In this paper, I submit that it is the controlled part of skilled action, that is, that part of an action that accounts for the exact, nuanced ways in which a skilled performer modifies, adjusts and guides her performance for which an adequate, philosophical theory of skill must account. I will argue that neither Jason Stanley nor Hubert Dreyfus have an adequate account of control. Further, and perhaps surprisingly, I will argue that both Stanley and Dreyfus relinquish an account of (...) control for precisely the same reason: each reduce control to a passive, mechanistic, automatic process, which then prevents them from producing a substantive account of how controlled processes can be characterized by seemingly intelligent features and integrated with personal-level states. I will end by introducing three different kinds of control, which are constitutive of skilled action: strategic control, selective, top–down, automatic attention, and motor control. It will become clear that Dreyfus cannot account for any of these three kinds of control while Stanley has difficulty tackling the two latter kinds. (shrink)

A crucial task for sport research is to understand and explain the processes and conditions underlying skillful motor behavior. One way to account for these processes and conditions is to describe and analyze the distinct stages a learner goes through when acquiring a skill. This article starts by elaborating one of the most dominant conceptualizations of motor skills in sport, namely the information-processing approach to skills, and then it briefly recapitulates Hubert and Stuart Dreyfus’s phenomenology of skill acquisition. In a (...) second part, these two distinct perspectives of skills are discussed. The discussion progresses in a dialectical way where the author alternately argues for both perspectives. Emerging from this dialectic, the article presents two arguments for why Dreyfus’s phenomenology of skill acquisition is superior to the information-processing approach. (shrink)