduced, for humans do not own ideas, but ideas own humans
should anyone study The Way of the
In other words, do I really have any drastically new or revolutionary ideas to tell you about? I do. Most of the principles and facts I base my philosophy on are widely known and discussed. However, the conclusions I draw are radically different from what anyone else has dared to conclude. This is not because I am a genius or an extremist or a religious fanatic. On the contrary, all I do is draw the most obvious rational conclusions and then I stop without elaborating or speculating on much detail, since all that is secondary. All I am interested in doing is explaining a very simple and logical view of life. That no one else has come to my conclusions is strange, but not illogical. The explanation is simply that humans are all indoctrinated to believe in the contemporary ideology. More concretely, they are slaves of their genetic and memetic programming, making them all compete with one another aimlessly for the sake of dominance and nothing else. The Way of the Competitor is about overcoming this state of meaningless competition and achieving the ability to compete to attain the single goal in life, to eliminate the unknown.
In order to understand The Way of the Competitor, it is necessary first to understand the purpose of life. If you are one of those people who believes that the purpose of life is something for which there is no right or wrong answer, I am not speaking to you, nor do I care to convince you otherwise because someone with such despicably low meme resistance will never understand. If you do know the purpose, but seek to make sure that we are talking about the same thing, visit singlegoal website for a description of the single goal of existence.
In addition to understanding the purpose of life, it is necessary to disagree with all of society and to defy its influence on us during every minute of our lives. Either that, or one must have no emotions, so that society does not have the power to influence one. If you are one of those people who has emotions, but has no grudge against society, I am not speaking to you, for you are useless and irrelevant. If you understand what I'm talking about, but want to make sure we're talking about the same thing, visit defiance website for my guide to resisting social indoctrination through defiance.
The Way of the Competitor is a philosophy based on the theory of microcompetition, which is an all-encompassing generalization about the world. Microcompetition makes claims that apply to every facet of existence, every branch of knowledge, and every aspect of society and the universe as a whole. Its basic principles are well-known and have been widely elaborated on and discussed. Some classic works related to the topic are Sun Tzu's The Art of War, Niccolo Machiavelli's The Prince, and Charles Darwin's Origin of Species. The list of such writings is, of course, very large, yet I have not come across a philosophy that applies the ideas of microcompetition to everything in the world, including ourselves. In this website, I attempt to present the complete high-level world view of the competitive universe in which we live.
Possible Objections to my Approach
(1) While it is valid to claim that many aspects of our universe are competitive, to make the generalization that all aspects of the universe are competitive would be fallacious.
This is the most common objection I hear to my philosophy, that I make grand generalizations without allowing for alternate explanations. The disagreement is partly caused by the fact that I have my own definition of the word competition. However, science makes grand generalizations about the universe all the time, for example, regarding the gravitational force. My theory of competition is no different. I am only generalizing based on the known universe. I sincerely hope that the theories I present will be rendered obsolete in the future because there exist deeper and stranger truths to be discovered. Yet while I claim to know nothing for certain, probability and reason tell me that it is highly unlikely that microcompetition will cease to be relevant within the next few hundred years.
(2) Some questions can never be answered and some mysteries will remain so forever.
Now, I think it is a distinct possibility that perhaps we will never know everything. Nonetheless, it annoys me to keep hearing this idea (or something very similar) repeated, whether in books, conversations, or on the web, especially since the same people who express this idea also claim not to know anything for certain. As far as I know, knowledge could be limitless and so could the implications of competition.
(3) Philosophy is about ideas that make life worth living, and one that is purely based on competition is not worthwhile.
I hold the view that whatever is true is worthwhile. And what seems true to me is that beyond the laws of physics themselves, there is nothing, but competitive forces governing the world. To believe in the value of anything else just to make life "worth living" would really be an admission that life is not worth living at all (because all is meaningless), that's why the best we can do is try to feel that it's worth it. The fact is that anything that does not choose to compete will most likely be rendered obsolete. The question is really not whether or not to compete because the whole world is nothing, but competition. The question is who will win the competition. It could be those pursue aimless competition or those who seek the single goal.
Nearly everyone will be confused by my concept of truth because I do not care to make statements that accurately reflect truth. Rather, I seek to make decisions and take actions that are part of the optimal strategy for pursuing it. There is no benefit to acting truthfully to achieve truth. What I say may not always seem exactly true, but it is meant to be effective.
In Chapter 1, I describe the history of the universe and humanity as a competitive struggle over who and what would achieve dominance. I divide the history into three distinct stages called stability, adaptation, and decision. I coin a word microcompetition for the adaptive stage of competition. The purpose of this chapter is to demonstrate that competitive forces are all that controls the universe, but not to defend my particular explanations of how competitive forces have shaped our history. My explanations are intended only as possibilities.
In Chapter 2, I describe key ideas on being a competitor in our time.
In Chapter 3, I say all that really needs to be said on competitive philosophy.
The following is a complete list of works I refer to for facts and ideas in this website:
 Bloom, Howard. The Lucifer Principle. New York: The Atlantic Monthly Press, 1995.
 Chaisson, Eric. Universe: An Evolutionary approach to Astronomy. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1988.
 Dawkins, Richard. The Selfish Gene.
 Fromm, Erich. The Sane Society.
 Gould, Stephen Jay. Wonderful Life.
 Hartmann, William K. Astronomy: The Cosmic Journey. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1985.
 McKay, John P., Bennett D. Hill, and John Buckler. A History of World Societies. 2nd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company: 1988.
 Stoff, Jesse and Charles Pellegrino. Darwin's Universe. 1986.
 Zeilik, Michael. Astronomy: The Evolving Universe. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1991.