Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Is There a Normatively Distinctive Concept of Cheating in Sport (or anywhere else)?J. S. Russell - 2014 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 41 (3):303-323.
    This paper argues that for the purposes of any sort of serious discussion about immoral conduct in sport very little is illuminated by claiming that the conduct in question is cheating. In fact, describing some behavior as cheating is typically little more than expressing strong, but thoroughly vague and imprecise, moral disapproval or condemnation of another person or institution about a wide and ill-defined range of improper advantage-seeking behavior. Such expressions of disapproval fail to distinguish cheating from many other types (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • Trash talk and Kantian values.Ornaith O’Dowd - 2022 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 49 (3):383-397.
    In this paper, I argue for a nuanced, context-sensitive approach to the question of trash talk, based on the Kantian principle of respect for persons and an emphasis on first-person action-guidance. I also suggest that we understand trash talk to have several varieties. On my proposed approach, there is no simple answer to the question of whether trash talk is morally permissible; rather, context-sensitive judgment can help us to determine what we ought to do when the possibility of various forms (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • The Moral Rules of Trash Talking: Morality and Ownership.Stephen Kershnar - 2015 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 9 (3):303-323.
    This paper argues that an instance of trash-talking is permissible if and only if the relevant sports organization’s system of rules permits the expression. The argument for this position rests on the notion that if there is no relevant side-constraint on trash-talking, then if the player commits to a moral boundary on trash-talking then that is the moral boundary on trash-talking. I then argued that there is no relevant side-constraint on trash-talking and that the players commit to the ownership theory (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Rights and consent in mixed martial arts.Stephen Kershnar & Robert Kelly - 2019 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 47 (1):105-120.
    MMA fighting in a competition is not necessarily wrong and is often, as far as we can tell, permissible. Our argument has two premises. First, if an act does not infringe on anyone’s moral right or violate another side-constraint, then it is morally permissible. Second, MMA-violence does not infringe on anyone’s moral right or violate another side-constraint. The first premise rested on two assumptions. First, if a person does a wrong act, then he wrongs someone. Second, if one person wrongs (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • On the Ranking of Teams.Stephen Kershnar & James Delaney - 2021 - Philosophia 50 (2):567-579.
    In this paper, we argue that in a possible world there is a determinate ranking of teams. Our argument rests on the premise: In theory, nothing prevents a determinate better than ranking. This premise in turn rests on assumptions with regard to stipulations regarding ‘better than’ and nature of a competition as well as a right answer theory of interpretation. We then speculate that in some actual leagues in some years, there were determinate rankings. We consider objections that focus on (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • For Ownership Theory: A Response to Nicholas Dixon.Stephen Kershnar - 2018 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 12 (2):226-235.
    In an earlier paper, Stephen Kershnar argued for the following thesis: An instance of trash-talking is permissible if and only if the relevant sports organization’s system of rules permits the expression. One person trash-talks a second if and only if the first intentionally insults the second during competition. The above theory sounds implausible. Surely, the conditions under which a player may insult another do not depend on what the owners arbitrarily decide. Such an approach doesn’t appear to be true in (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Spilled milk and burned toast: extrinsic pressure and sporting excellence.Christopher Johnson & Jason Taylor - 2021 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 48 (2):202-218.
    ABSTRACT This paper explores the dynamics of extrinsic pressure in sport and its relation to athletic excellence. We argue that psychological pressure exerted by activities extrinsic to sport can be relevant to success or failure in it, such that how one manages extrinsic pressures can transmit to failure to perform in sport and thus be a determinant to victory, with no reason to think failure mitigated by the non-sporting nature of one’s other behaviour. To make this argument we offer a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • More than Bullshit: Trash Talk and Other Psychological Tests of Sporting Excellence.Christopher Johnson & Jason Taylor - 2018 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 14 (1):47-61.
    Sporting excellence is a function of physical, cognitive and psychological capacities: its standard requires demonstration of superlative physical and strategic skills and the performance of these...
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Intrinsic Wrongness of Trash Talking and How It Diminishes the Practice of Sport: Reply to Kershnar.Nicholas Dixon - 2018 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 12 (2):211-225.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations