CFA: IAPS 2017

[I am so excited that IAPS is back in the USA this year! See the Call for Abstracts below.]

International Association for the Philosophy of Sport Conference

September 6-9, 2017 at Mississippi State University, Starkville, Mississippi USA

The International Association for the Philosophy of Sport invites the submission of abstracts to be considered for presentation at the 45th annual IAPS meeting and essays for the 2017 R. Scott Kretchmar Student Essay Award. The conference will be held September 6-9, 2017 in Starkville, Mississippi USA hosted at Mississippi State University.

Abstracts are welcome on any area of philosophy of sport (broadly construed), including metaphysics, epistemology, aesthetics, and ethics, and from any theoretical approach, including analytic philosophy and critical theory. While IAPS recognizes, values, and encourages interdisciplinary approaches and methodologies, acceptance is contingent on the philosophical content of the project. Emerging scholars are encouraged to submit works in progress. See Abstract Guidelines below for template and instructions.

Deadline for abstract submission is March 31, 2017. A Program Committee of three IAPS peers will blind review abstracts. Contributors will be notified about the status of their abstracts by May 12, 2017.

Proposals for round table and panel discussions, including a tentative list of participants, are also welcome and should be directed towards the IAPS Conference Chair, Pam Sailors at pamelasailors@missouristate.edu.

About IAPS

The International Association for the Philosophy of Sport (IAPS) is committed to stimulate, encourage, and promote research, scholarship, and teaching in the philosophy of sport and related practices. It publishes the Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, which is widely acknowledged as the most respected medium for communicating contemporary philosophic thought with regard to sport. IAPS members are found all over the world and constitute a growing and vibrant international community of scholars and teachers. More information on IAPS can be found at www.iaps.net.

2017 R. Scott Kretchmar Student Essay Award

IAPS is proud to announce the fourth edition of the “R. Scott Kretchmar Student Essay Award.” Interested undergraduate and graduate students who will be presenting their paper at the conference should submit a full paper by April 15, 2017 (in addition to an abstract, both through Easy Chair, see below).  A separate announcement is posted at the IAPS website. The selected winner shall present their paper and receive the award at the annual IAPS conference.

Conference Requirements

All conference presenters shall register for and attend the conference to have their paper included on the conference program. Presenters must also be members of IAPS (either student or full). New members may register for IAPS membership at the following www.iaps.net/join-iaps/

Abstract Guidelines

IAPS will be using the “Easy Chair” conference management system. Submitted abstracts should be 300-500 words long, in English, and must be received by March 31, 2017. Abstracts MUST follow the template and include:

  • A brief summary of a philosophical research topic
  • Keywords (three to five)
  • At least three references to relevant scholarly publications that contextualize the topic.

Submission Instructions

To submit an abstract, please download the IAPS Abstract Template. When you are ready to submit the abstract, go to https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=iaps2017 . New users for Easy Chair must create an individual account login. Please complete the submission information and upload your completed IAPS Abstract Template.

Leave a comment

Filed under CFP, Conferences

Reason Papers: Philosophy of Play

The latest issue of Reason Papers, which I co-edit with Carrie-Ann Biondi, has a symposium on the philosophy of play.

Gadamer, Dewey, and the Importance of Play in Philosophical Inquiry
Christopher C. Kirby and Brolin Graham compare how play is crucial in the philosophical inquiry of Hans-Georg Gadamer and John Dewey.

Child-Centered Play Therapy
William Schultz looks at the evidence of the emotional and psychological benefits of play therapy for children.

Reflections on the Presence of Play in University Arts and Athletics
Aaron Harper looks at the parallels of play in the arts and athletics and argues for more integration of play into the university.

The Reconstructive and Normative Aspects of Bernard Suits’s Utopia
Francisco Javier Lopez Frias re-examines Bernard Suits’ The Grasshopper and his conception of Utopia.

The full issue is available here.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under College, Philosophy, play

CFA: The 10th Anniversary Summit on Communication and Sport

The International Association for Communication and Sport (IACS) is hosting the 10th Summit on Communication and Sport. The Summit is scheduled for March 30 – April 2, 2016 in Phoenix, Arizona.

They recently sent out the Call for Abstracts for papers and panels. The deadline is October 14, 2016. Information on submission is at the IACS website.

For conference events inquiries, please contact Dr. Jeff Kassing (jkassing@asu.edu) or Dr. Lauren Smith (LS35@iu.edu)

For conference submission inquiries, please contact Dr. Lauren Smith

Leave a comment

Filed under Arizona State, CFP, Sports Studies

Sportsmanship: The good, bad, and hateful

There have been many great examples of good sportsmanship at the Rio Olympics. USA gymnastic teammates Simone Biles and Aly Raisman cheering each other on even as they compete against each other. USA’s Abbey D’Agostino and New Zealand’s Nikki Hamblin helping each other finish a race after colliding in a 5000 meter qualifier. Galen Rupp falling back from the pack in the 10,000 meter to check on Mo Farah after accidentally tripping him. Athletes throughout the games, winning or losing, acknowledging each other and the crowd.

There have been some bad examples too. Two stands out: USWNT goalie Hope Solo’s unfortunate comments after losing to Sweden and French sprinter Wilhem Belocian ripping his bid off in disgust after being disqualified for a false start. I understand both Solo and Belocian’s frustration and can easily see myself being overcome by disappointment or anger and responding as they did. These were not their best moments. Poor sportsmanship for sure, but these actions speak more to being overcome in the moment by emotions not necessarily to deeper character flaws.

But there were a few other examples of bad sportsmanship that fall under a different heading and require a different kind of analysis:

These sorts of actions regarding Israel are nothing new. Even just prior to the Olympics, Syrian boxer Ala Ghasoun refused to participate in an Olympic qualifying event in June against an Israeli. Similar refusals happened in the London, Beijing, and Athens Games.

While there are examples of bad sportsmanship no matter the event, at the Olympics where the philosophical basis and purpose is fundamentally about peace, these examples are especially egregious.

There are real problems and conflicts in the Middle East. There is a lot of violence and fighting and killing. This ought not to be denied, hidden, or ignored. Israel and her relationship to her Arab and Muslim neighbors, citizens, and residents is a complicated, complex issue on which rational people can and do strongly disagree. There are dangerous and violent conflicts all over the world.

But the point of the Olympics is to find a space beyond all this. The crazy idea is that we take a break from real life—a life where unfortunately conflict and violence might still rule–to play games, to watch humans excel and compete at the highest levels of ability and talent.

Here are two quotes from the Olympic Charter on the Fundamental Principles of Olympism.

  • “The goal of Olympism is to place sport at the service of the harmonious development of humankind, with a view to promoting a peaceful society concerned with the preservation of human dignity.”
  • “The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practising sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.”

Olympism and the Olympic spirit calls for people to step outside their normal routine and see that there is a possibility of peace, a possibility of mutual understanding and prosperity. As Heather Reid writes “Playing sports together seems to humanize ‘the other,’ by overcoming cultural and linguistic barriers and demanding mutual respect”(1) Through sport, where individuals must cooperate to compete under a set of rules and norms, people can come to see that cooperation, respect, understanding, and dignity are indeed possible—even with people you are ‘supposed’ to hate.

It is this explicit hope and spirit of peace that makes the Olympics different from World Championships or the World Cup. This is not just another event on one’s pro tour. Its specialness comes from the underlying philosophy of Olympism and its explicit call for peace and mutual respect among and between nations and individuals.

It is this that the Lebanese delegation, the Egyptian, and Saudi Arabian violated. Their lack of sportsmanship is a denial of the very purpose of the Olympics. It doesn’t merely reflect poor judgment or an overflow of angry disappointment. It is rooted in hate and antisemitism. It is a refusal to even consider the possibility of peace and mutual respect. There is no more un-Olympic way to be.


(1) Heather Reid, “Defining Olympic Sport,” in Defining Sport, ed. Shawn E. Klein (Maryland: Lexington,  Forthcoming December 2016).

Leave a comment

Filed under Olympics, sportsmanship

Sports Ethics at ASU Fall 2016

Here are the topics and readings for my Sports Ethics this fall at ASU.

What is Sport?
Reid, “Socrates at the Ballpark”

How can Sport affect Society?
Eig,  Excerpt from Opening Day;
Leavy, Excerpt from Sandy Koufax;
The 16th Man (Video)

What is Sportsmanship?
Keating, “Sportsmanship as a Moral Category”;
Feezell, “Sportsmanship”

Is it ethical to run up the score?
Dixon, “On Sportsmanship and ‘Running Up the Score”;
Feezell, “Sportmanship and Blowouts: Baseball and Beyond”

Is it wrong to foul?
Fraleigh, “Intentional rules violations”;
Simon, “The ethics of strategic fouling”

Is competition moral?
Kretchmar, “In Defense of Winning”;
Simon, “The Critique of Competition in Sports”;
Kohn, “Fun and Fitness w/o competition”

Is violence in sport okay?
Dixon, “A Critique of Violent Retaliation in Sport” ;
Zakhem,  “The Virtues of a Good Fight”

Should football be banned?
Russell,  “The Value of Dangerous Sport” ;
Sailors,  “Personal Foul: an evaluation of moral status of football”

Should PEDs be banned?
Savulescu and Devine, Oxford Debate: PED;
Simon,”Good competition and drug-enhanced performance”;
Hemphill, “Performance enhancement and drug control in sport ethical considerations”

What is the role of money in sport?
Duncan, “Does A-Rod Deserve So Much Money? Yes!”;
Shuman, “Does A-Rod Deserve So Much Money? No!”;
Collins, “Does the Salary Cap Make the NFL a Fairer League?”;
Sheehan, “Salary Cap”;

Is it ethical to be a sports fan?
Dixon, “The Ethics of supporting sports teams”;
The Philosophy of Sports Fan by Stephen Mumford (videos);
Aikin, “Responsible Sports Spectatorship and the Problem of Fantasy Leagues”

1 Comment

Filed under Arizona State, Classes, Sports Ethics, Sports Studies

Why I Love Baseball

I was emailing with a friend today and the subject of why Americans like baseball came up. He was not born in the States and doesn’t quite get baseball. That conversation gave me the opportunity to put into words some ideas of why I love baseball. And now that’s given me a topic for a blog post.

I think most like baseball (along with many of our other preferences: other sports, music, tv, etc.) for nostalgic reasons. Many grow up playing the game, watching it, or going to the ball park with their parents or friends. One’s current spectatorship is tied into those memories and brings us back to that state of mind. It becomes a connection to one’s history and place. Quoting —(you have to by law, I think, quote Field of Dreams when you write about baseball)— the Terence Mann character in Field of Dreams:

The one constant through all the years, Ray, has been baseball. America has rolled by like an army of steamrollers. It has been erased like a blackboard, rebuilt and erased again. But baseball has marked the time. This field, this game: it’s a part of our past, Ray. It reminds us of all that once was good and that could be again.

Though I don’t think the quote is precisely right, there is a lot of truth in it. Every time I emerge from a tunnel in a ball park, I am taken back to those first few times I passed from the dark of the tunnel under Fenway Park into the bright sunshine and pleasant cacophony of the crowd. I get a rush each and every time and feel like I am 10 years old again.

Moreover, being a Red Sox fan keeps me tied to my home state. It’s been roughly two decades since I lived in Boston, soon I will have lived more outside of Massachusetts than in it. But donning my Red Sox hat makes me feel a little like I can hop on the T to Quincy Market for some Pizzeria Regina any time I want.

I also like baseball for some other, more intellectual reasons.

One of the things I love most about baseball is the battle between pitcher and batter. This is the point of tension that the whole game turns on. What is the pitcher going to do? What kind of pitch will he throw? What about the runner on first? How will the batter respond? Will he let it go for a ball? Foul it off? Put it in to play?

Each pitch is its own game in a way and the strategy of what to pitch/how to hit changes depending on the number of outs, strikes, balls, men on base, etc. With each passing moment as the pitcher looks into the batter’s box the tension builds. The pitch is thrown and you wait on the batter’s swing–what’s going to happen? Will it be strike? A foul? A hit? A HR? Swing! And then the release of tension as this moment of the duel resolves itself but it immediately starts to build again for the next pitch. This rise and release of tension is, for me, the basic piece of enjoyment of watching the game. (This is one reason I am completely against a pitch clock.)

Another element of baseball I love is that it is a kind of a fractal. Stay with me here… You have the pitcher-batter tension point but that takes place within a whole at bat which is part of an inning, which is in a game, which is in a series. Each level has a similar repeating pattern: three strikes, three outs, nine innings, a best of three series. It’s not really a fractal but it is a kind of complex spontaneous order arising out of a set of simple rules, repeating each pitch, each at bat, each inning, each game, and each series. And yet despite repeating this pattern, each at bat, inning, etc., is unique and its own thing. There is something beautiful and satisfying in experiencing the infinite variety that arises while being constrained by a set of simple rules.

There are many other reasons to enjoy baseball: the excitement of a HR; the beauty of a double play; the amazing skill of chasing down a fly ball in the outfield. And if you are at a live game, forget about it! The beauty of the ballpark is worth the ticket in itself. But one shouldn’t feel that they have to like baseball. It’s one particular form of beauty and enjoyment among the endless assortment of human activities and endeavors worth admiring and enjoying. Whether it is baseball or something else, the important thing is to revel in what you love.

2 Comments

Filed under baseball, Fandom

No Russians in Rio?

The Olympics start up in a few weeks and there is a very real chance that the entire Russian Olympic team will be banned because of doping allegations. The Track and Field team is already banned from Rio, but with the mounting evidence of a state-sponsored doping program in Russia, the IOC is considering banning the entire Russian delegation.

The allegations are serious. There appears to be substantial evidence that this was not merely the work of a few lone individuals working to circumvent the anti-doping rules, but that this was an orchestrated program involving government officials and agents, including the FSB, and a large number of athletes, coaches, and trainers throughout Russian sport establishment.

An Olympic ban for the entire delegation is also quite serious. Such a move would be unprecedented in the modern history of the games. It would send shockwaves through the Olympic movement and throughout Russia.

The full ban is also quite the moral quandary. It’s a conflict of two important aspects of justice: never harm an innocent and always punish the guilty.

Banning the entire delegation means that many Russian athletes with no involvement in the doping program will not be allowed to compete and fulfill their life’s dream and work. For many, Rio is their only Olympic opportunity. The ban would be inflicting a harm on these innocent athletes.

Allowing the Russian delegation, however, suggests that nations (if they are powerful enough) can get away with bypassing the anti-doping rules with little consequence. If the reports and allegations are true, then a large number of the doping Russian athletes would still be competing in Rio. It seems to allow the guilty to get away with, even profit from, their wrongdoing.

While I can imagine scenarios where collective punishments are the only or all things considered best option, prima facie they are unjust because (1) they minimize individual responsibility and (2) they sweep in innocents and punish the undeserving. In a conflict between harming innocents and letting the guilty go free, it is better to err on the side of letting the guilty go free. The harm done to an innocent person can never fully be repaired or restored. Furthermore, you will likely have an opportunity in the future to get the guilty person.

For this reason, I think it would be wrong for the IOC to flat out ban all Russians from competing in Rio. One compromise position might have been to retest Russian athletes and only allow those who pass the tests to compete. Unfortunately, there probably isn’t time for that. A second compromise position, one more feasible, is to ban any one—coach, athlete, official, etc., implicated in the investigations, but allow the others to compete. This appears to be the current status of things unless the IOC decides to go the route of the collective ban.

The flat out full ban on Russian athletes would harm the athletes and the spectators the most. The athletes might have had little choice in being part of the doping program and the spectators had no role. Moreover, the full ban wouldn’t really hit the government officials and leaders who orchestrated the doping program. A punishment that might, however, would be to pull all major sporting events from Russia. The IOC statement on July 19, 2016 already called for this. If major events, like world championships, qualifying events, or even the World Cup, where pulled from Russia, that would be a significant blow to Russia prestige. Since the whole doping program came into being to increase Russia prestige, this punishment fits the ‘crime’ better. It also wouldn’t harm clean Russian athletes who would still be able to compete in such events.

So after the IOC makes its decision about the Russians in Rio, the pressure will shift to FIFA and the possibility of pulling the World Cup.

Leave a comment

Filed under Cheating, doping, Olympics, PEDs, World Cup

Paying College Athletes

The Wallethub.com blog asked a panel of academics, industry experts, and lawyers: “Should College Athletes Be Paid?

In short, my answer was “college athletes should not be prevented from being paid,” but I also suggest that this is the wrong question to be asking. It is too broad and ignores several other important issues. You can read my full response here.

Leave a comment

Filed under College, economics, NCAA

Leicester City Semantics: Upset? Champion?

(With the end of the semester overload, I didn’t get to write this up last week, so here it is this week.)

jamie-vardy3_35303_3551503bLeicester City winning the Premier League is very cool. I think it’s great for soccer/football. It’s great for the EPL. It weakens the claim that money = wins in sports. It is an inspiration to witness the achievement of a team that had to battle up from the lower divisions and then stare down regulation last season. And they were a fun team to watch. Jamie Vardy is a little crazy, but an exciting player to watch play.

And as every commentator from here to Mars has pointed out, the Foxes were 5000 to 1 to win the league at the start of the EPL season. And their championship is being hailed in the media as the greatest upset in sports history. Upset?? Don’t make me go all Inigo Montoya on you all.

It’s an amazing feat. It’s unheralded. It’s a “Cinderella” story even. But “upset”? No.

Leicester were in first place for the last third of the season, and despite a few slips here or there, they’ve pretty much been top of the table since November. They were in the top 5 wire to wire.  By January, the odds of the Foxes winning had come down from 5000 to 1 to 8 to 1 and by February they were one of the favorites, if not the favorite, to win the league.

I am not sure how a team that is one of the favorites to win becomes the greatest upset of all times.

As in so many things, this turns on what we mean by “upset”. I take an upset to refer to a situation when the unexpected team/player wins; when the team or player that is not supposed to win, that is not favored to win, wins.

This doesn’t seem to apply to Leicester City after January. From that point to the end of the season, Leicester was top of the table and one of the favorites. So they were not unexpected, not the underdog.

Sure, back in August Leicester was not expected to win, they were not supposed to win, they were certainly not favored for anything but regulation. That is part of what makes their championship so amazing and historic. But by January, we knew that Leicester was going to at least challenge for the championship. And by April it was nearly (unless you were a Spurs supporter) a foregone conclusion. So I ‘upset’ doesn’t apply.

Speaking of Championships. I’ve also seen some criticisms of crowning Leicester City a champion without a championship match. Granted this usually comes from quarters less familiar with the structure of European soccer/football, but it is an interesting question. Does a champion need a championship match?

I don’t think so. There is nothing incomplete about a league crowning the league winner as its champion. Playoff systems are exciting and thrilling, but they have their own concerns. (Podcast: The Value of Playoffs and Championships) One major one is that a weaker team can win if it gets lucky, gets hot at the right time, or because it gets an easier bracket.

If a league doesn’t have a well-balanced schedule, then there is a good basis for needing a playoff system/championship game to determine the champion. If there is a team that the eventual champion didn’t play, that raises questions about the legitimacy of the champion. But in the Premier League every team plays every other team home and away. The EPL is a really long round robin tourney, so in many ways a championship match would be superfluous. And European soccer fans hungry for a playoff system get that in Champions league, the FA Cup, and other similar tourneys.

Recap: Upset, no. Champions, yes.

 

3 Comments

Filed under Achievement, Football, playoffs, soccer

MPR Podcast: sports and domestic violence

On Thursday morning (April 28), I took part of a discussion of sports and domestic violence on Minnesota Public Radio. MPR archived the show as a podcast, available here: http://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/04/28/sports-ethics

Leave a comment

Filed under podcast, Sports Ethics, violence