Out of Control

In Fritz Allhoff, Jesús Ilundáin‐Agurruza & Michael W. Austin (eds.), Cycling ‐ Philosophy for Everyone. Wiley‐Blackwell. pp. 200–213 (2010-09-24)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This chapter contains sections titled: The Pirate and Performance‐Enhancing Drugs Life and Times Performance‐Enhancing Drugs The Paternalistic Argument The Argument from the Harm Principle The Argument from Distorted Values The Argument from the Prisoner's Dilemma Why r‐EPO Should Continue to be Banned The Pirate's False Treasure Notes.

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

ISBN(s)

9781444324679   9781444330274

DOI

10.1002/9781444324679.ch20

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,168

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

No Harm, No Foul? Justifying Bans On Safe Performance-Enhancing Drugs.John Gleaves - 2010 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 4 (3):269-283.
Working While Under the Influence of Performance-Enhancing Drugs: Is One “More Responsible”?Frederic Gilbert - 2011 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 2 (3):57-59.
Lowering Restrictions on Performance Enhancing Drugs in Elite Sports.Rory Warwick Collins - 2017 - Inquiries Journal 9 (3).
Performance-enhancing drugs as a collective action problem.J. S. Russell & Alister Browne - 2018 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 45 (2):109-127.
The Coercion Argument Against Performance-Enhancing Drugs.Michael Veber - 2014 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 41 (2):267-277.
Higher, Faster, Stronger, Buzzed.Kenneth W. Kirkwood - 2011-03-04 - In Fritz Allhoff, Scott F. Parker & Michael W. Austin (eds.), Coffee. Wiley‐Blackwell. pp. 205–216.
Judgments of the fairness of using performance enhancing drugs.John Sabini & John Monterosso - 2005 - Ethics and Behavior 15 (1):81 – 94.
Performance-enhancing drugs, paternalism, meritocracy, and harm to sport.Nicholas Dixon - 2008 - Journal of Social Philosophy 39 (2):246–268.
The Ethics of Doping: Between Paternalism and Duty.Evangelos D. Protopapadakis - 2020 - Pannoniana: Journal of Humanities 4 (1):35-49.
Cognitive enhancement, cheating, and accomplishment.Rob Goodman - 2010 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 20 (2):pp. 145-160.
Good Athlete - Bad Athlete? on the 'Role-Model Argument' for Banning Performance-Enhancing Drugs.Thomas Søbirk Petersen - 2010 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 4 (3):332-340.
Cognitive-Enhancing Drugs, Behavioral Training and the Mechanism of Cognitive Enhancement.Emma Peng Chien - 2013 - In Elisabeth Hildt & Andreas G. Franke (eds.), Cognitive Enhancement: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. New York, NY: Springer. pp. 139-144.
The Only Good Reason to Ban Steroids in Baseball: To Prevent an Arms Race.Jacob Beck - 2013 - The Atlantic:0-0.
Should we use Commitment Contracts to Regulate Student use of Cognitive Enhancing Drugs?John Danaher - 2016 - Bioethics 30 (7):568-578.
Cognition-Enhancing Drugs: Can We Say No?Frank Pasquale - 2010 - Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society 30 (1):9-13.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-06-15

Downloads
5 (#1,543,447)

6 months
4 (#796,773)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references