Some people think a sense of competition in children should be encouraged. Others believe that children who are taught to co-operate rather than compete become more useful adults. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Many argue that the young should compete with each other, while other people suppose that co-operation makes the young better adults. Both views will be discussed, and I opine the former view is more convincing. On the one hand, co-operation would be important.

First

of all, it allows the young to make better things. If some difficult tasks are given to them, they can not only solve them but

also

supplement their own shortcoming through teamwork

such

as collective intelligence. In the

second

place, the more competitive spirit is overheated the more poul youngsters do. As it causes that they concentrate not on the accomplishment of tasks but just win the competition, the essence of tasks is faded and only poul remain.

Hence

, teaching children competitive equates to teaching them poul.

On the other hand

, rivalry brings many advantages. The

first

merit is that rivalry is the biggest motivation for advance. It causes a competitive spirit, and it

also

results in advance. When youngsters compete, they try to win. Youngsters who fall behind in the competition find and learn how to recover and accept falls, what is their shortcoming.

secondly

, it is unavoidable, since being an instinct of humans. There is the ' Red Queen hypothesis ', which means that when one species evolves, the other species and the surrounding environment

also

evolve, so if some things do not lag behind, they have to develop constantly. In conclusion,

although

co-operate is important, competition can bring better things.

Thus

, children should be educated to compete.