life is a competition and you inevitably trample over others to achieve what you want....

Thank you for your reply, in this round I will give my rebuttals and concluding remarks REBUTTALS “Firstly, The debate isn't that competition is good or not. It is that whether we inevitably trample others or not. ” First of, I fail to see why my argument is not attacking your stance. My argument's points are to prove that life IS a competition and at the same time, providing proof to support my stance that people DO trample over others in the process of pursuing success by bringing up Social Darwinism. “. .. presenting the example of Bill Gates is that when he was not a known person and when he left Harvard then there were companies who had great people and money to do but he worked hard and achieved” Again, this isn’t a debate for or against hard work. Bill Gates is an example of a successful businessman, but did others (the other 7 billion people) worked any less than Gates? Working hard does not necessary mean that you will achieve more. Bill Gates is where he is now solely because he is an opportunist by making computer software right before the great boom in computer development. At the process of his success, Gates have ‘trampled’ over other programmers as well. Since the successful release of Windows 2000, ‘brand loyalty’ is created. Brand loyalty slims the probability of windows users to switch to another operating system, hence making it extremely difficult for small developers to prosper. See the outrage against Mac OS, Mac OS is a flawless and beautiful operating system, however, many Windows users despise Mac OS simply because it is different (and of course, there are others who provide a coherent reason). “Tiger woods became a legend in golf and became so respected and then it was found out that he was doing D. O. P. And all those life time achievements,respect gone in a second. He was trampling others by taking illegal drugs that enhanced his performance so it was trampling but what did it eventually achieve him” I see some kettle logic here. First of all, you are saying that Tiger Woods would not have achieve what he did if it weren’t for “D. O. P” (which I have never heard of nor showed up on Google), doesn’t this mean that if he didn’t trample over others he wouldn’t have been successful? Secondly, I am unable to find a source indicating that Woods used performance-enhancing drugs. Golf does not require overwhelming strength, it tests one’s ability to mentally calculate and hit the ball with the right force and direction within the allotted 45 seconds. -End of Rebuttals- CONCLUDING ARGUMENT As to conclude this debate, I would like to restate my position with support. Life is most definitely a competition. Competing with yourself is insufficient in pursuing success. This is vividly exhibited in the market where companies feud with each other for popularity. Another prime example comes from job competition, people trample over others to occupy vacant jobs and others are put back to the street. Competition is the definition of life, we have seen competition since prehistoric times up to today. For aforementioned reasons, I suggest a strong vote for PRO. Final Remarks Thank you again for giving me the opportunity to debate with you.