The aim of Huizinga's study is to try to integrate the concept of play into that of culture. He approaches play from a historical, not scientific point and, his study does not use psychological interpretations of play.

Supererogation and rules -- Problematic responsibility in law and morals -- On being "morally speaking a murderer" -- Justice and personal desert -- The expressive function of punishment -- Action and responsibility -- Causing voluntary actions -- Sua culpa -- Collective responsibility -- Crime, clutchability, and individuated treatment -- What is so special about mental illness?

Sartre explains the theory of existential psychoanalysis in this treatise on human reality.

Although sports and athletics provide a nearly universal social context for the learning of such cherished values as courage, honesty, discipline, communal efforts, and the pursuit of excellence, little attention has been devoted to the philosophy of this important element in human life. In a fascinating survey of the philosophic dimensions of sports and athletics, the author delves into a variety of topics, including game and play theory, play-forms and game principles in history, existentialism and sports, the popularity of sports, (...) its educational values, the function of ethics and moral values, and the role of competition, violence and aggression, self discovery, spirituality, and joy. He also considers recurrent problems such as corruption, the excessive emphasis on winning, and the exploitation of student athletes and suggests specific ways of preserving perspective and integrity. -- From publisher's description. (shrink)

Play The concept of play has received considerable attention in the past, yet one can generally conclude from modern work on the subject that its stature ...

Designed for both undergraduate and graduate courses, Philosophic Inquiry in Sport is a combination of 56 classic and contemporary essays that strike a balance between analytical, existential, and phenomenological perspectives.

The purpose of this article is to show that fraleigh, in "right actions in sport", has not successfully argued for the supremacy of knowledge as an inherent value in sport. this involves a discussion of how fraleigh misapplied criteria from the moral point of view (baier), why he should not have attempted to use these criteria in the first place, and how the application of nonmoral standards fails to show the putative supremacy. "challenge" and "uncertainty" are offered as potentially stronger (...) candidates to explain human fascination with sport. (shrink)