“ Humanitarian Competition: An Intellectual History in Perspective”.

Competition has become the mantra for survival in a globalised world where meaningful existence is fraught with demands, which go beyond the material to the immaterial ‘byte-size’. This has been exemplified by our obsession with illusions of immediate fame and fortune. This paper contextualises and extends the debate about the role of competition in general. Here the four major myths of competition are explored and deconstructed, from a Darwinian perspective to a more demonstrably engaged perspective on ‘capabilities’ (Sen, 1999). The second section deals particularly with the key debates, theories that influenced Tsunesaburo Makiguchi’s seminal ideas of ‘humanitarian competition’ in 1903. The final part of the paper seeks to decipher the relevance of the key ideas of ‘humanitarian competition’ as proposed by Dr Daisaku Ikeda in his 2009 peace proposal. Here the transition from competition to cooperation is explored by tying together the key principles of global coexistence enunciated by both Makiguchi and Ikeda in the context of expanding spiritual influence by the forces of culture, morality and virtue. To engage with humanitarian competition calls for a major shift from hard power to soft power, from subordination to one of engagement. In other words this concept advances the Buddhist principle of peaceful co-existence, or Panchsheel, as a norm for human behaviour of love, kindness, sacrifice and peace through cooperation, where equality and mutual benefit are critical. Humanitarian competition provides the essential framework to establish a new world order as highlighted by both Makiguchi and Ikeda.

Animal group forces resulting from predator avoidance and competition minimization

A new model to explain animal spacing, based on a trade-off between foraging efficiency and predation risk, is derived from biological principles. The model is able to explain not only the general tendency for animal groups to form, but some of the attributes of real groups. These include the independence of mean animal spacing from group population, the observed variation of animal spacing with resource availability and also with the probability of predation, and the decline in group stability with group size. The appearance of "neutral zones" within which animals are not motivated to adjust their relative positions is also explained. The model assumes that animals try to minimize a cost potential combining the loss of intake rate due to foraging interference and the risk from exposure to predators. The cost potential describes a hypothetical field giving rise to apparent attractive and repulsive forces between animals. Biologically based functions are given for the decline in interference cost and increase in the cost of predation risk with increasing animal separation. Predation risk is calculated from the probabilities of predator attack and predator detection as they vary with distance. Using example functions for these probabilities and foraging interference, we calculate the minimum cost potential for regular lattice arrangements of animals before generalizing to finite-sized groups and random arrangements of animals, showing optimal geometries in each case and describing how potentials vary with animal spacing. (C) 1999 Academic Press.</p>