Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Thinking outside the Ring of Concussive Punches: Reimagining Boxing.Joseph Lee - 2021 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 16 (4):413-426.
    The idea of human-like robots with artificial intelligence (AI) engaging in sports has been considered in the light of robotics, technology and culture. However, robots with AI can also be used to clarify ethical questions in sports such as boxing with its inherent risks of brain injury and even death.This article develops an innovative way to assess the ethical issues in boxing by using a thought experiment, responding to recent medical data and overall concerns about harms and risks to boxers. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The moral responsibilities of fandom.George Tyler - 2021 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 48 (1):111-128.
    Using American football as a point of entry, I approach harmful sports from the perspective of fans’ roles and responsibilities. Given that sports’ profitability is a significant obstacle to reform...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Scaffolding athletes’ choices and performance in risky and uncertain circumstances.Thomas Schramme - forthcoming - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy:1-13.
    In this paper, I discuss the risks of brain injuries in collision and contact sports and make a proposal to address them without limiting the autonomy of athletes. I aim to analyse the circumstances of profound uncertainty that athletes are facing in terms of the long-term impact of brain injuries. My strategy is to circumvent drastic measures in dealing with such risks, such as banning certain sports or changing their nature by introducing constitutive rule changes, and to scaffold individual autonomy (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Autonomy, relationality, and brain-injured athletes: a critical examination of the Concussion in Sport Group’s Consensus Statements between 2001 and 2023.Francisco Javier Lopez Frias & Mike McNamee - 2024 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 18 (3-4):383-403.
    This article critically examines the development and consensus outputs of the Concussion in Sport Group. We examine the six Consensus Statements between 2001 and 2023 to explore the challenges that the presence of contextual forces pose to the development of effective and ethically justifiable medical guidelines to manage situations involving brain-injured athletes. First, we discuss the implicit and explicit ethical framework and goals underlining the statements. Secondly, drawing on a relational account of athlete choice, we expound on the limitations of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Sport-related concussion (SCR) prevention and the nature of sport: possibilities and limitations.Sigmund Loland - 2024 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 18 (3-4):373-382.
    Concussions are traumatic brain injuries that can result from a blow to the head or a jolt to the body. Athletes in many sports are exposed to concussion risks. There is a growing concern in sport and society about sport-related concussions (SRC) and an increasing awareness of the importance of proper diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. A traditional, reactive approach emphasizes sound protocols in cases of suspected SRC. A proactive approach involves identifying various causes of SRC and implementing preventive measures. For (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • A Response to Cultural Arguments in the Renewed Disputes over the Ethics of Bullfighting.Gabriel E. Andrade - 2021 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 16 (1):50-65.
    Bullfighting has a strong historical tradition in Spain, but now it is beginning to be challenged by various sectors in society. The debate about the ethics of bullfighting is by no means new. But,...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Brain-Injured Footballers, Voluntary Choice and Social Goods. A Reply to Corlett.Francisco Javier Lopez Frias & Michael John McNamee - 2019 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 14 (2):269-278.
    In this essay, we respond to Angelo Corlett’s criticism of our paper ‘Ethics, Brain Injuries, and Sports: Prohibition, Reform, and Prudence’. To do so, first, we revisit certain assumptions and arg...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Should and will Inter-collegiate Football Programs be Eliminated?Angelo Corlett - 2018 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 13 (2):170-182.
    In a recent article in this journal, Lopez Frias and McNamee raise some concerns about an argument presented in Corlett, also published in this journal. This article is a deta...
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Disruptive Technologies and the Sport Ecosystem: A Few Ethical Questions.Migle Laukyte - 2020 - Philosophies 5 (4):24.
    The paper addresses the impact of disruptive technologies on the sport ecosystem, represented by four constitutive elements: athletes, coaches, judges, and fans. In particular, the paper argues that to understand the changes introduced by Artificial Intelligence, biotechnologies, and other disruptive technologies, we have to look at this sport ecosystem as a whole and ask ethical questions related to how each of these elements—and not just the athlete—is affected by them. The paper discusses some of the real-life applications of disruptive technologies (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Inter-Collegiate Football, Responsibility, Exploitation, and the Public Good.J. Angelo Corlett - 2020 - Journal of Academic Ethics 18 (3):249-262.
    This article presents philosophical-ethical arguments concerning the extent to which NCAA inter-collegiate football is a public good and some implausible implications of the claim that it constitutes a public good and ought to be publicly subsidized as part of a component of U.S. higher education generally as is currently the case. Underlying this main argument is one concerning who or what should have the responsibility for subsidizing the necessary costs of the sport, including its associated healthcare and medical costs.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark