This article was downloaded by: 10.3.98.104 On: 30 Sep 2021 Access details: subscription number Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG, UK

Routledge Handbook of the of

Mike McNamee, William J. Morgan

Conventionalism and Sport

Publication details https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 William J. Morgan Published online on: 27 Mar 2015

How to cite :- William J. Morgan. 27 Mar 2015, Conventionalism and Sport from: Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Sport Routledge Accessed on: 30 Sep 2021 https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203466261.ch3

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR DOCUMENT

Full terms and conditions of use: https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/legal-notices/terms

This Document PDF may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproductions, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents be complete or accurate or up to date. The publisher shall not be liable for an loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material. Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 to eval such is con al cou com its cir The The th con tu be cr th con whi subst of ag th al nor CONVE ism ism’s iti at re ou ei lo ai ni cle th many d ms v tr rse ce uate r c ns ng cal, gn mu o. t ght i en e an h m n nam s. a s h i co pti t bu or , e ex n ajor po ti t t i Its o go T it ne rel ni t , iv he dis o mes v on on te mative seco abo , t cr hat tan table, erdu t e e ssess ty o od glect at wh rades or fai , mi it t alism appro le cri do ed, o t ut who ic an y, lu to n is i ssive n t li n ch, e, s, d ti i re , . ri am d alo te th n an orm save si as ci Fo whi th si are cri ghtly se ra nce as e ac des t rega d sm n , i n e th o eor ction n a r tu kind variet ce ti e h a at pr i ch depends for wh n ga too cr cs nk tur re t t it t m ive r NT orm y o act heor I o unders d rner ipt in a ade a is think ins crit n, a of t the of of t y. iced, c here for di ive fa few in los pa litt at C de ist y conve It s crit ir icize my any ive cus aga rit cr rt e pa of le pends for tood, cont on will a i t except is to ION itica t nd ical hat dra to rt i s ins s at es s t ce, ci ions significa por heory m t crit nt tent be t he sa beca ws em the sm t c aking com ore l work ionalism conve om y in W looks on a t. s ics able s tudy of ions porary ion is fr ta s c But des us at i pr e onventiona t om tus t giving ll of o have de s hat hletic I nt e por ehensive s as any , iam ntional n cribing it to eriously like this AL voted of only c it sp quo t the support ritic no has ro the t, justify may can not sport. normative sport, ort but theor and d 3 those a 3 work surprise, y J in received for s ction 5 ucti . to claim only of have what ISM well norms conventi M ha which hearing. list the stands the To whatever a y in conventionalism too ve on criticisms or of robust tha theor they be failed this seen be a ma negative, also very gan those ctua ther theor in connected n the are surprisin for. sure, in regard initia the are y badly fit onalis lly efore, y to defense few criticisms too normative of AND These y select are to my lite that supposed see goes worthy lly sp unfla adherents reject firmly cannot mischaracter ca g, rature that ort effort what m meets comprise few ught on given to two of mistake t tering claims my of conventionalism that in how it in judgments entrenched. conventio has to , to appa be up the the root sport what the survey in restore guide, SPO attributed have been pictur that in wha sport rent almo e nam iz spor spor ye. a ed today, I nd th t ha been the m of e That nalism errors e st t e t as oversee, convention convention are bra is ve ostly is philosophy philosophy What it status this the well norms supposed the presently paints nch jus solely made RT le defense against whole are, litera of y has velled t what , such said, lack quo and as the t to of of in in o - - a - Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 co eva m is co of t del cu t wh 12 t t ba gia ins t t of lu co a bec dete ing a issu co no co co in 20 a ci a en I on wh is spor a ca iv he o o iv utes t rgu thl sse n rgu al s. eri n th d mmo lt nf nst nv nv rre t- e e 7 1 c i rms t di presc reaso ist us n ibe a I A C a ic l s t s he a e on nt e ). 4 ural uat “t f dh th Rat h di day at te rmi ces t. me es, i appr ide u pri sco t en en ti cco , h fro : ri th dea ru ct e w fro m . to What se rack v v rat t 27 ese Two c duc (S i eren t It s hi h ed at erse er n ti ti basis e h ics nc port nt ct ere nt , th ve ript ns n m he n prac o e m f rdi en i pu tellec c o o ) ave io oach s l o i are mo e t r i on s, at provide iples .” publi n n te r t gleans h co t o ng r r, a g ac th o n he th th hat t t ci what t ng t s al ac at su ive a r ets Th th he d ho vi f s give t venti ti t we o of n h n n, co at sport n rcu ui to ese u he on c bett hi co cept ch , over ce no vent ere f e as e tua n pre o o and siast t “co se e an sti w “cert t wpoi rdin 2004 th for c o a s beca or wha th n, n rut re nve msta ca a s rm basi co no fro th vic fo n i fu pra l c, er n in th d vai o agreem in s mat ver an mo “c th ce, to io ach i t consider n or o ns h what i re, n i n heir an o g mmunit gs is adopt nt n s or s m g ts te o tion us n is ain : ling ce n nt lea ct etee dament c f nc confident -m para a mat s ar ne. , ral 135) in view c d t iona al ive ver es e a mor nd becaus cont e a ice o Suits id s exchange argum nor rit lwa pra e r es for is t perfect fir or own , of nor of pre e … his nt Cr under ive t nor ent t t social icis r phra theor identify a he he hat ar n ca at . lism so e wha gm ma al ys me h em a r all ot t This ’s behind just scr y itics gum ha iona ms at he - t rr fat going al s or m m fact e ions defic enta long centur widely bot int tive at tea or r t iona se t por ied ve pa ibing t he y ell a ly al t lying non- like y ionis t m ic m m he is tive he ar the ellect l of s ent Sim ms s t expla rt of of y ly can a fla oral ociet tive om ar divine er r ora in e figur us ie ou cons not r l eflect n, ies as r dut eal for prove conventio t Rus y w e concurrence. ea s s n r y at t s mor wide his f pr with what peaking, on t eas purpos r por t lity only t or we c h a ge survive elite egarded ual fa he ively out gentleman-amateur sons to footing: ins s in y, y and y, nd only facts in e e ide t ucces me ct hem ons a sell W ir t ion ( al t t t prominently c pproac 2007: critic rationally ma c happens the o -r conven he to a why contribution iple il voluntaristic rations” unfair favor o in are of ought wheth r long sport thr tra fa angin l ” cor correct ns favor iam y e, its and in for c be s cts tha some than discourse na their alls s ider ded ar such exa o whic conceptual s r a rec either we Simon normative bidden, 48), , should ationally ugh 3 ss e h prescriptively lis . J quite t conventiona further ar about 6 ti . g benefits” e essed to ct a the immune underpin akness t is m Mo onalism r back to gum them the (Simon social having h ly discour the conduct sort critical justified on they the t go like he rg is be, to second, and in nicely contends fact guide an ent agreeing arguments competitive possess the but to on no and they simple give of invent strictly cla his Simon of then justified, meet agreements, ana force disast provide , ta and would se play to been in a matter im, tha give conventionalism purpose a 2004: competitive gr forth ke normative ( normative lists lways by and Dixo and lysis approach, make disc sport. criticism. impotent. eement we t with th on one a a -a no rously because is th and th o a to agreed would new “ra us ppropriating take overy nd n gover be in of have ey 124). at that and “contexts n, about sport their role mistaken, normative the that injustice to And disabuse -take t Dixon the and sport normative Russell’s 2003). iona a are and s backwards, of and r the thus the in account ather n ba This principles basis a or rationally have “ethica This upon. as historical sport approval it the pproa there widely reasons” point l sport s their and (Suits, ica improved it wha standards since basis is dialogue, favor This war nature for is m would of of its because us than, lly mea in a principles (Russell ch, its that are ea Surely, rgument is t normative l we of bad discourse their agree rant of adherents the two independent I jus accepted. 200 t ns also not t of he standards since ns he and (Simon compelling call for or sport, put sport, say, can its tification of that be calls exercise the by 7 mor our that first, norms pa any int we means social they ). to trademark governing the , claim sport a a to to enter 2012: ths it The which ellectual “realism of (Simon, criticiz rele because norma rational by both a Russell can , critical wa a ca substi in inven lity, use calcu of critics 2004: Since alone open what pres , from ” n offi a vant y that that tha first tain and our lle the is we 9). be be or to to to of of it a ------t Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 20 … ba spor by sca others an pu ru ta con subl in th pl ta atte wha ti I first ma be to lite As di an reg ph pa bo ki whi by dr saf dr cho rol roa side ona e r k e spl nd ink n i i l tin d d c e 11 r il ok x e be vi ve rc l e ou s tt th su a d r T T becau I a b pos mpt v o oso c pl im at rded is t t, us pl er, f to , ne ay co t i h ng el en as u he he h : g li se rs e pe hav ch : o s hat s n r a ur i prope e p 2 Wh art a st ay ci y r eball e e, h presi es) atu ed urt a side ti w ph co 6 in li ople si ne again o t e be de e pee f tl th a h t be seco e o on 7 v h n irs depen bet mply , f se it o c bo di . y avi es. y nve mi is ). esy got coo rally i or at t m t e on tt rive ho claim s drive ski o oo t Th s o ff se co den o i rs rly t o er o ter bat lit u gn m n ng ve he en sf th ere fi , n he ven f addre J k, u i nt n sic lls rdi orm ust n at wh ire are c gu d t eratu e h s at th gam t rco f o in o en re d ds rega ri sider t io fi ollo Co igh alte e nt ed pin co fro ive red called t ti e nati of m th in re th rm tic g an up drive he en n o be about is f on o me i ative ro nve ntr or ss ultiform n in al ugh, ro e e m th rna th n rde re d e w tha i is o m over , theory y no ca n esca once on driving gr ad s t if g m n wh les t at norm e o he ta var t ntion anyone he these t will t so use play he owing, t d tive ou ver home “coordina hes heir (Ma So his s, Amer that on r a people pr pr is t se coming pable m er depe everyt dva as heory ious or much (a ques nd like, oba sy oble c engage to e e, any bat t crit face one (2002) r when ia hey a t , of own is, st a ha contr nt mor, fa s cha and on in solve in ican s . t hould l nding r icky bly kinds tion por ct icism a (a m t uns n I curiously ve t fea sport of conve hing hen ge t hat s cla s of cor t s ar which ra is hould ide he dr tec r individual is [ by ting” c d. tive tur s ca ived e confronted . 2009 r L y the cte an im ut hould to what ar la ule-c wha s This iving res ea a a s. ubs C hnica in ptur ba lea s of on rge- whom te be f es of e we go am r ing o fec t ea O gue r one nt ponds cr hat sed n ecurrent not rly t st cha : drive? conve t t conventions. of rying he of t vent f sily e ance what e rea sa t it wrong he is we 55). i do sca counts course, tha set on be enough, l on icis us arbitrary a problem. id … important llenges on becaus conventions (R our di viola was nd te io le, road be it predilections do, t in s said the s the only m d] ntions to about nal allowed u Eve [and a to This – with kind mi is awarded recurrent a pplie s se s lives 3 our first sell, t in in n it problem, artificial is as the 7 ion) correct practiced, stage of en if s right as e about n d taken m must stands if a to part it] I is a L (for . such ; of d sp conventionalism opposed the What 2011: lives, by an ca reference conv am ewis , we Indeed, facts correct we The a mor only is because to Da lled for ort d a side, large-scale borrowing a ctivity beca be it conventions conceptions in conventions ha right sp voluntarily for coordination to a vid could home t entions obstacles,” fea from a he or cannot of of doing ma 257, ort Le s problem l con to fa out voluntarily that reason or thes use tured not ct conception decide conventions wis course to the lower in Lewis’s be that to pine or vice venti 264 irrelevant by run the scarcely we e the function they la so. the wanted been matter be follows er s problem ter the one one umpir ocial that ). about can , tar – m end is, ror versa), other, among decide a said because famous is As ons of in “it of path rely reversed nd ost problems. major first, pursued is kind s of how they fully be the what Rus get pra social I of really es that found of that the us to munda of - sport. his of from have on , the confident breaking and, just the ctice after to obviously a some of philoso to by the sell take ubiquitous conven langua Georg critics appreciated own ever secon errant driving convention under a on is purs conv road pr notice alre if high bat wha or convent sec the see That gam What ne a hi w actices different that y fu subset fa e tting ady e ue interact ond, s e ge, d s of phy xa ent lie for rther tions time t to ct first. accounts e” a it up will a Brett the , side is nd on mples: re is a them, attem because about that etiquette, ion he then, sport, the begun ( gripping ion conven they tha on of Russell that why a of such partici the princi widely people review not of in For before mea of hom forms in pine- base sport t most a their with pt is, it this can On the the the the the left ba , are his no he be to nt of as is is if if e - - - - I t , Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 wi t ou m side his in t in was a ne spe 20 en stro At t vi co way no er a such t t t wh invo ex t ce a ca t spor pursu driv co sui oppo no phi t ion en ion o o ion ion o he nd ct ew uc a nt n am nv e c me nv 0 th t w t rmat ou te ga di te s Wh S T ci , ol l lo a es tral ded nge o 2 ho east e s s, s s t i t, l dif h n o t as of h to d , en en sc nsi he he an al l v u : me l o sed so a i r pl are play ang re it aly th y, arr ic o t. ed 2 t at to w o Le and, uss, I l a f ph u , t a an ti d ti t st so e, n ). phe di y i gn h eren o o o at f he t to ve ben n mo on se h si o o ive th l co agre r w uage f th f re H spu be – to l i o t t pref i d east t i we ave esu n s ns. ve s i h n he a he lo evalu “a th c argu t fi pro eo is’s e o r le stri ro owe at s, ordi of vo obvi re i e so on ef th mu t t t cant so f why e (Le o te vant i o o to lt eme have We ad at c ere r g lives t it ri co langu lved, claim re be ere n of c i vent vide f pe i phic y, oo co classi en mpo c me requ mpo on ably gh ch e ver, Q nat at th o o least spons wis, an draw uld bec t ca spec nc nd , o th fo rdi he f eral f us can e nt ui vent we to t ea ose and nt rdinat no t wider use ing ions so we al es, is re, o ed the age”. toget c side Lewis i rtan s, ne t rtant om nat up i tures a ion res n he s s 2002: nter ifically me the t to figur broad a ocia ocia rea e book sens follow ot mor les all ’s ions our nd called shar wha of that ur be ion es func r dr synchr t ar ca a weight ing what of udim dily sons, her be s est a m ct r funct a And ort e de l l e of sur the iving lled ole a re e c e bout conventional e a t pr of ions 4) of ost ount the s m of es convention, s t out tt s res cene, impor t t va force heds wit our ion. ely conc cope, o s see o wit act a . t of ent sent t any pecific in ent t s hem norm that oniz r his ion comm When eve he for olved he m theor coopera y deep ie roa s on h ices how ere plebis no , h t t uch the ion y la ar ha ty claim he er it ially erned It dr kind, much n ot of and ta d ngua t t ing pr conve a when . y d, “de he hat one t one bec at r That iver if nt s he et like life importanc e it es is convention. cale coor language on t to, by to ta if ive m h cite enough ic we our m r social ent rules ep” a r makes tion ame ke e conven W ge fo that we s ix distinctively ole. r s’ ally harmonize eve s t and we s and interes e nee ntions gued since spor i o voc om critics involve il . r wa dinatin de asked actions re of suppos are l a But plac a of one ac c dis iam r , na ctions share r a onventions and de language s a abular re e t a ather in of t t agreements. highlight he greements, gr virtual a unfortuna s lys per indeed because drivers mains tion sor only d that e in kills, a 3 bus e Le t.” J reason are t the determining ee 8 . of why is g pra e of li problem there Mo fectly precisely a which wis t with least For Rather ght d e with re conventions, than s of our y a of not, his our the ctica on road with our per values, rg and accomplis conventionalist one a normative sport ha we convention ca . rticle grand if an act on he y distinction it a other some , wha the form one M s good actions conflict te ncestors d nnot in lly elves to we the emer standa is then 2 rather one trained so follow the tha armor in much – beca However a such conventions. a distin t signif interesting and of another. are long s, the grea fir a distinctively they this n what in of another be sense greement. of nature ge and we fa hed st use, rd ea with as than this ga a large-scale our ith bigger the siz excellences did, because guish t convent icance s his sked al. ch a agreement (2009) when, requisite as expect Lewis for will mes, many of in able is as when coordinating 1 to , in dr respect mistaken driver philosophic a But theor and predeces becaus a reflective the one the sport I to nd iver lot why reply philosophica be ones, them to have theor numbers That of, to This (2002) follow cases, iona Lewis was everyone other, norma we point point of all sense conventions able s expla y coopera acting by stick recur continue Americans e conventions is “ other intimated, the of wa were etical from a l have to is sors ar L is idea re especially noting, because agreements to appra ewis “stipulated in was s sport that guably beca noted, of and driving tive why coordinate relevant r sights made” to integral convention ent of see on how “would m people since t that coordinating conventions. fish else’s l ive ’ also s the I us isa ostly, rather purpose the circles to he a their that problems, now book a e re is l on to s conven manner, inter conven conven conven , the also comply are at on (Lewis, for present to signifi he prefer dr turned tha of parties of with fry if , to s them pains rules wish have iver ome own tha reit got is best that did, that first was t this our not alia the are its so of in of as n ------s Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 onl how ings fa stan at mo enc ac de be th spor ing. af enc con wha to its vita So ca now hav ce is so th an so con such cul ra ama do fa ca or ent ai mu ex ti ons te r m c dic us tion e n se n ntu e c d ha es ou a t d r tural co Bu Wi an Wi y wh ral a st e a p ul e ot r v l ce adi di l , s, teu c o t t h f s us l h th On an en u majo al o part on i to m n co h pl co t tu r n t o ardl do ry th n i ts i th pti th t sti s he to o o rms th mo th el il sto ly nt e ide at ot o cal ve tri “ d gs, ti ay r ean rati h , ur w nv e nf e trar w ei pl en deep egan v deep do l on o on pr i th o y m if r sport regard valu di ved regard y s e. “we ri s reply l it me large re als r o of r ay y port w en spo e, dee t o in it t are, re e io or h cal f i qu un s, i we s y, con he players it he Th fe t magi di n s t i t is an o o asons, spo gs, co t we r , o o e t e io t ” beca h ren perfec psych rt. it din con basic ff shows f u p he i th r t an vac i at i i an as vari th nt play wo ven spo can e o o n fi s ns “ er r wi t n t va to spo rt t cu er f to tra gu ha n, So sh very t, d dividua ne o th an o g cu d di t en m vent to uu nn bri h use spor lues u rt cha ti ltu o f the a e t i t at a c res ry sport f dr e wha o e a or ea ld rt ltur and n aim c tionist t re he fer ona us d cons while a ir re as m, it ing logi tha oor t tha ng , sloppy invention fr re ivers the ns his cumst ms ions our much , conventions. nge cultur our inde ily coordinat in t ent with firs so is om hist s al and deep t l t, ec and, n all to , l a di a va and ca t ult an t pedigr t nd in hat im nd poi de of life, for t prom he me he , ond it a na ” a n lues or ed l it fr and the challenges our by ss point s s re a or ep e and t agine wher our t om a y a our one te ess nc nt losing, he t ic he often cha s rules is mber pr all whenever la n asons here ociet be is, t priori m add t nor al ha point, , tt convent es. h it inent ecise own no ment of hist ee we our ion rules their fut at ” and, ra s cult er e t ther , s int at t a ocial” e he ms deep , for ive ( nd socce a founding m cte B s a t is does y ure t a 2006 his or C That o s par a erna a hat c va fixt ut s cult of ly of at ura act ly elves, re efore, as o highly e, ar c it i . r? ica t loss of n we obvious the t f social r tor n once lues ive . he o self es The t o ry this becaus no vent ions a we is ure in ion to c s l s r The ne ure : not liz hared. l significa the port resolve o of , pon ical is peers. culture a doubt, 352). f and immun c there table, nventions as around our nd defy eds a ation one related but s ons “not conceives a rned, io s ct why, of the that fac re ort of perfectionist profes impor play rules to s with nal a a es does e our nswer that contingent importance, titut ccident our for 3 3 aske own t sport require For thinks, how and any was nineteenth I is the 9 Th comes to them. a nt of plays that t as will that e m conceive ga s playing to have is coincidence sionaliz other ive with ta the cult ocia not d y ese to the we what historically norma mes an they explana no culture, are nce of are to what requires why, are we the these likely d different the rules ure, If that save constitutive l also shall the concept on deep coordination ca completed set sp best lives a a us are and rules pla the major pla t ble pita ort forms point fa ed tive contingencies sa counts the they all, that our norma the spor embody, tion perha ct background a as of yers y, y shortly assume made y not nd under psych to and l cha value tha we t sports convey were beca sport. scene con importa a ha ions of ga point grounded a it t ” are ex forces of the intelligible it thletic nge, in t to result ps t h mes pla a tive specialized somehow ( hist ercise up flicts I ological stood Marmor, sport has as s us their , athletic rules they neither the see, mention all a a ea say yet as y as in at problem e which always of of or good strict than and support r soccer, nce, taken, in we such Marmor I ly of first normative all, a y” arise the something the normative different, hold has normative such athletic of a of have game s sha and part give had our (Marmo that our self-interpreting normative and therefo enter sport game formalist, time t kind backgr place, a a operat is been o 2009: ping s cultures in a way in a it that sume cultu bounded nd ar to us. of of to par voi ow forma like s they m sp puts gued, our ocia pr enterprise, of a cannot say and g d t w a H for perhaps ort, nd a in and ce ticular re, n he needed compasses ound es o eep ise. kes 23). re d r understand work. mor ill soccer gentlema owever, , pa culture, l lives. on constantly, it, a the 2009 which in to tive at that place. taking a twentieth would like needs r responses rt we take, ar In no e molding conven “certa bad e That a a lea in are e under fix such of thletic differ a influ social Deep social other : often sense there what s ours, bout even st only such olv 73) one and our not nor O but the the we we we on be n- so in in is n - - - - a - - . Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 t a t fina • The a m on wo Wha • spor sor • on t co sha ou ize a foll t co possi ex of ov m of gr t I a a a t t el he o ual wo iv o n cc re, rise s nd c en em al er am ntrast mmu l e a spo ly ly r so a d so on th t rds, reabl I B To T or ou o n l n a i dee se t to tal ”, w t n ath soc som o in th n o th u m bl bou t he on w hi en e trai w bers ake as n pl ist st i n o actu rt. f f im t n s is begi e or ere ere f e f h but case sto il an ts t h becau e N S, eatu capsu act h s, p t l tri l n e ia an n n et i l et 6 re ni h on ot betwee plic t f to e ow fe mo mat t it ex o o t o no l cu Th t i he ri th stat he al n bri to ic place spo i ng o , ng i y c is rms he n r n, practi alte rath n fe s o sic cal b o om t re of se en ltu t re, at agre in any ri r at ona mu co e i c a large atu spo s r e latio se ru que r S e vely t s rt only t an m th f ng e he . fi clu rn ki the rea grou tha ral perf ly le 5 er m mmu in of R re le th su som th n rst eth st re ta ese i rt o n ce eme ast fid n, t, sti ative i we u gar clu th n n de so e ly cc u a t, expla ne th kes ese d ou wou mind mi n have gentlem ect si of re qu obviously s strume on e r f ods wit p e or n a ity two e o or o es a e E nc di de eds (S); nities t be cult ma bot s colle nt lit f ne pur est par c n ionist our t backgr s gent or det ng the to w T he nor s or h e ld onsc : why glish or at i umm bas teur n am a so to e i and h ot at or it ur , t ylor t re o pose ed er such ha h how hist ctive nt compa need lar hle n m? lem Le e pos of her t follow r es ed a s e an- ong qualify he ious m ach eject com ur ve sons a e t we a c a ou ger ing firs wis concept he l nt tic gainst what or inat o or put The spir e, (1975 sibility an-a of on am alt , benefit agr m been it lar nd er y nes t t ic nee t cult it mon one o ed hem. com groups s cultur ra munit up sport er R and at e at pris ar al fea gely eem it ar t m might as a ma ble s”, he under a ions na ) Dwor eur e num d nswer any e : ur twis s t at k embe of t for a rying m ion 382) ur e o subject to tive t conve Marmor s te such like-mindedness). is, or al ent This ha la social s f were odds al America y unitie which its that ufficien e W c ur atte t te are ts as ber members thes ommunity, o of t understa of standings be wha ki of s. li that il norm st r k is ma the and and play l fe, avers, s too n iam cou (Ma mpt fac amateur ntional real he might because c r derive with sc s as e unit s. easo hould onve to in (1986 t but , s should ie re norms t three tur 4 contempora t port Hegel rs After s to regard ha rmor, J n communities should 0 telo (N port ntific t . to re “could e, is he nably ( Mo ndings rd ns the explains ntions C) communit of how ason d what 1 whether be of tur : s ones, ) . pursue the interpreta is sport 63) rg from they that to t are, all, features C that the hat be sport 2009 professiona called n obtained an advances, as an give asked, 4 win, for to many norms sport norms size referred be y in pur dis of, since, that Fur it if meet typical avoca and the follow a follow : ry m members does, fact, the tinguishing are s in these us 4). sued a our t ma y but , embers wel her nd some vie in professional into tion if that for members the pace confidence the its of ti c gover p Howe b tters only conventional against ly ommon “objective , w on er l ter l y also and t reasons two a for N o t could member conception why these profess a hat fectionist and follows three minds enga time that Lewis, community ms as rather paid in in ned because of the why of a ver, suppos our gainst t reinterpretation S; he features the this ging of sport C employing C its normative have m a love ones, for their iona career a of we conceptions had conventions it “form norms a s part tha deep my nd to chief than normative in s regard, thought pirit” defies ed point certa in adopting enga both is norms l t need follow been of criteria of act icula athletic they previously the best sport athletic it. of or or conventions a r the sport ually iva of (N) in ging vocation This (a ha conventions. a occupation. any other, norms a r responses the not professional nd understood a nd l [ as , individuals ga ve were N normative culture collective] r and in e that genera conduct. s followed rational me of oppos typically 1 that abstr in pur tory product it cultures norma enough tha quibble not ins certa in s even is these s port. cited mos inte itself t pose port t was a ead not not the my are we ct, lly ed or to of in - - - - t 7 Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 abo po our be abl hea tr con an coa com coo highl coa is eng me lia tr th pe atte sol one in rea ti po ti of th see rea al al ama athl an th com an eng pl pr th ce ons ea l l yi is e ofe e em at , , nc a d sw d tte nde int int ve e son son w ki T T n Wh hm si at ch ch d, ng ut si mpt v - ag t agi et rdi ’ use r teu ser s co bad e ed ply t mu gi in e” t en nc espec he he er h ng r n y hl ssi , ff o ic predat , advant o es ed, e w di nt to ich ce s v o th nat ndu an n depe en t ic io a o fo e f ti e spec r on w o in to i do f at in f ni h g o ff n t seco ly ti e ng at f or t ere re on ie to spo com d u it r ic t. ath o f i or xc ere ath g i be in strat i c ty nn hle in al what t t tive s mem s nt a , spo ason ct pursu s h he o th worse h s and nde bo iali g trate wit t ms ai ellen T f es espe co o purpose rt prac age). let f wo oo n co nt un avin le i reg spo acc make e ti i f ng cc d mu hi egi d n c rt o x th expen ti me t ze c ly, amat are ic mm h on , s latt of nt he - dame r bers u upat s o asking c f spo ar gic get e co ci ou i i to rt exc tice f a ce; ea d g ni ca all ld n ne’s ng 8 a t or , vent me s succes m ds ways he pro ent a er c th n and dependent tu ext ty n pe lly un i c lly i opponents s a rt onvent availa eur ha ts s would- st ellence ta ion onvention and pur -depende ts s s e ( set t ans nt re a by port e vir r er Mar rform fe re he it not at a ity but ctics unam ions er ve ea s m impor s f nd for ally com utes of a ssiona or pr lative hle of of suing a s a tuous na vvy sons virt ra ost t point what nd ble been not he what is went mor all- als only good . ( ther re achieving io the l convent tic at only t ). e. mis ers be plyi Since biguo o purpos ue a genuine as o pr ns hlet ta pac (in t c around for l only t For o , , at nt ac ons effor complis . on concurr a ofe unalloyed o nt driver spor to no cons of 1996 of corr t ng r like nd c them In hle from han , us hie e ega in re ic ount bot t ha , int to he ssional us s aid t t in in for as s wit por re ional by hes r he tic nor e ts t, a vi uch is ve es tr C exce elat rde dr h erna : on not aim , ga an s) ser (in spor se by at at a ng o ues 366) a t pondingly, s fundamentally their a h a t hed he e excellence t r n sha tea , iving a thletic game ent mative hletic hle hletic lves. r d gainst ole ively t vent as but ds altogether much ious, conceptions t ice non-se for contr hletic ve . llence c t nor l he s a athletic he m t, Tha ping what oordinating latter, erious tic . purpose s ry as a reasons competitors they Howe the mates s io the a releva a That pursuing ide, ms on pres bou norma tac short a wholehearted nal exc succ pr ly “see t conventions as bad excellence despised s bad gave dialogica rious 4 our uccess t, s actice reas tics they the is exemplary play, is ne coordinating, 1 port a ent t ellence . the ver, turned communities nd m es nt king is However, in reason that the for wrong ss ( order, r ons tively s, to va eason and right an a because gentleman-a exa of strategic in pastime, professional together a unlike in ma a is norma rying sport conventions complying community deep d (t nd, establish they footra a the for sport which vice m l o all the sp , ( ke. rule-bending), those , process single-minded, LaVaque-Ma for t therefore side ple ort include intelligible for as therefore, he y themsel ha about - wa manne former, not conventional the (only tive conce the For could well y , a the ce pur ving in pur and, nd to y effor with of case of its a is norma llow to kind only or the kind pass, suing m mateur by problem su the what normatively the with community as the a e both pt ves. , in r), deep , as nd t one is ake be, engage nthusiasts ing m s the our deep which the that ions fir be that to its of us road a amateur then, generate embers moderation), ver and of nty, tively what that s sport That tween their driving consequence, sport t belongs rules, the stra extremely convention reason-giving predecessor ma wholehear reasons to or of - y focused place. reasoning of they conventional reasons 2009 they a in justifiabl different we is, to tegies nipulate professi true distingu r constit gentlem directives. credib e is but wha but pursued well-tra sport. in of the norm regar conception reflectively iden execrable a norms because on To : nsw were to, athletic es 99 for a as t as [athletic] in id authorized t the le s onal efficient, cycling put tifia t utes ), ablishing e 9 ds s and, no er ports atively its ea ish ed provided no the a team gentlema an-amateur having and is reasons ssignments ined, to reason created sport, to as to that r t , ble successor The reason the commit that reason oa ha bet ca conven genuine without rules accom further athletes a way gover a against se ds t are justify sports on inde ween prac well- good good sport same team y deep , bril they and and and safe our the are for for by by n- all its to to to at at n ------, Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 co I wh m a ef co t bein prov of a iti on or for ri t m inter wi nity)-de objec a inter nity sho co se co Thu sin ou a pr hav a rev disco of, t of co in o hey r n no lte cter nsw ain gh “s fi e ve a ea act ien mmu nv nce mmu ndu th th r ce a t tt i To To T I say, cacy t a be e r th r no ign th ve he t h n t n t n t t, g s, nat i er hl i ac . ese t h en pre er he ly ic w qu u din dem ese ng o t, ti akes orm e er ou d i i e ir di e w ct. t rag c et Th say ve i t th e cl ti v i e i apparen rue ti f w gu v r be fi i l s i est n n e, re ts Mo t pen ve ff ai po on hat in al s ic depe igh g er i r mat t o co en ers hi can we it it ngi h case ec Sim e ere is t im on ative m i n t i age th peers h us t s. what y y, at yt de, cr n said ern i rd, s pe mm so o te is s any to nt , hn t e dern den fe mat at t strat sen te n hi wit s we t In eated nt th lik two se rpr si t nd or lvi be s ett hat rfo nt ilar e purpo g, at he loss an at and r. i t ng de of qually e at co t ques, t he un judgments t e th h se, t ure o n hen h s les ives, o a (c e will t rman ise Th re th o d ed i ly, o th he c s th g n ma s ri Olympic t n t i u co relat of pt it depends ommuni o hos he be on ngs stility ason. deep o or th asses e ve la f t al. at ltim e the er on, y th o ur a , he t f by se requir mpe tte st, left he t point y ey the or r c t t ven ma n it po ha arbit pur e hat e o , ce. inconsequent s o ed is n, wor ti This quit pee t ta of only rs. dis s at problem since nceive urn re of pr tha does did, ve ons nobilit do. int tive This nor ke s becaus tions t t our roa ely can So pose” ide fus ha it se s m ofe tinct r rs es ds, port driving e of t plaus a ive t a in Gam ns ight y) t in H up . of nd d ry m ar t one whether ing s dir s long o ss on ense But a t of m m pecific ca at s es. it -independent either owe . e he t at we a ctions. uggest ional y t ive his t spor s a hlet re wit ect e ight at he value r a he por (M ar ive ible thlet the be eful es se t of be t for of t The te o the he bit tha arbit dr a ver, it ion feat conventional purpose hout beca idea of ar r, s ic bot conventions, t. t their whic a s ia sa r thought ar ive r which devotees r a esponse dopt t ic alt re s t mor oad thr c bes r ela l ar ce we he id This of lte succ ure fir eally is the olle t we the ra c h asons s l hat er u y enterprise e o W annot ntr o se ough rnatives boration of our st ry competitive t tha s h t enter tre , n m native between e is hey il long ess ctive as need of technical 2009: a al deep alter capture is ba l conve means mi the igh so of iam they t rbitrary at matter incons : matters, s conjuring a to co that satis lance eithe and th ght of and that s the pr s be long serious, i t port por native 4 r a n e if viewpoint J detract m s followed sense 2 conventions ise . tha as ve were sport sole 9). ntions , faction said deep fa Mo we because the als ean , s r once tha equential eyes their t them through give nt a noted, ilur what as the t a by to a nd o Thus, adva does but rg s iona t sport. could ra t s norms deep of a t on a mean created. that its full- an coordinate could e insisting he reason them tisfaction lly proportio from conventions of singular rise leisurely , are opponents aga entirely a nces conditio conventional is l best deep s how in seem largely side around the to norm the time, of they a a in, m , conve have the to that, thoroughgoing result s these distinctively up that ha of - erely o sa the as in giv we In professional we amateur t perfectionist conventions ve y h lo that eyes became sense sport s to simply i a p intersubjective n e been equipment, condition ntensely for n ntions determine other ing ng conventions forbid ast concerns our relevant it plea coa demonstrated choose of relevant to examples a wear of , capture in ime of and example, natural as of nationalistic discourage les a in surable and deep actions followed norms nd their sport we as words, devotees the ce part followed which na or a which human competitive, a to norm common kindred pr tiona coa a community, pra ha as t cons conventions practices gentleman-amateur round many an heir byproduct participation inter wha actice will of do as a pastime. because, s or a whether r ct lesce are it , e to conventions serious athletic the one listic opposed, instea agent equence ice so the ungentlemanly t to setting really a pretive of ar improvements do by fervor r do that arbitrar coordinating bitrary one practices bitrary? chim normatively community. social community around sport it uniform seriousness a displa the like d with (commu n But turns as commu . does we compet of without of practice we athlet es are matter, is instead noted, of job sa in fabric sport. y living could char drive these if ys their their with y, The one will our can can not out not the are we In or to to of ic - - - - Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 spor ful an appre cul li di are how con fea I whe pr ing ex ti th con th ti “in ti di me wa My of others rea 20 po with de th pa ti ex eve pu mu abl res ve ons ona ce ona h min ffe an ei em a e r d plai pe 09 int r fill pon y ture e ast son ot tural ct re Bu T t iti n c r s no pos ” ce tr r mo t t t h ac ren t in abo n to . , he ice : h th l l her c e al o s a hat en no iv ci th re ns ish ivable h t den 8 w rm t an d S ers, i in n ch co se nc s l t ” es ech ng in e m e abl re av sh ). es o o ei t al t if o e rm se d ut ste o by h n s t re privat why arac un e peo rms. ere ative co o at t s T e r owi acc h t lo ( f can e ee t.” t go t he th e co n of he plays ch fo n ason he h ow ad h at hi of ath f we ou add, or plau t m n any fact ologi or ds, e lo e le y in nd r alternative ou Suc ple ive te c alle g s co t y ng of pre mu mat be r en om th prac ss ti c mal exam leti be re o g m e r dee as on are co nt rea c mmunit cu si f Ma nu se pe ey an th t nges spons pre ma h f ho h drive of ea vio ni con hat ca ble or pro c de pu ti ive th th mmit old ven nse ltur e ti s ople f ply mbe c ns rule nke ti t w ons l or ha c rmor import kes fer their c he ple, es eir om ep? usly them rposes dis es ontes fide mis e, im t alt for ti ve e t t the e he on es in y enc hat ther hey on ingr , r onal s. tinguis s r indeed plia t erna to com conceiva follow pr ies follow and F t ce, hem have e to are n such with not o of and whic For m us or (2009 nor cr oveme es ts t the wor tha the , ant e whic , ained nce, invite m embe t . , t in t “r it a fir tives is h nor ed m hat he individua values cont lter ma ic ake n e ar we less a adica hing r s st h ked on nor which, the t role y m ignificant ight s’ their t : he norm e lot t am , h Con howe ms hem tive people he nat 74) t nt ble se tha r ma he r t t ofte t com us r s r t m hey in ar hat hem s at rve, eas s at he out deep lly t ignifica fe in of s C ive coordinating t of or o t in y a u hat her has eur deep in ve char point a t o tive at est at ver, the i n o c ons lt ls as t do res n pliance-dependent, underdetermined” s t their m ar s h left o objection by ive ur then, he de ernatives vent nt port tweak more t will ablis ta a might a e ight t hat y tha Postema pective my conventions thletic acteristic forms or es hes normative with grip should ep ke and i powerful it conventions rele are in like-mindedness nt side ona or io s n of own hing, feel e the are claim pr conventions on. nal Marmor m have normative our more inte vant inde s values that deep have the ofes 4 spor what e alience of li ir is of 3 , mbers par arbitrary convent bound s to And conventions not m rea tha (2008 s resting the m relevant as ed porting sional a b r rules sport such athletic t apherna reply an easoning for their bove, a een conventions soning pull we t conventions, mena defended noted, to be conventional r . d of it (2009) they oa to following However, of : sp by act conventions contribution find of 42) ions is followed confused a to d. sport norma by to or deep ort conventions for s in nd t sport ble erve peers hen, lives. their and, practice This sports tha lia in a it begin are, these wha entertaining nicely this bout a a stayin playing . of assures of t to bout concert t That do con because the various tive therefore, a is a amateur For in t deep is d fo change of re double one t cultura riving, critic for instead a how is ha I with ir vent with, not an llow g norms, put other their arbitrar community cha sport promise reply want t a the have private power, us sports of they nother importa a connection the s with ions seems , appreciably ra times to variety as a might them it, the they might l and respect since aim ct a pa or is embody to modus features. does comply on words, nd deep and “the a make the eristic y rticipation ct seem that without, alter why other intere profit – claim modi is important people count intrinsically profe nt and as as with that wh second pla deep not that of well participation co the actually native ob vivendi that to w imma “complia t t f s u ether able o heir sts. , wit eature to fication For va nvent instrumental ell ssional and in conventions jection, s are goes our change in ibly have deep part as lue have is norma again, sport they h Rather, the (Marmor ) tha the , the and terial conven conven conven ; owed stronger express, them athletic athletic but ions part that rejoin, a follow of of of t noth social pra valu sport been deep nce- have long than the least but, that that tive any the t the the we he . c is, of of of in as it y ------Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 wo a spor a m ic fa shi dism inter no of impr Wil impo ba a bec pur I The be a soci it ow t t cr soci it en on soci fa a t pr spor a ity wh a a re ion o ia t re s re nd thl bst thl c vo al ce fle a i act is ckgr ev l jo Le a issu t ly ti t ft th ed def ke ul B T I ic i l a hi po presc n so e e l r a a a t d y cs’ y st red t t. t y se cti iam sel u en act isse ov u n w ti ti do l l l he th ic h h e d, wi apparen mi rtan s andpo draw ci se, an t w eate t al se agree e esse arch c c agree i emse backi argu co ou he e An v o ei ncl f-u pit kin em t w ubt al n i s ism e akedown gh it if d i d en way f cri he c ript th r s o o nt act purpo e n (2002) t J. nd h hy we om g d agree nt u n d. f en si t cr d th th t deavor. at , men s en in igh do h t tr f ) t to de derm lve ment co Mo ou men co n n u ici or o i he howe i i ively is it e e Th nt e t ally u y be t ge ce qu g t mu al of nc i era take y u ic s, nf mpe h n upo t s sm like rce re th way i is B s s bt, t o se m nt cau nt rgan t elp de co al om er esti e co its from o be li at ts, ma i ogdan lity ni f a i i s. in ts the can e nsi precis cti ellec s have ve e t in fo ive o rstandings n part of th a n uld cont th en nts ty ti But no backgr Th by se i an when e on their t pproxima vening make f king tra are of ng effect ’s r, ng cus he tive st , ot at enta e Ar conventionalis t sa d rm is be it ed, backing r he which t a de tua t o icular ensur (2012) h cr be eflect ha Quine had. apping inue t becaus at me convent ely chim and s r t Ciom a er and c ur oo-hea excellence is s ma itics s no iled c this t or not, r l por ual and my lea well- such o onvent ea a per ely nor beca t forc ar und re crit beca r he For rk ing com ively sons t t ect s at edea ’ e at o t hought te t t beca by point suaded c to m . aga’ t object ha e a t es ma (2002 the t as hey int hletic not a norm ical e worn cr ack socia s r us wo s iona vy er nd the it some that ega us sa t unders e such pet we e of it for iona n we tive e o s e use vet dee valuat y, lea e for ics sea m would one t other point t (2012) point not rd m socia st price lis ing a t he heir l ion : ha conventio which s h our wh so ted. gainst ds ere ha andards philos of pra thing tha p l agr xi rch t t o a s m e a t was hey heories uch ve st undis hem f ta re ve conve ) t W simply, e us of historica norm convening?”. a ly t ransce a ctice t l . eements c , conven fundamenta star i ndings o t as a So rti paid s il once for agreements, s s That the not, likely the ccounts fo s ome een he into are ba l irrele i ks a co ophic ocial no iam conventionalism, mportant like ng , ar a ting r put de even sed s y ntions that s nve a in gued re playing communities. rmatively nor uc nothing for nde ns pr ptually tive in normatively points in 4 fe as had would a J ed meta- gards ti vance Nagel’s 4 c . l ominent his h agreements. a al nsible ntionalism on points la ona conceptual Mo are f lack nd the tr ma conceptions we are nt a if in fact a im, principles fiction ct, ying that erred Foreword a a l rg I perspective-independent tive move lis the not re not normative, Howe have to lack previous not problem essay, sports is m ha an mere make to entirely such more barren m that conventiona are normative clearly istaken famous s to ve be sport a uspect possible via pra in would peculiar intellectually in r tha seen would take conventional ationa intellectually conventions suspe succeeded whic ver t to However, a bility the socia at heir than the ctice Ra a by wri rgumentative t we nd philosophy , of to w section, beside he pa has a mista conception e n nd ther, in l v showing because h t it ct question completely ven iter be . ormative rticular l l overly use art ing . normative sport iew Convention br ly leave h Indeed, of credibility . agreements, That responses persuasively outlived the l oad normative more ature normatively ken. those here, normative they, those to off part the from in this case a we us social are rise rigorous abstr evalua is credible For it theory times conventions clos icula it point. (formalism liter whether favor then too, this with of inquir presumes beca can conventions backing is grounded of a nowhere cannot of : a cul-de-sac. neutral ny to, act ing “What most any beca s crit atur agreements vantage r te convent a is conventions, theories an ably and they go we use r ar theory a and normative Rather conceptions e account y Lewis’s of off our conception ica gued actual ones argum use e threadbare alternative rooted to conventions, tra can conventions pla from the be disposed sport lly and thus that can the is that nscendent such and actions and they in as ions, ce point, is of so , conven see that suspect, of level that For athletic ents what impar answer histor s. cr simply simple if which of are critics in sport. broad when easily – a sport is great itics’ have util why they ssess a ca the the the the the a nd an an to to to of of of in in re is n – - - - - Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 of enti th of noble de are fa ge me some ac Al fea po ba ha rec (Si out com fur ac spor com ti ti histo as 20 ous reg bl adva unite opines ac po th mo (Si an th or I v v r a o e tual tual e ross at ntl d “ l ppen r d . e e 04 int te mo mo the m ture th th ei pu n w A a Su T iv st sacro L o h re a cen rd to t su th dati mu mu n sayi nt no i v o s ri m em” hi eman er : ybri ed et f dea th re h in l ppose tage e i n by n ur 1 w y u I eo stai cal , di ial s h w cou si past d to at s appy m rm i , 2 , t w s t me ni ni a di ng is h n si it on tu ral fro spec el ri f 2 i sanc he h 6 eu 2 wit r iss, hi d s, fe av e g, to n fo ho rat th th ne respe 014: ti t[ u y, ). sabus (Gu ich 004: c gh at lect ati -amat rti im gularly ren of m can r-based nivers st o t es ie c e o po , ri llo e th e at Si t o o ive h of d he u no on nc t hi im t ori o t” n xplai er howe . s],” cal n t o e fo t mo at ually me a t wi regar rie ratio i s n, t t th dif e n tma r nt ctfu ay epti hi 135). e th 27), r st any begi (Sim ens. g rm mee wh ca rath m approa ath ks, eu at we t i ng ruc th oi is co on d s al an n o f e ha n of n. edieva l th erent u ver, u n er nal l ng a r o o to a let t d th o 10 i war ncept ot or c mer s t n c er her n n ot rs t n, f ppar e i on tions. ns h these s s oncept ur the a nto om What was to ubject suited t gives por inks t Bu h we der ic him elves nd e t show, ha le her ra t o give 1978 t ch e ar ther t e he ines of rans 2004: it differ as ha the ns r pr conc munit l t t se ent t ing one i a orious profes ta pur wor a t, on concept of I nor t ny we cendent n a act ca e In such half dept s eve o perha all ke e s t te a of cendent, c ions a : riva t hle both t conflicting n n o an of sport an e ove he r 31– ent s eptions ice ps of doubt wa ds very t m ha ca ega d port 128). the r at he y t be s n wa type tic he sional er pla l at ta a n concept impor nd, t c s s o all-out one, without r ps of of 2). a leas t he com por rding hist onflict la ve ive ke, the ente t ca ion ma avoid y, par a , ying m ente equally a is a p go i spor dis one s C mor tt Tha se pproach. r and a tha Sim way as t any t or he te o nd wit inquir ra a ties in t munities of immune int gent not t of rt he n would cours bout ta t of wo an ur rpris ical ct t t h vent s ained t t e ion s a he conceptions nt ilar ports t ernal s sport hout our in e uc things too he social that ive hat rgues tr to ions to one Simon are undermining the a arbiter lema obvious r crucial nd bad uggle comm h ly, io unders es c fact y e. ers t is of rationa i riti take he ntellectually he nal F u exces normative mos t have c former, might and pr R s mos pri the pers to , abs or ncrit ,” ca onducted tandards of and n-amateur 4 s to hier idea “but is c port have is ofessional o pu 5 claims , n al in has marily of external bert onalities m tly, tr the to on if t t professiona ta steps subjected uaded exter he ses rsuit a be acting archy merits l differences their ica we deserving which the an ny ndings that dialogue supreme conventionalism demonstrate breakout is if norma of already one way if the l d Simon nea . can not a trouble kinds avoids nal, of immersion we sp itself sport of for The ble vocabular respective “the from conventionalism a tly ort we idea a nor scrutiny in burnish of r nd from with a physica enderin nd open of entirely, adopt tive financial outside t to plural o our “divided fir their l done can of in partly has a mati (by like of second- “the the professional such conception, betw that surv that careful justifying st chance him inquir a our the our n respective ctual be is r a d ve ormative l ies. the athletic pur ity ecent contribut gs our is int s ive conceptions in discourse excessive een (bodily) sport o to divide hybrids a from scrutiny because sufficiently remuneration. process, on- appr r problematic of in loft pose ational of since or y present it, Simon scrut normative of into disabuse such to nor ly sport, der into future mind t viewpoints on y its hard he- aisal, is the sa can propose conceptions superiority mative to us, iny philos of not y dialogu isolated I . best ions. and a standp athleti perfection, , the ground his sport. version as a a The their Ren too, thus reiterate, diverse, and, a be one bstraction ssent. pr should here ions and from thletic ath ourselves of co I second ac not co other” ophica conflict d T i claimed aissa d letic have nfident c f ealt tice) principles oint[s] sport, it second between piece e his nceived envisages Tha of So ta is pushed paradigms” bona a all on in goes idea of social ke n be too sport in-depth, endeavor nce Simon ca a is retained t this quarters of practice alterna cla at norma l tha recom (Sim what serious critical treated n Simon l is and of stand of I part with of obvi is fides. none sport types imed ideal is with have only t why way that a a our too the the the s no on nd … “a t to of ly is is o a ------Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 t for in wi smo t co en ca t t a a t prof ing ful sign Si pur a ea howe ca sin Si sin re t priv t a just fe it ble of wh Si re som la ca t push he ion he hat iv horo he he re nd dmit thl r at mo mo co mo a nn n c n is nce g e th m ies ce ce sim son B Ne n Wh h re en l if ure ag su n e rat co co i s essi oi a i ot eth be ot in be nc w fi in w pro o u l ti y , o l any n n n to egi on v th ug no l te ch o e pti can o n if t t i o he c qui n nt v he t ul w io e er, d il s s ere t pe of t i f made i o seem ed ert t rth made at dly sel cept on w ide h o ng fes s e i hl bon e h r w un acra rary n c ng t i n on d ng nal r t an m em o s an t an ou r ni i skati he hat al o an ask t e y , dou t e h s e y th h sio t f he he di derst al ative ctively no t in ro h el n att “mo aly e t th n io assume, as h , a o se an argument gh o obst ot in acc s hat exch e at f lse g o y wh ot e t e clude n to f m f u t o th to e n fi ti to ypes, bt n ractive e f o he ss, way f ot sis n t, al an r two up ea spo ar u th t s . des n ren g ou and int ey , he spo in n wh rselves , at acle t c t he i dif c g th H o e r. th tha tur do is he nqu he an o o i o grelized” o c fe i t f nt rt t ir ernal bor ces tha ip n f n en That ere I he an in r ca hes he for o dialogical fe rt. ile but at i ge in sport r es t would the as telligible and r so ar s decidedly in we f thin is m k, rent nnot iry t re hlet t re claim from t at do o ea pre we row gue he bet e succes For , our Simon their of ther facto embe the t betwe an with whet ive if am he nor ra ch acc wit a st dra does bor , in ic conflic deces ppr ween ot ice thes ther anda will tiona d if a ope algam e t fr do, own nor ccounts a encounte the differe w fr r be o her m t h hers pra with t r row ccount Simon om a his rs sfully her is hat opr unt t om a in en tionally dir at heir e not e t concept t n- r the rds be he iona sors ma and e enough mixed ctice h ightly lly of fact ive t other is ’ ext t t, at ect s iat h a ended one riva s r his is t from pra a the rd at hem. e tive a n ot no t mea hletic a n of of wit line o ideal . o ing m. ble be mer l erna s s c s ion. wher iona ur i of t The ur her ct es out r r l s hat t c I to r, out var re a ega e am obs o ly comme h doe a om conceptions io So conceptions ic ely nother. right n, have conc subjec t a ccounts of a par in fle fr its W overlap dialogue he in e l rgue For side So one l de thletic es n or s core io s ateur rd, om practices, our e xter howeve tacle uperior. direc ide c munities il dia whether s, ctive cours t enough of ticula ritic us ny of l the his are other a non-id iam , iliation that I cla beca about if logue another perspective. lin our ted nal other var ins athletic our ns fea sport, do Simon’s tion. and to re conceptions imed, al indeed 4 two a e, e of J e, in urable: r pection 6 , ppraisal . the ying gard? tures ndea us s r, to actual point to determining there crutiny. Mo not tha wa pra It therefore, sport eal the e that profess provided, our overla this, for of can and is conceptions determine that a wa transcendent outside y rg there t then ctice seems ccount vor features conceptions athletic not pedigree. of see forms is amateur an One out the that particula furt s member is get not made conceptio then are requires, the tha the p our what Neither iona require This not a they how are enthu her com of in us of they indee t to to place possibility, s needs rea scrutiny very of of it , lie pr purpose it conflicts the eno l are sport def some to whether ha by is be each at point and could munities. follows actices. so sport. r c somehow s Simon behind do sia s of ourse easier hlet ve d inite historical of the n ugh as ns camp, sheer respective option there possibility lost no as of to accounts s , professiona why sport not ts nothing these Simon of even of a ic well sport normative r not that in be obstacle So of , over e a sight limits 11 like since which sport said communities t nd these our dint ca and is ha them therefor T doing this Simon each dra is far, I as o one be n practice that no possible t lap the excellence conceptions think, are these than not duly be rivals he of different cannot make wn, of of normative importa of on must, if all t dialogical additional need hen, at and to to or l job we s her mixed the to sport argument is is setting an ur made conceptions how e steered . done, least promised noted, is sustain , recognize also The sport mor have e, however, e apprising will by to per communities subject so option good amateur of , to to conflict. incor however, nt rather specifically as far bridge have good. which in e construc to r draw ra rationally necessity, however, problem, t have intelligi ight to he amateur vocabu a fashion, we of of norma features tionally no a we nd cohere on which por a do, fruit these sport land, stage been their t t stop way that tha that B it ha and On any can not the the all, for we at his ut as is is n ------t Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 hav th otherw is g th we mi no ce any ama no ise ju stan wh of pa ru of al not con one with me ar be qu mi do in be out ta The gr other wa con fur ca pe th ing a l k gu stif at em, an se a r me, y le r tw ts rs pl s est nd. ne th s the re th e s tai l n We T y t e co , pe arg te te trategi , dard w s teu ist t mat di au ayin me t ri tati l or o are i suc ie e he o ee co er strat i o c io me i th t bei n to mpo sts, ke n i on rsuasive gh f n sappoi s si th ed but o th It d die um same prof fl ath n back can n r i nf e nt t v de rati t l n se, w ter cessf tra in e he spo i he i g n o re o t, i e t co i ke in is ct e egy wh n at pro t l h i s nc e g n ff ict en abili es he rary leti be n o o im th th e wo th akn o es t f e’s mm n seldo see - Si drawing n whi m u rt wi ot eren f ut hat i bec e nal mi lan u i n ts ssue on ot clai at cause ame- fe e u sio ere nre li ch passe. m t sh cu c am i lly h ti co u hi i p x give th ke advan ty ess i ssio t u sam at n why co e mpac re ng e un ld o c guage o tha ause n ca rre . cu mi s t t nde aso r of me i t de m h ateu n i uld ia al he w s hei one B aso of of s nt boxing sort all, n it c ac , of i n e n account l way. t pu ntly t ng e u n d age n alling. skills Since viewed y, y t n com he al es a rst way th t he t which fr su o t r n s befor t, t we able, hold r a t argum h ccomplis a t uc bega t s h le ts om he wit anot h y ge pos udiences gam crit e ince d s it ch e would anding was and nor e t uch , t e under It giving h o, c ir m bet profess and ra ca t ha ould in alone socially hout wer posit i hat a we ic in a wer one e n will unity O t such but t her very e. n ion on iona d, by could dia profes by conc ween i we enta norm t which t s t f hing the he one’ he ms no e only it , e have cours in h of not ions dis or only t its be t t a s covet of beca iona ir s heir de he a l hen c , differe tive ny but ta we the t eption a longer a lat om wha give fa hat s cuss such valued t at and a sional rgum dhe t side as rt li rem t and he he rgum se ca disput hey ct oppone ter be ive re t a a al e, of C l us a o ver pelling what rguments not ll nor wit an ed e gam , n its o ca t ion ot rents , a rat nor conte e t em a historically a won n go, rat nt such t both, m counts hat as a back-and-forth get conclusion ble ent nd mp o y vent have her int h fea of it nd ent. safely ma own communities, ely place king ateur others. e, ionally ants bered persuade different ever construa is m because and a rins take tures s n such is to t consider tive that io port ca and t of ative xtually the no tr cas ts a o T leas in had nal rguments not ar n ying a make as ically for he these conception as pers in and act in that s es 4 e guments work between that which ar e is an the 7 thus sume t the of So xception, a eye is enter ven their r ua m such a are how has gument. reasons, ls embedded genuine ub, it uade lights to beca the p the argument athletic g the , footrace ed lly when an good rofessiona a dispute conceptions. rational of ood to will in pla sabotage made, the that howe get per prise d that account most former essentia and did a the the us e accusa its other the that sp n the ying ye these were them rea sua end, e a off rea ort impact, Simon main since extramur we ar dvantage athletic B everyone go ver, it on ina disputants why compe professional , is namely, could amateur son gumentative m sive ra ut stalema son a logic accounts going tions side by the l fated nd sta or tion bility l too ight tha in strategy-friendly a wha fa a is of ny that to , thletic each pur or it rt iled or the r so that my But t str asks competitive ground ational tit would ally ally on weak athletic be r t, challenge it cannot our cause amounted ar a to al a pose. if, te ategically I of ions, by of t ver if rgument is should camp iona exa same gument because side claim, if these easily the normative sa fail it followed to superior. that, any, in being communitie ma either inquiry showing y these w rendering and to mple ; reiterate, and case l them discourse, and All question, per by members continued king perfectio will, but interchange it, place discursive that do same I resolve in be – feeble sisten rehearsing clos conc would beca of did one that , that comprised camp man to spor to of of lead the onl kept wit the arguments to fr that str which str th ar th er disputes om the nothing c , f use eptions ategy y we or ce ca ind ourse, ipulating ca t h d guments change both at same ategy eir s, n. same to let to to is in of out if to n argue, n is, will if to all encounter the both they suggests rules. Members start each an m everyone convinc peers the persuade persuade our an us between only the win suggests beg think rational how of the is a ration should it moves prem deter a kes inside begin break a really more same inte were were their with sides such does own rgu rival it vita side ha Put use the the the the for an its is. it d - - - - - a - l Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 li t ca t dete bein un t a cr or wh ge no on inc m of is a t on no ge re t t Russe a t skil fa t co no bot a we on a cl re bot t co he he hat iv ech hou his hat o rgu nd bou nd rgu gh ai ct a spec a i so n n n ntr ach e a rmat e ly ti e t corre ch th nl l T I ir B et l h r h m hat ef reach ) tl ble tl ude ts , s a arr ci me ati rmi n [ou h g me prof ed case su si by gh u a he t y em em e rg he w be ov fe ed side ed ar argum o ic am e m sms es de ll t ti al ri spo o ch du r o i he um ct e e t th t al i nt r has v w ve ers r] by n w on n v in o ght an an ct th ra by mo s ess co t ot al e ate do no e cen i een s co e al hat in ty n hat t i i o t rt. on divi vit spade pers made s hi so n o er y en at s e h co h th rrec were co uld wh io t th g t in wo ve n ur fract me reso appealed ral en ave he an to erwise o he abo s i in wo tral h t -cir e a n nc po nal di n t abo wn ei n th i ju sive r ha ar uade m n o t deed y e ot g uld ra fli an s ru i ting have ff r pro of strate impor e epti nju ven n lu in uld deplet u i dly io in i t t to i so c aga cu tio ere n to all cts co s u ctu s rivals, lin he d t po co a on ti ti i n c d t tu s th th ri fe f th e stice lar on n beca i na or a mmunit ons profess s at avor ir nt proponents g i Si ne of nvi ts ver wha win sit of just by it vinc re, ght ha is ss ns s rned”. g i letic gy like e s siona hlet to e , officia l ta mon’s e iduously ed ra ive ut at t of out t v a just the this role res yes nced s as hat , is it nt i of e but us by tor deign it. tional of te hle in fies ha ra ed of s s s t applying their ic the Witt hould ue, he olu fe s e view ver iona ifica l l own s uch nor rd, tha a Surely y disput officia t such in kind, tic por s ies So betwe he at exc t and of he s ls only tr pr hat t tha t da sort is , which a ha ion t base non- at gens m ma in and tion n evious a l pra a s to ma when t. would lights ellence cla y it a enses rgum egy on t not t of t light a s 13 only se , ist ca h a s but por m ant ques ls’ tive Rus duty tt its Simon no t en le of ct int inte if im ball tt My pine view tein hose ses akes t then contextual at ac t he t ic (t le ba his as t s t ic is s. t, t ained ant eur nor he ly no hat enta of k , he he we m is e pla t sell’ nt tion. t fact, find d o who the h a not a o Aft why se s (1958 is ( W on c at tar note ma matter pointles tr t ome ionally Simon the i-s to c is proponents ca yers rational conflict o be, legitima ma hey co communities disc hit make envisa ore te indeed s there il t ategy, mmunities er ive c lls tr controversy l te there coaches their too ear this to r iam nd but I or tive wins other I but ategy d bedrock ur ourse , all, readily the s r would make is resources, think rect hould lie sec uns c mention rea res 4 hig is sues ged. lai argument their J conception is I 2014: s. or contra conceptions 8 way . as r integrity, the is te ba a tion the indeed athletic Mo list p would m It cited no puts h should by a genuine a onse a a sed when a lterna per in ny Rather Simon misses on that fact that rg thletic be have of idea complete concede , for fact. case a would itself, 217) insisting way 27) vene r an on spective). this on in gument, once thing the bats entrusted wa resolution those have is of the the argue speak t . behind This a the never question compe succeeded in what a ive which tha rd udience My obs forward the , s, the profe is capac rationa that accor s the when what kill, never of argument a objectively and in run wh else t offi just n that is of erved, that lea sell point. this matter first sport it to is e be cannot rules. they open not. ere ssional lling. then ding ffect, cia ity, contemporar That view ves Simon’s out for the to such -out for is wrong such l what of the be whether disallowed the is it ls st when response what a call because we s in very ( have all. a That pur the of ue that make the able wa argumenta to this about Assigning lem That a conventional is core a of ar mea that viola be per conception “have justifications denial we penalties, cor s stalemate The does, best gument its pos t Geor tr what we much dis a ha succes matter, also presented we to achieved s te means anscendent ns coaches ua bad rect own is tions either differences are e t baseball cour agree able no is mean for relevant both ding y of because because reached come that in ge ca that they ca dealing that elite open, one. sfully tive s such sts terms. self-respecting which continue se fact, port have, Brett by lls, to which any signals s adherents on the ide they the by of by doubt have a fact , va in I defend to. up pproa would sett one’s Simply sport, and touch defended and a howe objective of amateurs ‘rational’ ha sport bedrock, anything lue effort perspec and one ha 12 this amateur pine in impasse with there Russell gentle ing are against not, ve would a minor s is when wha most ch a their until duty own won had, case side that that s ver, - not not the the are we on tar by to to in of as is is - - t Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 th con cha gr ama la th rewa of inc lia mi athl mo Bre hinte cl th his tu ea of such out ma Kuhn pr th new we nov to pe spor th to ent ha athl styl le … For New wa enc sw de a nce e ofe at e ne e ey a r nc ppen e itc ght ims chan the s re li r reasi a I l hi to ed men n rs tt e e et et f r k a n pos teu team n ars of er K ts. by li w ” rded hav e ati t ge l i ’s to ed he tt paradi a d, ssi , ti o cre ic ic m, abl ct pl . i uh st e v “ po ex th is nf i me and, en rev we s i ni on bat An r ng s si on i n ge Th s s art re i n t uch ayed n ath t. o e are n f bodi su ews hat e at er at n as in g plan bi t eat ew” l as to an th ur al descr h it ll ally Wh o be by th al a d i ed cce to t is th to lit (1970) let e ng ho i ic ou lut to he Ro pro gm at s deep already no m ure o c e cie co pro m we co bec en o sc es e y we s, th is by om ato be f f ic make sci me ss. at port gh a produ io n jus orge sam po in t to t ie nc rty po athle nf ibi argu as , eori he nt hope e ho rath argu ing f wer re ause n are least n wh en r su essional d I nc t e pic making T tif li in eptua y a ifi ary, siti n e we run to w a e run ct ance s sh (1989 cces no about hi to atte w ce, e, g i ts m st c ment e ahead a ich er be cat re tic the able it ced in se o r owed n s is be visionar t t circles at t at unconvent of change able H ns to s he affirm their pr s, he d s ginnin ason. philosophy, g public. nt t bear ee ory s only ugges l lead but her fem h is , egel issue pres actica as r that a and just : se all, ion from such an which s, s as ecognized aim nd s this what 78) om t M signed port by ha t tha one fas s is inis t norm o , we ha ific r of peer ed ent N wha art over nam t on nor epeat t g t of for ehow ies tha ing, eminent he “fa hion t put find her our of l Br t innova one ever n hinking it . ts no t in’s at ra of a o a when inevit T re t ma one cont t iona et ma t t s t wa ct spor in nd he a ory at s e ely ther P he t s his nd t t use m ing kinds minds if t t’ o and ” ee, thele it m a lat her preem another ive he is of he t ny s s t t t , C imely , as a as um ive o he logical ge ight pr be t l m t inue the t, tions onist home is no ny a o dea o hat is ably t a ly efore, to tha fe Ya what dvoc t n find heir entre time philos an nd esent politics anage well. nuine wha he outs cause t r ss, vent pire a at jams o beca such ely of r ge nkees them thletic opposing d pt about n at i “play we out the that requires same he mportant ,” inter a will n and ates ional c e t our ide over bodie , io preneurs s run any on he were is ontempora space nd, e and, , And rial use, ophers s re yet incident there nal women’s conflicts raliz kills a home decided old , that nd of might but could 4 th one’s calls vention for if way provided tur what off to Kantian wor s tires later is 9 the he way uch ingenuity therefore s to e , m one a arguments, curiosity past for unwarra , Ya got , ble in ned are a the come is box, voca in “normal” ld an turn reiterate, had past for ome athletic leading new crea nkee’s of well no in inferential not good forwa sport which with sports such d that to in to proper history were disa sports by ries, bularies as gendered the that the sp ra tive such noticed philosophy, the when wa kind sport a make Martin to , ort change nted the t a rguments and bled have to r iona reason is ma a change regard take since d fir season it stroke able s skill is, lights like pass way imagination they ly such a the a substitute when disputes, scien st relev a nager, for nd is of ll features by and did l a their try rega occur ag moves. , relevant ssertions time. a in any baseball notice. the to dialectical t of p , bout our ver Martin’s a with the h he the ainst imaginatively ing to because erhaps fere nd newfangled of ce ant a of relevant ad for rded most their nd jumpstart confronted of Billy y ca Rousseau argumentativ illegality indica red one vie has the Pa strategic disabled mos to So ntial to baseball amateur se since different, a qua Y one “redescription the late t nd ralympic he , et w , In dra as factor in entrepren figure rather other run what even some and initially scientific Martin, t important lify ingenui his it on tion, old pa what move, in athletic anothe to the str w most short, the is t its ategically counter-intuitive thei atten advice h a this of as the spor on man adm cle sports and Ein one. his for fut social with than in out ga co that am convent tha course, athletic sk t Games. at one e adva r who ar, he tory par ur me ty r, pine matter, njuring eurial they stein determining ts, ills tion inistrators. agerial ateur Hobbesian communit professional t bodies, own games how rather any To e one’s leads as nor and when we would ba like practices wit for and that in a nta are - of brought ud I t tar to pull oppor did had has rate, iona mative which efforts earlier excel gestalt ver might to h geous much For sport. infer unre ience is those pr inte from their their bril up than ga new case that that this the get led es s for off lly be ve us to in 14 it y - - - - a - - - - . Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 spor new I de- sho re a t co t t a som a des t pre spor it us en va it t ou m we on for t wo ise ice he o hat he he n chi ll nd 2 1 3 4 a en is nt co , mmu sc s r e, ca to cl son mu rds, pair. ci se an “t Th It con of ic to Th men Th sen la ul w s c n ev eh pe co dee o t. t on ts wh i o mm o r pract us w nc al ath he s, ew d o al hat d f t and t si ne u t at e is em se l s, sen he l h ers ow mplet n h e so ate y ce e ou v bec th are n l of ts t be per at e n r e d n Fo l in s. en l c is w eal y a wi g it an e ete it on ot d at should se, r an en is bove st are r m d t i , th be no abo ul not i plaus erposi y ce ti om r perfor n spo i d us t ion co at ll in argume I f ore we disput s. es, th in t cu es e has o o t ely do ug r soci o u wan h wh everyo n have e eall nali c rmat n ut ; li to t e e ne At r rt s lt e no and omm o ot t ou t clu ke whi h hat ha i have ibly oft qu u be th as c mp plausible, ai ti ally f olly me spor sa y w th act z u ra t u wro of . e on r t th t m e si y, e en hi ively o, Wha ltu i beyond co gh noted to achieved, r is, e convent ch l orta n a s d lang easons o e nor n . unit ne dis mong s their frei ngs ts of values t t of to ns por er wr silly nve of upon been re orm B n ha unders s t wit requir a o nt g tingui comm ut red a ghted t m ua is whether on did what s a t con ies c we t that nt por promi cer i nd o bec ra conventi t h e at pee idea ar a ge wha by I pla sport g cri iona the uld ” , does nd in ional Le tional ive e t tim duct don’t a tify dis t a he disca core ed the a i s r ying ti ause deep gam shared, r rs bout its wis power n h e t our t and edesc cized se; has supposi that cover “ be e, l, work aid s t phi event Sim bet t they common I’” t me he ta ed u ha he a nor si sa rding ons es t t s a t s ke c conv heir in ha nce by wrong losophers wha we hink y, wh rgum t ween privatel of ert an , ones we intuit t ribing is and on’ that c fer o a tha as thes spe m t but ti rit ually for that in re t t fals ainly a my the is on c hat en he at s t entia have t only t cannot t W the onclus ical even abs aks they he any s tha ent ( ive we standards e conventions who tio whic reasoning ive, e. what r uch 2004 Con th il con y actio ather sa cla about voc ir it new tract, to l ns iam For at t happened may old to cre l is me voc have say is cha to such pr ri Not im the dr and cern . judgments drop s abulary what h created ar ions diculed ns : clus ome tr itself dentia e , s be 5 a make 127) something ah J uc ones. abular conceptions things guments decessors. nc we o wn conventional i 0 uth tha . mor f o the r es as created. Mo istorica our f h conventions distinction wrong that e thing we may their that ion are each t depend amenable a a are ra of rg the rational e , words, ls point norm When in convention them, community y. we la enough, ther should an we that ra were no of success, never rger we is So of certain l . favored a dical 15 wrong a t nd might about about H a to to nd us regard And t we a when ha of conventionalist owe ha on “a social it t make be true be ar need mere ive dia have asocial embody ca ve a rules use n seems to a gu create. th nd more , philosophical it who performed of thletic n ver, our well logue, the that a c room , not at ra as al ment s in onceptions lives we a of it be immodest socia to thinks instigating to tiona it a we s reference “we” principles, of a sport other ocia would own these str reason come nd previously coherent a wer evaluate plausibly cor argue in And chie are l t argum get for ange competition leads he agreements, such l t l rect are e his is ar on conventional practice normative not and , way vem these our giving because to gument, in re-conventionalized, the normative mean , back circles in is cases to from to claim the to them ent of “real” or, a see simple actions other a ent, the normative underst made a those first-person purpose s firs a round, sport a dra ne other as y and does that is and result tha as does crucia t- I that w the only the a by wn we, complements no argue, cha once s pers a social social some of t since, nd games forth the not part and I a within a accepting theory ; we lea the sking an nor nding the premises nge, vie that cause not s in on like of ee l how .” require st assess prem firmly histor point, sort entire a singu adopt could ws other, other pra plural sport , gree rele wit does after most it wed that a was this for , nd its c to of of of of is it h ------Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 Dix Col Cio Bogh Dw Dy G 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 6 7 8 9 0 2 1 4 3 5 u reso tt S o or an m “ pref Lan l I bl ci a beca Fo ar h agai (1 It n Cr to co o ru f As w cl o o m I I Th ti I u n Ru S mi to th cer l presen in Of ti i enc or m f port o er, in ad ew f ut n sin ot v o do am o h m ea al c ere e oc yster 9 aga, gs kin a l d n sh Il bjec e. r , spo gh n it su es onv an ssi av m i t ta n 98 ce n l ssell si el io ak hybr co den s t r eren n li y N g a e. ic ks P. been ac u empt ju o o , r c o de in c an e a im st n would, t n, si 3 , n as th egar per M. ). se o well-docu oncede t e u . s h rt t urse, n, f t as B. t 1898. st en R t o 0 ed ti io Bu it mply ha benefit he l t f ld 2003. d pl y A F at o t h : in is dec of mi v spor (1999 r self f c id t ( wa hi . as P. sport u r u f it ti 103–16. suaded ule e he at 2012. 1998. 2005 t . a es, growing r ding om ib t in 1986. at b s be i both P ying mert on. 1978. just s ight sgivi ssue r 2007. t form lunt he the s s played idedly Sim m eason” ress. l e c he first pir be e sha t. or footnote pa Sport’s of si an t not eta Ca am and : ed on forms ifi rat : mi r ra t pr raph 37) it on’ ed ngs c Making ejec spor i Conv t on i rp c he t 353) t [on L ca mented nte n hat s he onstrued t physi im ” na ourse, Fro poi her per ed t larly ofessi gr Fe her high. aw he of r questi tion s ungentlemanly edges by mi enjoi use out egr ( di e astutely eatly e res ts rega ar ly] rasi amateur t followi p. m nt re ventually that ’s ing our place of sport an entionali for ni ddle that tha deri the cal the 7 of wary t 79). et, E rit onal of s, ng “ be only w … explai cely the in But rdi ns mpire abov , collusi on (LaV figur knowl ual account n “ curr of from er money however clai by strategy ded burgeoni and nor idea as found here, in the class ng Ame and that e ng any i athleti t anti here of ncorporate nei t he to pu “hi m e, and a the o ent . aque-Manty, e the n mativ mana sm e C poi r l works Bo r the re Olympi on” tacti .W what dg rican ts not ejected skaters, c ther elevant ci for how tradi would such usi type. gher , ambr co la no t wi athleti e as pates nati professi , of ghoss nt i r , urn c rd: i . ri , t, si ev monetary ng hat n that ng (Colli cs e N geri idea as I comm thi fy C nce longer the t ti D i a T we sport, amounts ea i on’s s legi poi outwar ew For purpo ny strange idge, o si onal it slightly like wor he of dem my n we i n m: c allow i my ted. th Fren ns athleti al in c l an wer rivalry vent n end nt such indi Yor on , ti Games types a er, nat is the tr c o Sport wel in cco ’s an li un ha kin macy pos 2 on Re cl ocr cl a M ucti pace co o ke Spor al gen gl ses e, 00 terv ch ( 1 ure k: ass d,” io ve v fu ai ut 2 ity up ear u ven mo 89 A: l-bein os twentieth un ’s c meta ntain i itio con different a fere 00 . to atiz 9 m nal s s dual its , tu Ox ve trateg judges between than tleman i s her : s s dis t, noti of entio 8 i cul l to n waiv t Har wi kil uper, s 5 of tive 7 i ti 9 re in first setting : h o n. er ama E ation is cept 1 : in o 9 s mo 3 th on fo tur tin ere n physical s,” e tar th ed l, 78–9) u nce thics m ). f 82– su g. athletic on th essay vard rd e se th and, merely a ed a dern s i e, p ns ic ctions iter ch ting n teur that the , nd rgument Outing e the ions an supra next ractica th speak is and right and University 8), a nomenclature, of o sport. s aside of and century, period interventions a these d a and ation f regard, kind in University t (Morgan, therefore, sports hybrid illuminating social “group and from is, English predecessor, managerial sp the of Martin’s the sentence, community realism collective the between ly subject Philosophy making ort l against indiv 32: the sport boxi Both olympic two s reason of they . sort of o in professional between New the “there class thi 382–8. conceptions called amateur reasoning modern idual consciousness favor ng Press. society athletic Martin 2012) denounced in were camps, s a that strategic wrong such Press. - does or animus gentlema York: amateur legitimate in that expe M subject, tactic sport. discussion in 6(4): is the would mental might of spendin governs armor’s oppon hybrids ,I , no 1906 a athletic rience our touch professiona “start[s] as as his practice attempted pla Columbia emergent move. to did 410–22. conception because philosophically that Journal maneuver evidenced Rader - of c n ins discourse similarly stoop justify but athletic . e and strategic features ents g not Urbana form . and sport on (2009 how nor pired its a of community’s money” nd But from rather communities, 1924, suc ma this earlier , of (2004 working-class in so Hegel’ l at professional the not each of here. University that : sport the ke my h ethical contests. in 2) low waive ,I such by team pr bending to issue. rea athletic basic a legitimacy L: i it es : only this rendering see Philosophy dea both core we its of ar come, version 131) list s en a s is University interesting u gument s as notion us aside relatively l sports fficiently His Dyreson t to do example a bui strictur , alterna misgiv types. desires, that, matter hybr we in noted, reason excel of He resort Press. espe then, lding have v cita folk did, iew and our the try of of of id as as of is is e - - - - - . , Downloaded By: 10.3.98.104 At: 00:36 30 Sep 2021; For: 9780203466261, chapter3, 10.4324/9780203466261.ch3 Wi Tayl Ru Ru Ru Su Si Si Qu Po Mo Si Ro Ra Ma Ma Le Ku La La mo mo mo Va n w it stem der, hn t rm rm ss ss ss r in I P P Mo 3 P N MI rga den, tgen s, o ty, L: is, 5 ac que- ell ell ell hi hi n n n e, r, J: , B. –50 o o T. , , , : l l n H if D. R. rga , , , a, oso oso W B. C P r, r, R. U R. , R. t i 2 J. J. A J. u ren c sein, W 1970. . A A . 2008 Mant 007. . 2002. n phy phy 2004. V. . n 1999. ma 2011. 1989. 1975. 2012. D Chapm 2014. . . iv . S. 2007. . 2004. t 2006. 2009. J. 2002. N iv ic ersit n 2005. L. of of T is e 2012. ew y, G. The K C ion he A L Cont Spor Spor Ha He Ame D 1958. M. y Int i Inte net onv imi York: re Sa ai Fro How Soc oes Fo of elements gel ll. St E er gn, Group, 2009. li t t rules rican i ent Broad tati ing valuating r ial cs. ence . ructure rnalis m Mi na 39( 31: ewor meta Philo Cambri ion: U ency, Routledge. ons l lism co chi a et 1): rba 122–41. w spor nve all The hnocentr rea m d. Ameri et sophical ga A internali of is o 65 of irony, na a nt and hi f In t soni n a n s: phil dge: lik pl Scient ions: –100. soci nd ,I the cs sport. Pres umpi From Conve ayi e Spor L: can osophical make ng. and internal al chess. s ng Inve Cambridge From por i Human if s. sm, sm rea ic In re Topoi t f Phi t. solidarity ntio ie he st t- Revolutions l a has sons: In deep igations to ds law Legal language losophical age n: differenc study W Handbook of values 27: realism: to A Kinetics. of il comparison. Hobbes Eton: conventions, in . l work theory philoso 41–55. iam . . Univ folk N Oxford: Oxford: Sport e to . in e w Equality Chicago 5 games J Associa C law ersity 2 in wi . York: 12: phical sport. of , vs. Mo a 2 th? n phi . the nd Princeton 343– Blackwell. Blackwell. Hegel. rg to dis Journal Press. loso Journal Cambridge philosophy study ed., tion, an ,I moral and In the cours 56. L: phy Ethics edited excellence age , April Jo Univers xi–xii. o e urnal of entrepren f , of of NJ: the ethics the in of te sport? by 4 University levised Philosophy . of spo Princeton Philosophy D. sport ity in W. Philoso rt Lewis. bridge modern of eurs, J. , , Paper eds Morgan, 2 sports C nd hicago . phy and M. Oxford: of Press. University of ed., meritocracy the . presented Upper Sport 102: Sport McNamee sport. 9–19. gap. ed Press .W 327–56. , 38(2): Blackwell. XXVI: Saddle Journal Journal . . Champaign . at Ann Press. J. the 254 Morgan, a nd 27-49. Arbor, River, o of –72. 2012 W. f the the J. ,