- Submit
-
Browse
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- More
Switch to: References
Citations of:
Add citations
You must login to add citations.
|
|
|
In this paper, we reply to Eric Moore’s argument that Lance Armstrong did not cheat, at least according to one, standard account of cheating. If that is the case, we argue, so much the worse for th... |
|
|
|
|
|
We provide a new wrinkle to the Argument from Unfair Advantage, a rather popular one in the ethics of doping in sports discussions. But we add a new argument that we believe places the moral burden on those who favor doping in sports. We also defend our position against some important concerns that might be raised against it. In the end, we argue that for the time being, doping in sports ought to be banned until it can be demonstrated that (...) |
|
|
|
|
|
Ob eine sportliche Leistung anerkannt wird, hängt maßgeblich davon ab, ob sie im Einklang mit Werten steht, die wir für wesentlich für den Sport halten. Die philosophischen Standardargumente gegen Doping im Sport behaupten eine Unvereinbarkeit von Doping mit Werten wie Fairness, Gesundheit oder Natürlichkeit. Ich möchte im Gegensatz zu diesen Argumenten eine grundsätzliche Unvereinbarkeit von Doping mit dem Wert eines nachhaltigen Umgangs einer Person mit sich selbst behaupten. Wer dopt, so meine These, folgt einem verabsolutierten Leistungsdenken, was aus ethischer Perspektive (...) |
|
|
ZusammenfassungOb eine sportliche Leistung anerkannt wird, hängt maßgeblich davon ab, ob sie im Einklang mit Werten steht, die wir für wesentlich für den Sport halten. Die philosophischen Standardargumente gegen Doping im Sport behaupten eine Unvereinbarkeit von Doping mit Werten wie Fairness, Gesundheit oder Natürlichkeit. Ich möchte im Gegensatz zu diesen Argumenten eine grundsätzliche Unvereinbarkeit von Doping mit dem Wert eines nachhaltigen Umgangs einer Person mit sich selbst behaupten. Wer dopt, so meine These, folgt einem verabsolutierten Leistungsdenken, was aus ethischer Perspektive (...) |
|
|
ZusammenfassungOb eine sportliche Leistung anerkannt wird, hängt maßgeblich davon ab, ob sie im Einklang mit Werten steht, die wir für wesentlich für den Sport halten. Die philosophischen Standardargumente gegen Doping im Sport behaupten eine Unvereinbarkeit von Doping mit Werten wie Fairness, Gesundheit oder Natürlichkeit. Ich möchte im Gegensatz zu diesen Argumenten eine grundsätzliche Unvereinbarkeit von Doping mit dem Wert eines nachhaltigen Umgangs einer Person mit sich selbst behaupten. Wer dopt, so meine These, folgt einem verabsolutierten Leistungsdenken, was aus ethischer Perspektive (...) |
|
|
ABSTRACT It is argued that sport, like science or medicine, is a valued human practice and is characterised as much by the moral manner in which its participants conduct themselves as by the pursuit of its own skills, standards and excellences. Virtues, such as justice, honesty and courage, are not only necessary to pursue its goals but to protect it from being corrupted by external interests. After explicating the practice view of sport in contrast to the sociological view, the nature (...) |
|
|
It is argued that sport, like science or medicine, is a valued human practice and is characterised as much by the moral manner in which its participants conduct themselves as by the pursuit of its own skills, standards and excellences. Virtues, such as justice, honesty and courage, are not only necessary to pursue its goals but to protect it from being corrupted by external interests. After explicating the practice view of sport in contrast to the sociological view, the nature of (...) |
|
|
We provide a new wrinkle to the Argument from Unfair Advantage, a rather popular one in the ethics of doping in sports discussions. But we add a new argument that we believe places the moral burden on those who favor doping in sports. We also defend our position against some important concerns that might be raised against it. In the end, we argue that for the time being, doping in sports ought to be banned until it can be demonstrated that (...) |
|
|
Governing bodies such as the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) make decisions about which drugs to prohibit athletes from using and the dosage... |
|
|
A familiar move that philosophers of sport make in the debate on the doping-issue is to reject from the start the argument that doping comes down to cheating. The claim that doping is cheating is often rebutted with the argument that doping is only cheating when one accepts that the use of doping is unjustified in itself. In this paper I want to argue that putting aside the cheating-argument in this way comes, first, too easy, because essential complexities of what (...) |
|
|
Athletes who flout doping bans are generally thought to have gained an unfair advantage. In this paper, I critically examine this view. I begin by defending an effort-based account of desert in sport, explaining why it is preferable to the hybrid account that is favoured in the literature. Drawing on the effort-based account, I construct the Unfair Advantage Argument formally, in what I take to be its most plausible form. I then argue that the Unfair Advantage Argument should be rejected, (...) |
|
|
In the following article, it will be argued that there are at least four clusters of arguments generally proposed to justify banning doping in sport and that Simon’s contribution has been of a seminal nature to at least two of the clusters. |
|
|
The possibility of genetic enhancement to increase the likelihood of success in sport and life’s prospects raises questions for accounts of sport and theories of justice. These questions obviously include the fairness of such enhancement and its relationship to the goals of sport and demands of justice. Of equal interest, however, is the effect on our understanding of individual effort, merit, and desert of either discovering genetic contributions to components of such effort or recognizing the influence of social factors on (...) |
|
|
|
|
|
Cognitive neuroenhancement involves the use of medical interventions to improve normal cognitive functioning such as memory, focus, concentration, or willpower. In this paper I give a Kantian argument defending the use of CNE in science, scholarly research, and creative fields. Kant’s universal law formulation of the categorical imperative shows why enhancement is morally wrong in the familiar contexts of sports or competitive games. This argument, however, does not apply to the use of CNE in higher education, scholarly or scientific research, (...) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In 1984, a number of US cyclists used blood transfusions to boost their performance at the Los Angeles Olympic Games. The cyclists broke no rules and dominated the Games, yet were later maligned as cheaters and dopers?they had, it seemed, violated some important norm, albeit one which was neither an official rule nor otherwise easily identifiable. Their case illustrates the moral ambiguity that arises when a performance enhancement is employed in a sport that has not addressed it. This article takes (...) |
|
|
Despite the numerous instances of PED use in professional sports, there continues to be a strong negative moral response to those athletes who dope. My goal is to offer a diagnosis of this response. I will argue that we do not experience such disdain because these athletes have broken some constitutive rule of sport, but because they have lied about who they are. In violating the constraints of their own public narratives, they make both themselves and their choices unintelligible. This (...) |
|
|
En este artículo se analizan los diversos argumentos en contra de levantar la prohibición contra el dopaje. A través de este análisis se concluye que ninguno de los argumentos es conclusivo por sí mismo, sino que todos y cada uno de ellos aportan un criterio normativo que ha de ser tenido en cuenta en los debates morales en torno al dopaje. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-5ff6c685cb-rv6xt uwo