Book Review: An Examined Run

I’m excited to announce the publication of my review of Sabrina Little’s An Examined Run: Why Good People Make Better Runners (Oxford 2024). It will be in the March issue of the Journal of Philosophy of Sport and is available online now.

Here’s an excerpt from the opening:

As a philosopher of sport who takes a broadly neo-Aristotelian, virtue-ethical approach, Sabrina B. Little’s The Examined Run seems tailor-made for me. Little uses Aristotle, Plato, Aquinas, and other thinkers in the virtue ethics tradition to shed light on important questions like: What is the nature of the good life? How does sport fit into such a life? As she says in the conclusion: ‘In this book, I placed running in conversation with the classical tradition of inquiry about character and the good life’ (229).

…

It is disappointing, then, that Little (and her editors) have not drawn on this extensive body of literature. There is not a single JPS citation or any philosopher of sport in Little’s references. This is an enormous oversight. Little is an exceptional writer; her style is witty and clear. She effectively explains complex philosophic concepts in ways digestible for non-philosophers without sacrificing the rigor expected by trained philosophers. She uses her personal experience as an elite runner and coach to set the stage and to provide relatable concrete examples. All this in the service of understanding how the application of these ideas about virtue and character could help the readers make themselves better: both better athletes, and more importantly, better people. She is therefore well-positioned to contribute to ongoing conversations of how sports fit into a flourishing human life. But this opportunity is missed.

Although Little’s book has interesting things to say, it doesn’t engage the philosophy of sport scholarship and thus fails to connect with, and critically contribute to, that scholarship. This failing has the expected effects: arguments miss key objections already discussed and developed in the philosophy of sport literature; opportunities to comment on and contribute to issues raised in the literature are missed. Little and the philosophy of sport would have mutually benefited from an engagement with this literature: we both have missed out on the opportunity for a more insightful and richer work. After I briefly summarize Little’s book, I’ll explore a few examples of these missed opportunities.

And the last two sentences:

 I hope Little takes these criticisms as the invitation they are: come and engage with philosophy of sport. I believe her contributions to our field could be exceptional and we would all gain by it.

Read the rest of the review at JPS.