Kretchmar, Scott R. “Developing Philosophie Skills.” Practical Philosophy of Sport. ‘Champaign, Minois; Haman Kinetics, 1994, 3-29, Developing Philosophic Skills ‘The author: Why are our physical education majors required to take 30 much science? Might we not be prepacing a generation of technicians who ate unable toaporecnte the human sie of pytel educator, coching sport management, or sports medicine Professor Joes: You know the condition of our cursicukam, Theres not encugh time now to acquaint physical education majors with the expanding sciontife content in our field, And besides, ecience reigns supreme. Science mensute seal ‘things and produces facts, Would you rather have scents siting aud sharing pinion in some philosophy cats? The author: How cant you say that philosophers do nothing more thon share cpinons, ond what makeo you think that Natori, Ierary, and philosophic information is not expanding too?4. Proctcl Philorophy of Sport Profesor Jones: dont want to getinto some never-ending argument about that ‘bat will ay thats theeecedtcouree on history nnd principles should provide sore than hough in to do whatever it is thal you folks need to do, Why is Profesor Jones so unsyinpathet to the humanities? Does he simply Jack philosophic cunisity? Oris more that he has lite confidence n the validity ‘of the philosophic process? Or could itbe that he thins that philosophic ansveers Taek practical appHlcation? Je i true that philosophers do Kittle more than share ‘opinfons? INTIS CHAPTER, YOU WILL + acquire ekill in asking philosophic questions, + linprove your ability to purewe philosophic answers, and = work through a philosophte analysis, ‘ims Decne wistor net every choice we make and everything we do, phi- Tosophy Is @ broad and fundamental dsc line Philosophy may be mystifying berause st dele primacy with ideaa—things that we Sopa Votre inmate pile. Phyl ioderbe ond do. For mony EP bese sure people sakes ony alicia Dut plilosophy abou be either ya Sng tor antraororhy. We nt eve a that iat fo do. In fad, you have bes thinking pitsopictly your whole and snany eyo hive prebuby been dng k ery oral! Nevertheless, we ned to Lok a Tb of phtenophy to kitten mise tindestandlngs tatty stared ty tm Salyas to remove any tncertaty or at {hatmnay wns Foran ofyoaths wibe Stadvertre tat wil alow yout ess ome quaionaabout ic Blt of plesopy ‘questions in the fast place? low do you compare with other students ‘m téxma of your philesopic curity, ‘onfidance, and commitment? ‘Wiy i physiol education such a science ‘nlensive fel? Te this 2 enticely good thing? ‘Can you think well enough philosophically toavoid the eticem that your condusions are nothing more than mere opinions? Acq Acquiing Skill in Asking hilosophic Questions ‘The philosophic process is the art and eci- ewondeng ate rey psig ge ons related to that wonder, end purst ters fo those questions elcively Ttanart and a science becanse the philosophic skils of wondering, posing questions, anc searching for answers aro grounded partly ‘on repeatable methods that can be objetifiet and explained (eclence) and partly on inte. ions, tendencies, and flashes of insight that ‘oan neither be fully predicted nor atounted for (ard. Why Even Ask Philosophic Questions? ‘The chortest answer to this question and one thot is not entsely misleading, 3 "Beonuse they are there.” Muck ke Sir Edmund Hie lary, who gave a similar responoe to ques tions about his motives for climbing Mount ‘Byerest, you have undoubtedly come upon philosophical dileminas and found at least ‘ome of them to be interesting. Hilary di3 not invent Mount verest, or did he arti cally manufacture an intereet dn climbing it Insome ways, Hillary could not helphimcell from wanting, even neading, to cia this ‘challenging mountain, I Ss possible that By ‘rest controlled Flay rather than the other ‘way around. Simuladly, philosophic quections beg forat- tention. What should you do with your He? Should you devote youztel to one of the Physical professions when roctty eeems to ‘value mental activities more highly? What role should movement play in human exis fence? How Important is winning? Should ‘Biological health be the ultimate goslof phys: ‘cal education? Should young children be vliced in ‘high-intensity athletic environ ‘ments? What role should moveaent play ‘mong older adults who now fina itdificul, ‘ven painful, to move muuch at al? ‘You need not go through some srt of in- Ventive process to bring these philasephic {questions into-being any more.thna Til needed to invent Mount Bverest. You come Devetoping Philosophie Sk 5 {ypon them, sometimes stursble upon them, jn the course of your daily activity. On ‘ccasion it seems, they even find you. You ace studying, teaching, coaching, running fitness center. You cannot afford, at that reo. ‘ment, to take time out to consider a philo. sophie lente. Yet it ie there, nagging a you, asking youto giveitsomeattention,chaleng. ng youto come up with an answer. You get 1hooked, stop your work, and start sealing some philosophic problem's formidable cis Not all people are interested in climbing ‘Mount vecer, and certaily not all people are interested in devoting great amounts of fdme and energy to answering: philosophic ‘questiovs. Bt you mnast notice oneimportant differencebetween there eas, Its quite pose sible that the eirewastances of your life will keep you from developing a fastination with ‘mountain ctimbing. You might have been ‘bor andzalsedon the plains; youmight have had overly protective parents who discour- aged you from doing dangerous things; you mighitbea coward by nature; youmight ave Benes that better equip you for oating in a hot tub than eimibing a moun tain, In short, you may have no teasem to challenge Bverest gecno intra dinge, erywhere, and they are aevessibe to begin- ‘Secaandexpertsalike. Your birthplace, your job, your place of retizement, your body fype—none of these factors distance you from philosophicissues. nd while your up. Ibsinging and genetic inheritance cam influ ‘ence your interest in philosophical matter, ts elas your aanty kode plop, hey do not normally have the power to eliminate philosophic curiosity and ability altogether. Hf youenisfy some threshold eiteria for what Its to be conscious (avvake) and human (ca- Dable of dealing with ideas), you are at risk Bf finding. or being found by philosophic questions,(6. Practical Philosophy of Spart Tio only the degree to which phllosophie problemsarenoticed and thetoais of philoco- phy used that differ from parson to person. Soime of you fied your profession sich with theoretical dilemmas, value questions, and moral problems, and you can hardly keep yourself from tackling them. Othees know ‘rattheseigeucoare there but find them nine teresting, insignificant, or frightening, Thus, ‘you get eidetracked by them less frequently. Where do you fall in this range of philo- sophie wonder, curiosity, and sensitivity? ‘Are you more 2 partcpant or a bystander? ‘Are you more a lusty snountain climber or ‘one Who stays on the plains? Do you enjoy journeying on philosophic trails, or would ‘you rather be somewhere else? @ PHUOSOPHIC EXERCISE Atthis moment, you embody a certain read! ness to find or receive philesophic questions sd to want 16 deal with them, Tao ‘be called your PRlBSOpHIE Rexainess (Qu (SetORPHOSn ponte fo yout rough measure of your own PRO Dy complet- ing theaccompanyingTilosophleReadiness Inventory. Walling your answers on a sepa rate plea of paper respond toeach statrnent tning the number thet corresponds to your degree of agreement or csngreement. It Snportant tat yo complet the noentory before reading any further beemae the discussion tha {follows would bias you anu make is difficult for ot lo produce a meeninghl score. ‘ThePhilosophic Readiness Inventory isde- signed to measure three readiness factors: SS erate ‘an overall mea- sureof the extent to which you embody these three traits. In other words, your PRQ should indicate the extent to which you are ready to find or recelve philosophic questions and ‘engage them. ach subscore should give you fa sharper image of precisdy where your seadiness is higher or lower. Subscores cana y a ‘Developing Philosophie Skis 7 Philosophie Readiness Inventory Rating Seale: Strongly Strongly ‘agsee Disagree Set 1. Thavp frequently wondered about the meaning of lif, about why Tm here 2, Whether or not Tam a member of a religious orgonization, } xegatd myself as a religiou person, 23, Iti interesting that people around the world are eedicated, sometimes to the point of giving thes Lives, to very different values, religious traditions, and types of political leaders. 4. Lyi probably not undurstand wen half ofall here lo know about the meaning ‘of human existence 5. Compared to others, think of myself as more introspective, more reflective. 6, There have been a mmber of cecsions on which Thave simply marveled over the {ct that Tao alive, 7, Lolten find myself pondering quesilons of ethics, of what (s right and wrong. 8. There ic much more to life than surviving oy “ataking it" and I think from Eame to tie abost what that might be 9, Loelieve that there is eomething very powerful (slmost mysterious) aboul sport, ance, exercite, play, or horman movement. 10. [think of my Hie more as an adventuve story thea a routine journey. et 1. Lam confident that philosophy is nt just a matter of tadking in circles, 2. [think that the products of religious traditions (such as the Ten Commandments) contain some wisdom, 3. Is possible to distinguish good froma had sportsmanship while leaving, very fewr ‘ray areas of uncertainty. 4, When I get into philosophic arguments, [ama conikdent that 1 willbe able to get * oilers to see the strength of my point of view and come to agree with me, 5. While philosophers may spend a great deal of tne sharing mere opinions, they can and should do more than thet 6, Philosophers can uncover the trath wih atleast as much confidence es scientits do. (eontinued)8 Pract Philowopy.of pont Philosophie Readiness Inventory (continued) Rating Seale: Steongly: 7. Wile there may be more than one vallé postion on the value of exercise, not ‘evey philosophic conciaion on this eave fs equally valid, 8. Thelieve thar ean usually Sgnre my. biases when reflecting on values, 9. Lan convince that there are many logical argurents het force me to agree with Tele conchusons 10. Everything in Ie i nok reatve. Lam confident that philosophy and/or religion can tncover coli and ending valuce sas 3. Commun sense cannot gel me very fox need a ood education to reach my por tenth. 2, Much ofthe hope ofthe world rests with academic sy and research 3. A good general education in college needed in oder to hove mbt quality Ke. 4, Tnellectuls should be Meh respecte and steed to, 5. A stlled fool quarterback who is leo a sudent ofthe game fs preferable to ‘one who is equally ailled bat who leas only by playing experience Human beings are far superior to lower animale primarily because people can zeflect on fe and commateate through engage. Elementary teachers ae underpaid and sven too hile spect in out sodety 8. The rapid development ofthe discipline of physica education (induding physiol- ‘4g, poychology of exercise, socology of sport) ove the pat 30 years as been “very good forte profession 9. Experience is important but, without eddiional ideas and understanding, can ‘edangerous. 10. Good coaches, teachers, tains, and sport businesspeople ace not hoa, They are created, in pact through bard work and a good, scectfclly sound education. ‘Add up the responses from cach set for a sublotal then add up the subtotals fora toe ‘PRO. Compare your subtotals ond total with the norms listed atthe end ofthis chapter Save your test paper, siuce you will be asked to complete the inventory egain toward the end ofthe book and compare your two sets of scores.te weed to Hey een tht need attnton thos you wish to nv your PRO OF they nent sey thy oa Fett wy youd aot perry Tithe philosophic process begins ling gust van bmiseneiodeten ee Simeserous way thencuroatyeonharnen sndconunfment se altmaperant indie Ofte iklioodrsquench en intent your going startet Carey's hr noes lows philosophic ose fo ook nereatag Frovoative challenging, fon, Confoae Tresusainer Stagg at penne coe Hate eros to phiceophiepuasicsac cee you goig wien be tee ee ee on gg shen ‘ Inay lve worn otf Commitment coe Fan rfc your fags Sat he ans proces otoniy leads somewhere Yolo ‘here iporant—tatplsophfe snowes Sante vue inthe own uh ad ne thay can mae a feence ne we Curlosity Song of Yo ne youngster or a8 pans rep Youngsters, encovintered a story. book monkey named Curious George (ey, 1982) This mischlevous Kile primate as a, ‘Ways geting lato trouble becuse, Uy 83 he might he coud not ay no to the many havite ons hezecvived to explore, experiaent, dit \ydally, experience the world, or, in short, play. For instance, one day when Curious, George was siding bie bleyele by @ pond en route to delivering hie newspapers, t oc. ccozed fo him that he could tart his papers ‘nto boats and float them on the water, Trae tohis character, he could not ress this temp {afion. The boats were made, and the paper, ‘ewiless to say, were not delivered, tion of your! f your philosophic curios- 129 to do with your tenden- es to wonder, question, andl ponder. I alsa Developing Philewophic Skits {ells about yout capacity to be amazed, in- ‘aigued, even perploved by the life you have andl world in which you fin yourself Confidence All of you undoubtedly have st Ieast some interest in philosophic iasues. But whether Your curiosity quotient (subacore 1) is high, low or somewhere in between, you wil ales pphers, of course, are looking for what might ‘be callod truth of at least vague or partial truths. IFyou believe that thinking, speculating, and using logicean acheve such ends, your confidence factor should be high. Onthe other hand fyou much like Professor Jones atthe beginning of the chapter, have ‘snspicons thot thage that cannot be physi. cally measured realy do not ends or tat pat. Josophers do litle wore thea share opinions, {Your confidence score will undoubledly be Tow. ‘As the sustain, confidence provides you ‘with the faith thot your zeflections may lead to some anwwers. With stich a prospect In ‘ind, you are likely tokeep thitiing, ty out new Sdeas, study old ornew religions, or talk seriously with fellow students about the meaning of Ife. On the other hand, if you hhave a high curiosity score but lack cone dencein thephiasophie process, itisuntkely ‘that you will spend much times philosophic reflection ar debate. You will se: ‘questions as interesting, perhaps even lan. Portant, but the prospects for finding any an ‘ser slim, ‘Comunitment ‘The third factor in the inventory is commit- ‘ment--speciically, commitment to the no tion that philosophic tuts or answers are valuable. Itis poste for example, to be Fall of wonder regarding philosophic questions10. Practical Plocophy of Sport {oubecore 1 and confident that philasophe process ean lend fo atleast part truths Trnbecore 2, but stl uncertain that these are were have anything o da with your fein ‘Be rel world’ low comtitmentsubsoore would indicate that you harbar ssepcions about the worth of values and other Meas, You inay not appreciate knowledge for Its wm eakeorseatny praca ses for piles ‘opty, or both, You may think that theory i fine, ws fa a it goes, bul think that telly does wok ga very arstall You ay pul more fain ia common sence, sesbiverd expert ‘cee, and everyday skills then in pies, potions, and theoretient posses Tn contrast, «igh tora for sulbocore 3 ‘would indicates commie to philoocphic Concisfona ae genuine knowledge and fo Pileophie troths ee potential guides for Jour Ue on thie plan You may 300 ls Tnowladge as valuable In its ewn ght, ‘whether oro! you put fo wse, Or you may, Feflect on purposes foe some behevior, on Your moml obligations, or on the values of Snelesiylen contrast another before pet ting into action That i you use the retlls fof our reflections in ging your stone. Interpreting Your PRQ High or low total scores or subscoxes shold sof be a cause for personal congratulations or blame. This i berause you probubly had Felaively ltd contre over the development OF these three atltudes or tendencies. Thay ‘were eulvated by your parents, bothers, sine friend, teacher and spiztual lend: Gs they were teanamited by television, newspapers billboards, school texlbooks— by everything that impinged on you fom the Doginning of yourlife unl today. Forall you ‘now, some ofthese tendencies may even be genetically influenced. Regardless, you did ot sinply choose tobe philosophically cut ‘us oF eitinteresed, confident ox skeptical, ‘and counted fo the value of ideas and theo- vee or not, This daes not mean that these altitudes cannot be modified. I fat, becomn- ing aware of them can bea first step in mak= ing changes. Bat as withall deeply ingrained lusits or tendencies, they are not recast sgulckly or easly. Whatever your ovr status may be at this ‘ove, Tam convinced that generoda amounts ‘of phllocophic curiosity, confidence in the philosophie process an commitment to the fnpoctance of philosophic insight are im- ‘portant both personally and professionally. If you too believe this and your PRO was relatively high, then you are undoubtedly ‘ready to began the journey awaiting you in this book. (On the other hand, {F your PRO was rela: tively low, Cope that it will not stay there for long. I believe that something in these ‘pages will catch your attention and bother you. Maybe it will be the disturbing image ‘fa career without direction, or differences 4n your work when i is devoted to values like excellence or play rather than phyales! Stness and survival, or the way that kumar evelopment can bo errested. when bodies are treated like machines and movement ike ‘an impersonal mechanical process, of the ‘provocative puuzlee related fo far play and the importance of sinning: You may wake up some night and realize that you cannot escape philosophic questions, or deny that ‘ere are celiably better and worse answers to ther, or ignore their concrete implications for day-to-day living and a saafying carer. ‘Whatever you learned from taking the PRI, ‘you should now have three answers ready Ter the question posed at the beginning of this section, namely, Why should a person, ‘even ask philosophic questions? You can say, “Because Lam oni; because I wonder, be cxuse I néed to stop my hectic pace of Be sometimes and deciceifalloffals makes any senge; beause I want to make suse thal my ‘personal ane profesional lives are headed,somevher beens pling within ferivown ae ‘ected ty "Cease wast pews tomy quo ea enone FeddotecbomuseNneiet steed lonely ony ea ese ar scns ripsene oe eae aca rcee “And nly yon sk ys Dee Ten connite tothe tmponanes eee frags bean Fehon at See es eee ipa eer ep mths oon igri nee cpheceonenemedeea ee oe Feral ir rn Semon er How Are Philosophic Questions Different From Other Questions? ‘Some people believe that philophic questions ‘ce easy t0 spol. Perhaps then you will have no Sifely in identifying which ofthe following questions aze philosophic fa nature: » What i play? + Toit morslly soceptable to bend the rea ofa game? + Was that last 2m dive beautifl? + Why are athletes 50 often considered to be dumb jocks? * Should physical education be required 4m the public echoole? Ta our colleges and universities? you answered that all five are, or could be, phitosophic questions, you are sight. IF you think that all five need not be philosophic questions, you ave sight again. This i sy be: ‘cause virtually any andall questions that peo ple can think of offer some possibilities for Philosophic analysis. But the opposite is alo. fue, Vitkually any and all questions can be ‘approached from nonphilosophic directions. The issue, then, becomes not go mich one of Ending unique questions that can be Developing Philosophie Skits 11 viewed ftom a philosophic perspective but ‘oflocatny the philosophicstandpointin con trast to others, Fer the five questions just ‘sted, at least partial answers may come or Perspectives taken by historians, phyciolo” het, sociologists, and many otters, But scholarsin these three areas adopt a cifferent standpotnt than the one taken by philoso: hers. They look for anewers in different a YHILOSOPHIC PamcIse Bramine Table 11 and see you can identify ‘common thread that rans theough the data used by history, physiology, end sociology. 4 the nature ofthe things they exomine the same in any way? Try to determine if this threads present in philosophy, Then answer ‘the question, Where do philosophers look for anawers in cvatrast to historians, physiolo- ists, and tocologistst ‘ven though it would seem that qutetons having to do with the natuze ofreatity (ro, Lin Table 11, ethics (no 2), esthetics (o 2, the heory offowledge (no), and vale {ear (a0. 8) wow fave litle to do with istry, plysioiogy, and soctslogy, echala from there fee can and do shed light on {he topics For @ample, can historians 1 ing only their own fools, oF eoviologte, thinking oly ae sociologists answer a quee ton on aesthetics? Can they say with any authority whether or not that lest dive wa Dowutfl? They probably caanot. But hey ‘in shed ight on the current philosophic uundersneing of beauty by investigating what was regaled ar beautifal in previous 78 (historia analysis) or by evan actual tide toward beauty conten ary sociely (a socilogieal sty),ssopeurdze oes Sapp wy cae An sp OI EA Bape obo ae ‘onEnp® restyd Praag = ieee ue pared anys, og AUTO TS MN ATP AEG BMT IER OTM ges 0p 01 Sum, Aman ba pst: fo ip pee as are pg agaeoe Speep wonton! 9 PC. peor Bap om rent (smyme napa Ag pees paren oD abe seat“ owes ope Ssopradiong sedan yo mdm eT aL“Totake another example, physiologiats,us- sng only the tools of physiology, cannot de tennine whether rule bending ie morally ac- ‘ceplatle oF Dot. But they can provide facts bout certain physiological responses to (and possibly also precursors orale bending. By Jreanuring phpsiologicalregponses they may De able to indicate whether individuals per~ ceive tule bending as morelly improper ‘heating,on the one hand, or morally accept- ablestrategy,on the other. Liedetector proce- ‘Sores are based on the understanding that Satentional lying i typically accompanied by Sdentiiableand measurable phyriologieal ro- Phat then makes a question far gain for Listorians, physiologists, and sociologists in ‘contrast to philocaphers? How ean a single ‘questionbe turned ina historical, physiologi- ‘al or eociological direction in contrast to a Philasophleone? Whatis the coxrmon thread that runs through all of these nonphiloaop hie ‘methods, a thread that isnot present in phi- secophy? The Empirical Tora ent py ogy sry coi ec pooeberee eaceert anata onsieathanmys tt ee cea tigate a rode ate Rea eet ee Shoe Seems Shela ea jatar oye Semen Just like philosophers, these scientists and Sievemroan as Bedbeeceta ee Sto poeenmcnert Tooking for clues and evidence, hey take the Developing Philoanphie Seis 13 mpi tr. Thay Fook fo emething that tbe found and sensed by ter senses either dix (ar when they find and reed $ palmary source nity) orindcely ae lente inp palge eating ber Sem & Sigal cone "fo put tis empha cmt way, ahora of spt fake was the en Gresko engaged In inch play, would nok be ely Io responds et me iy the las logo tl question, na pained To you pignogae faked whether requred phy ehestion dons dren much geod woot be ety to vespond, “Lett erly rfl on tak fora few weeks” Ora ectogisy feaked whether set in out cate ar generally Thought obedambjocs, woud notbelay torespond,"Letmeat ply wih someldess on thik” he te would need To etn ther materat—primary historic sources, blood cher or put sites, or the re ported als fs numberof jac 6 Epecvely ‘These Oaoples axe iat meent to In sats ch aldo even mally do say stil Sn thls wn eres Many historia and pisos, for dung, nl hat they ant leo tsk p= soph inorder ta completa research Novae the exarplo even ment to tply that thee displnes ae healthy or ase tonotrcks I sndotbtedlySnportaat to sxtracoera sn rom may ate st rons at once tis Undone Se portal that protestonals in the exec ‘snc a gna don he hore ana plysllogtssokogis, pisopoe, Soba of hers ate ena ta ‘Thepolntlecelntat re ates mahade of Aerent and wld approeces to acderng ‘adentanding, tnt ad the tat The Philosophic Turn Philosophers do nat take the ewpstcal turn. Rather, they Took invvard to find their data,AA_ Proetca Philosophy of Spoet ‘They reflec, They abtoct. They describe, reamed judge concepts. They employ thetaors of age Axplosopher thay wast to dnrify idea, the nature tings relation- ‘hips, values characteristic, and ways of Imnowing--not the actual weight of mele cles, not the specie content of historical Aocorents, not the phytic characterises of lec mnplacn not the fact hat eta troupe of people rely had crtin Idea at Som te THis very important to note that this plo- sophie arn docs not mien hat philosophers éannot ot do not concern themselves with phic realy or tetwerld experince, On the conti, most ofthe material en wich Biksopher work the ctf of human be Engr day day hfe—both physica ea (ike chats) and ponghysiol things (ike hope nd friendship) Bot when an tem Uke a chair {sexaminod pitocephialy tie not Beets presence fis eoor weight or chemical com- positon that wally of concer. Rather phi- Fesephers would sant fo know its nere conceprally or in principle, porhops how ‘hair diferent from other objets. Or they might want to Krow how hey perceive chic ard with what Kind of ssouance they Ienow that hay af here Inother wordy, hey ‘ee the ool of reflection nd logic not these of ectual perception and measurement Tei aio very portant to note that is saad ten taken by pilesophers doesnot aan tat their methodology fe not axentfe ‘clonic means caefa systema, objec: five, and well grounded. Many philosophers fn the pot and some stl today consider themaces tobe scents and thelr methods to be as rigorous aa thooe of fhe pysial sciences. An you will erate inthis hater, ‘here are times when plilosophicconesions reach of appronch the certainty of the we of physics, for example. Philosophers, in short, believe that idess are important cbjecl-—that hey on be held, turned around, looked st from liferent ‘angles, measured rofectively, and shaved ‘with others. Because many scientists, work: ing etdctly as eclentists, do not take deat ax ddataorconnt thems evidence, philosophers" ‘eettt mpc iincecomotprodce adequate descriptions of human life and bes havior. Philosophers belleve they have a parily distinctive veal in which t0 operate: fad one that needs and deserves attention ‘his distinctive ancl Important realm can be claited by looking at the question about the ethics of rule bending. Philosophers ‘would Focus on the idea or conceptual side of thia issue. They would ask themeelves {questions like the fellavring: What it it 10 bend a rule rather than break one? Io there some distinction in principe that an be ap- piled here so people now exactly what they fre talking about? For exrmple, fs faking, & foul in basketball by pretending to be Jnocked down an instance of rula breaking; rule bending, or nelther? On what crfteia ‘will philosophers decide if this behavior 0 ‘ome other questionable action ts moray de- feasible? On the eniterion of keeping prom- {ses? Onpreventing harm? On playing falnly? On promoting the greatest happiness? On zomg else? How then does rule bending stack up on these measures? Is it morally ‘acceptable behavior? Should coaches be ack ‘Vged to use and condone it or 20"? ‘These are complex and probing questions. ‘Persuasive answers to thera may not be easy tofind. Lingering Doubis these quéstions frighten you, on the éne Iband, or rate old skeptical feelings about the Impossibility of finding any zeal answers, on te other, your fears and doubts may not be entirely misplaced, nor are they unusval. The culture in which you live does not promote good philosopbic training, nor does it gen- erally teach you to last your powers of‘What criteria should we use to decide if cer {ain sport behaviors are morally defensible? reflection. If you are like many individuals today, youareprobably far more comfortable elréating to seenething you cn really sink your teeth into, something you can actualy see ox feel Dut infinite amounts of empirical observa~ tion sti are not sufficient, Consider tha * You can shady all the historical cultures ‘of the warld and examine the extent to which they bent game rules..This may tell your a {real deal about these cultures, and you may. even Jearn if they felt such activity was mor- ally right. But this does not direetly address Developing Philosophie Sits 19 ‘the question of whether or not rule bending should be secepted, . « Yoit can study all the physiological con. ditions ind responses associated with rule bending for years on end. This anay tell you ‘great deal about why people behave in this way and how they react after doing 0. Tt nay tell you much about nervous responses ‘ond how thee aré affected by this questlon- able behavior. But this does not directly ad- dress the question af whether or not rule bending should be condoned. + Youcan study allofthe groups and sub- ‘groups of people you can find to determine leir behaviors, motives, perceptions, and values. This unay tell you a great deal about why rule bending iS so widely practiced, ‘bout why 80 few people think of it as mar. ally wrong, about how peers pressute one ‘nother info rule-bending behavior. But this does not directly uddrese the question of whether oF not rule bending should be re- ‘gagded as morally acceplable. ‘Consequently, inaitempting to subdue this ‘question about rule no one can avoid traveling in the company of ideas. ‘This does not mean, however, thatphiloso- ‘phers retreat tosome clean world of theming ‘where all distinctions have shayp lines be- ‘tween them, where all values neatly rank themselves, and where all shoulds and shouldn'fs are dearly listed, ‘To a degree, at Teast, the realin of ideas is camtinaoes with exnpirical reality, with nature. YourSdese are affected by the nomber-of brain cells you Ihave and the chemicals that are contained Sn them, Your ideas are influenced by your parents, teachers friends, by your religious ackgromnd, by where and when you were om, and soon. When you retreat asit were, {nto the world of reflection, you retreat to an uncertain arena where you will cary on a battle for objectivity. You must ight to distin- guich old biases and unexamined religious beliefs, for instance, from genuine insights,16 Proctial Philosophy of Sport ‘What Is the Range of Philosophic Questions? In the coiarseaf this book, you willbelooking, st several different types of philosophic ques” tions nzelationship to sport, exercisescience, and physical education. Jt will be useful to define these questions and to look at.ex- ‘armples of each that are related to diferent dain bout xéality, 1, Questions Having to Do With the Nature of Things. ‘Th a an area of posh tad tooaly called metophic Be concerned with at bing andes ae and how ey te smile to or dla from ane ant iis deseipive lays the qualtley arcs tert, enter espe of phys things Ske chai wonphyeal ngs ike hope epee Inte thing ke hen, ae forme of ion ke ring al beenng What is this? How Is it diferent frorn that? A _g00d couch, teacher, or trainer, a person ‘must have first been a good athlete, dancer, or performer. Related epatemlogia! questions: What isthe relationship between playing basket ‘oll, for example, and teaching it? Are playing skis, traits and tendencies the ‘sme things as teaching kil, traits, and tendencies? What kinds of perspectives, appreciations, or insights night be avail ble toa former athlete, dancer, of exer- ser that would not be available to the Developing Piilosophe Sis 17 coach, teacher, or taner who didnot Ive 2 performance background? If there ary uch unique peepctves sd understandings, bow import ace these to good teaching, cnching, or tclning? 5. Questions Having to Do With What 1 Benutifl. This isthe aren of aestheis ke exoiog, iis concered with wit io ood. But sestheseaforunes pecticly on Iratlesof ene ante goon wh it enuf or pleasing tothe eye, arpa, sense of foes on wehat ie balanesd ar ‘monlons expresin; and 9 on Serpe eta cin igor hating ody prot asbewifules once war boomee haters coach, eludes ae padng ‘ver incenongemphaai on atest elated cutie quo: What excl i athlelicen? Are thereqremenis ofa Tet Gach a te dopey of strengih {in muliphsolaton jumps) necesnty in oppesiion to the reeiemenis of Desutye Are celles presented by aesthetics a8 demanding as the col: age prone i li pre of speed, power, and tli? Ts ‘fee of ea fla fo sc be. tweenthesntwoemphasexin igrestat- Sng If so, wat wel it bet PHILOSOPRIC EXERCISE ‘Tomake certain that you havea sence forthe rooge and philosophic character of the five issues listed, you should now attempt to ‘makeatJeast one additional dam undereach ‘of them and Uist questions approprie for cach. IF nocessary, return to ray samples on the previons pages to help you extablish a pattem for writing claims acid questions,18 Practical Pitosophy of Sport : SUMMARY.BREAK ‘There are three reasons for asking, philo- sophie questions. 1. They are interesting ind arouse curis eaity. 2. Real progress con be made in answer Sng them. Thas, they generate confi- dence a philosophic methods. 13 Answers to these quastions can bein- ormative in their own right and use ful for making decisions and guiding ‘one’s We. Tus, they produce commit sent tothe philosophic process. Virtually every question can be & philo- question Ukewise, many questions tan be dealt with histrkally, physiologt- cally, sociologically, mathemately, chemi tally, geetically, in religious tera, and so on. Pilosopherstacle questions difereatly because they refuse take tne empleica turn. “Thee data, thee objets of inquiry, ate yp cally under a reflective microscope, not one that sts ina physiology laboratory. "Pilosopie questons may be metaplysi- ‘mon tol ofthese examples of moral behav or. You must ask yourself, Are there any common threads tat ran through al of these cases of good sportsmanship, and, ifs0, what are they?1 no answers fo the Philosophie Exercise outat you Immediately try afew possi- ee with me: 4+ A central characteristic of good sports- manship is the correction of all wrong, ‘alls ina game, assuming that they are dearly observed and ore comrectable, This isnot good choice foritiea feted concern only in the tennis example (0), Be- ‘enue the other examples also show good ‘pertsranship in spite ofthe fact thet do nol inveive the comection ofall observed and conectablecallsina game, thischaracier- fsticls probably not exeental tothe presence of good sporismanship. Moreover, because there may not even be opportunities lo cor rect calls in soune wnoffated games, this action is probably too specie. We need to lookefurtherfors more comprehensive Iheead that unites the examples, + A central charactasistc of good epor rmanship is concern for the tafety end physical well-being of players ineluding ‘one's opponents. ‘This seems to be present in examples 1 ‘and 3. The footbell plryer exhibite a gentine ‘concer fr the physical condition of his op- [ponent aftr a forceful colison, and the bas- ketbell conch wants to asmure that vielting ‘Opponents are treated! as guerts. We could drgue that the people involved ia the other cxamples also care about the pliysical well- Deing of teammates and opponents, even ough it was not this issue that put them on. ‘nr Hct. At least there is nothing ta suggest that they areinditferent to problems of paysh- cal injury. Purthersnore, most every spect wwe ean think of probably indhudes at least some possibility of physical harm. The only problem is that such concerns ‘may be too broad, Attention to health and salety isan obligation i virally everything, Developing Pilosophic Skits 21 ‘edo bth at workandat play Caring pys- ically forouseves and our negibons thee. fore; may not lle mich abot eevee af eticsin spor It woul be hep fo ind something tat is bth common t alo our fxaanples of competitive activity bot abo more specie fo ebmetiive games + Beause spot is rulegoverned and rilecested activity ental chesarer isc ofgood sportsmanship ow comet sent i pay sell by the rls of the one. “Wi would apoear toe the West conch slo ofr. The coach ho refuses to et Ms Pitcher legally doctor tacbale the ene Payer wo canet accept an Ulegally won Point andthe eosze tach who ould ot lake advantage of an snenoreese ule all show an ancinnpronising commibent 1 play by the rea Binmples 1 and 3 do not say enythiog soul llowivg rake pee Howeves, hey do not contradiet our tentative condsion about tly feowing the rule, There ib ‘othng in thee acre Hat would uggeat thatthe fotbll player and backer! conch Alsregacd gama flow the games on Th any cag comment topley sey Wy game rule renaina our best consson 0 fc ven If thereat better conclstons than hie one ul adimence should ste usa a feature tat Sich mare ental to any conection of good sportsranchip then the more specie nd octasionaly pesent feature ofcerecting eons alsa the excedingly bond ise of promeling Phys cal wellbeing Ths may be Becae res have aspect or priveged logtel relations ship to games and gan plying I ht fs Sov it is nol supa tat moray right be Savor in conpatitve gunca i neces ound up Wid come ration of following theater "This coun ae pomp progress even ie was a ode Mik son eondderce22 Prac Elosophy of Sport now, youem sate hat commento pay ttc by thous ofthe game on eet feature good sporsranship. This was pee tnt inal ef om examples of ood eit Be Ihvior ding py, and you weld expect to find tinesunples fat we have not revened. Intaitive Reasoning Rather on relying on our silty to induce {general principles from a mamber of specie ‘Examples as was done with induelivereason- ‘ng inti reasoning is baved on our abit ity to see something directy and desebe ‘what we ee Thus, we do nol have to gather smliple amples of our object of interet, Forour question all that isnceded i single ‘rample of good behavior fn spoct. We can then go to Work on thal, by varying i aad Yl eat at isa very power ten you understand, for expe, what might be ale betng blak frets ik goo sportananebip. The principle ofthe operation fr fay simple. You imagine an example of ‘good bxhavior in mport ancl Chen play i Wary it cage it in some way. Ia eiteal ‘uilding blocks eanowed earerultofavaria- on, you wil now itbecusce the whele bull ing called ‘wil fal, _mnohi, in the abeence ofthis ailing locke, {rll no nage be tial oie. On te othe band, if bldg Dock Wat not cite to le intent of sportsmanship is = {hovel youl routs oo Decne pee ‘rani wil tl be here. a PHILOSOFHIC EXERCISE ‘You can employ intuitive reasoning to make furtherprogtess on theearller conclusion that ‘good sportsmanship requires «etict aaher- Exc othe eles af he gamo. Tor ‘fanalyes placa gate clack iron of your relive ge aed vay Ie You may won twat though te net cele rete lt me, Cs also summarized In {able 12) Then you con ty the proces on Your own i sanage en nate pot Letuepletreabasetiall player following the offdal NCAA rules relgiouly He carey, one gal equipment does Eotatlempt to deceive flats to making IRcoret eal, and on. Tacept for och Sonal seddentl fle dat ll brain Payer make, Ci individual plays by the albook He wl lock for ard kena cone pilive advantage at leno ety perma Fedin eras ‘Table 12 Intitng Good Sportaneship sition Judgement Spoctaanchip ts il pees Wee ‘You are pletusing & ttl payer (otlowing te reler~shooting, posting, dbbling You are pletwsng» basketball player Bnalng a lop tele Indherales and ‘aking advange orn ‘You are peturing 2 layer breaking be re for pe poses of promoting : Tiny or futce (Comelsone Good sportsmanship das not appear to be gunsaniced simply by rule adherence, 3 ‘oor sporsmanshlp 1 mot juarantend skimpy by ale wlan, isnot oar Bat sporsmanship Sportemanship is 25) prevent here‘Aa we reflect on this rule-abiding behavior in basketball do we also see the uninterrupted « presance of good sportamanship? Does the structure or building called good sportsman ship still stand? We will probably conclude {hat it does, These variations, all of which leave sportamanlike behavior intact, would ‘appear to support our earlier conclusion that trict adherence ¢o the written rules Iles at (or near) the heart of good sporismanship. Buthave we donea sufficient number of vari- atjons to be reasonably sure about this? Probably not. Weneed to vary our subject ‘matter some more, reflect on other types of legal behavior in basketball, and see if good sportsmanship may actually (end surprise ingly) disappear, We need to probe for ac- Hons that are allowed but yet are morally questionable or improper ifindeed any eset, As we continue with out reflections wwe now picture our basketball player finding 2 Joop- hole in the rules. This is bebavior that Is per- fectly and clearly legal. But it also may be in ‘Can good sportsmanship disappear even when players are following the rules? Violation of the intent of the miles. t may be ‘a behavior that the rule makers knew about but forgot te prokibit or one that they simply never onsite when wang the ca, Such incidents are not difficult to bring to snind. A famous example of loophole finding dcouretina colegetacatallgane anus ‘of years ago. At that time the rules for foul hooting required thatthe fee thzower notstep ‘on or in front ofthe freehuow line before the Dall had pasood through the cylinder. There ‘happened to bea very large center who was a notoriously poor foul shooter—thatis, until he figured out a new method for shooting free ‘throws. Be would stand with theballnearmid ‘court, run foward the foul ne, fap from the floor behind the lin Sy through the air, and stuff the bal the basket. Indeed, the ‘shot wns perfectly legal. The shooter had not stepped in conto theline before his fee throw Jhad passed through the cyelinder. The rule on ‘ool shooting was revised the ned season spe cially to prohibit this form of freethrow2A Prmcical Pllosophy of Sport shooting, one that the rule rakes hed reve ntipated snd, of couse cl caver tated, ‘o condone, ‘We must ask, in the presence af this re following behavior oes god sporitranahip evertheles ditappear? Have weaken away nt fomdafion stone of moral tehavirin sport? l good sportsmanship dis- spent or at least grown dimmer, then it ray be thot we have intuted that ther i scmelking more fundatneatalto oodspotts- tmanship than mere rule keeping, You an aay notbesureyetwhatthatis, bat we know Seis there because we lost sportsmanship, or st Tenst came to donb is presence, while reflecting on a perfectly legal, though Loop Ioleorientd,scity. We may van to con Sudethat playing tly by the written oles isnoteulficient for meeting the requirements of good sportimanship. We may think, sn btheewerds,thatthereno one-to-one corre Jaton between playing bythe roles and being 4 good sport. Bot we are not sure. ‘More vaviations may be needed. In ardor totwstourtenative conclusion, why not ook Sorte reverse sliation? Rather than search 3ng for examples of rile folowing that how poor spensmarship, we might look for seo ‘Strulebreakiog that are consistent with good Sportsomnship. In other words, we will hy 10 find an instance of blatant rule breaking, ‘Dat alows tu ont hat goed apertarnan ship ssl ntact ‘We an picture a eitation in basketball in which a player legally grabs an opponent, Tt does 10 forthe purpose of keeping the opponent from falling into the otands and Sojorng hima. Ox we can picture a sla tlonin which offical relax theruleon travel ing becnuse a certain gymnncium floor ia sieoth and glassy. Players on both teams travel on numerous occasions. However, ‘ides to keep the gaune moving an nol pe- ralze players for something that fs beyond thete contro, onlytheznost Blatant stances ‘are clled Or to take an even more exreme lation we can imagine that sn oli han sade an obviously wrong clliate ina game {hat ts ted. Players and coaches om boll teams saw what rally happened. Yet, tho ‘rl fs to go unjustly to one ofthe tems. A player on this mam, not wanting to win on uch acl, decdes to travel intestonally a8 Som as he receives the inbounds pass. He eacons that this soil zekura the ball to the toam that deserved itn the Mrs pace. Perhaps you will conclude thal, in spite of these rile breaking vavation, sportsman- ship stayed inet thxoughoot. Tt could even be that such rude breaking is associated with very high and optional standards of sport imap. any cae, your suspicions sot the Ind ofa ohedo-one correlation between rule following and good sportsmanship, on the one hand, and rule brealdng and poor spodtsmanship, an the other, seem to Be oa tm "We abonld be fay confident, hen, that thera is something more furdamental than playing by exis ing rales to explain one of lhe central features of good sportsmanship. We may not yet now what that ie for ou sncatons on mote fllowings and breaking have only poised out that good sporeman: ship docs notappear tobe guaranteed simply by rleadherence, nor does bal pportstean- ship soem to be guaranteed simply by rule lations ‘Again, you ave made some progress Your understanding of sportsmanship is nore sophisticated and, hopehily, more a- ‘rater Normally you might wank to sxy, fondlslon, that good. eperiomanship 76 Gules that one follow the primed rules, bat there appear tobe exceptions to there people should fllow rules that donot os, fon the one hand, and should volte rales {hat do edt on the ater "What pritlple or building block will ex pian bok this normal sportstranlike behav Jor and thete exceptions? You would probe ably nee todo sonve more variations indcnt, but there Is no space here to pursue this ‘qoestion any furthes. The analysis that has been provided should be suicent to show how this method of taking a single example, varying it, and intuiting conclusions works, Deductive Reasoning [Rather than beginning with pecticexamples and inducing broader principles Givductive reasoning), or taking a single exmple and attempting to intuit the truth divecly Gna: itive reasoning), deductive reasoning ve. quires thal you begin with oneor more broad slaimns and then Jook for epecitie facts that Togicially follow from them. It is possible to begin with a fact (come proposition whose truth hae been demonstrated) or a hypothesis (ome proposition whose ruth 2 til in ques. Fon) and attempt to seewhat follows. Deriva tions rom facs offen tke the form, “Because {his isthe case, then sueh-and such must be true” Derivations fra, hypotheses often take the form, “If this s the ease, then such and-such mustbe true’"For our question, we ‘would begin with facta or hypotheses about good sportsmanship and aitempt to derive farther information. PEMOSOPHIC EXERCISE ‘You can pureue your earlier analyses about tulegovemed behavior and the mature of ‘porismanship in the following way: (1) eit 8 rae that playing only by the wien rales oes not necessarily satify the requirements of morally good behavior in physically otk ented competitive games, and QD ifstis true ‘hat violating some written rules under cer tain circumstances can satisfy the require meats of morally good behavior in these Developing Philosophie Ses 25 settinga, then what follows? Check my ex ample fo Table 13 (next page) and sce if you ‘ean add any more of your ew. ‘Tomakesure that thereatoning inthe table {stight, wewould noad to define more dearly ‘several teuns in the premises—words like playing by, violating, sah, and requirement, ‘Aay new words in the concosions would ‘also have to be clarified, For instance, the terms go beyond and simple allegionce kx the ‘third conclusion require this restmneat. New. ertheless, itis possible tha theeethcee dedue- tive conclusions are fully justified by the two. [premises with which we began, Once again, ‘this counts as progress in understoncling ‘what sat the heat of good sportsmanship. How Do You Know ‘That You Have Reached a Valid Conclusion? Physiologists and ofher empirical scientists speak of degrees of confidence in thelr an. swers, and philosophers do too. Some scien lifie Findings are virtually inescapable, ‘Statsteal procedures employed sn empirical methodologies indicate in these cases th Isextremely unlikely thatthe outcome could have been produced by chance events, AE ‘you will ce, there is an analog. to this in Philosophy. There are conclusions that are YYirtually inesonpable. For example, our de- ‘ductive conclusion that anyone wanting to ‘ullysatisy the requirements of good sports. zavship would have ‘9 go beyond a simple allegiance to the wetten rules mast be tie if ‘our fo premises are valid, Ths conelition follows logically and necessarily fram the Premises, ‘Nevertheless in both empirical ecence and philosophy, hereare fer more cases i which ‘Conclusions must be held tentatively. and it26 Pracial Philosophy of Spent Table 13 Good Sporsmarsghip Through Deduction Premine: fits te that. laying only by the writen rules docs not neces antl tay the requkemente of epertamanship And vilaing scene writin rales i estan ‘cmotances ca eatily th caqurements of sportsmanship. Is race, if ever, thal absolate certainty ie ‘achieved. Pitialls of Inductive Reasoning {An the fist exercise for inductive reasoning, ‘we took five examples of good sportsm ship and attempted to find a general charac teristicor thread thatzan through all of them. ‘Our conclusion, or atleast the one that we found to be the strongest of the three we considered, was that sportsmanship 8 commitsrent to play strictly by the rules of the game. However, we further analyzed this concla- and found it tobe lacking. Based on this indsight, we should have originally placed. only alow dagree of confidence inthis earlier finding. Do you recall how you dele when ‘youcameapon this torchusion about playing ‘hsiely by the rules? Did i strike you aa be- ing the answer to the puzzle about sports- ‘manshigt? ‘Several important sources for erzor can be ‘dentifed in this type af philocophie reason. ing, Firs, questions car. be valued about the ‘examples of sportainanship that got onto the list thet {supplied. Are they all exampl sportsmanship? Are they all examples of the Conehsions “Thon t mst flloe that _Aayone plajing entirely by the walien es say or may nol be entefying the requirements of good sparta. Anyone violating one or more ofthe walten rales may or ay nat be sallsfyng the require ‘ents of good sportsmanship. ‘Ayo wanting to fll ety the roquire- ments of good sportanaaship would have to go beyond simple allegiance to the wll rule same kind of sportsmanship? OF course, if thislist of particulars fem which we induced 1 broader conclusion is flawed fn any way, ‘our conclusions are likely to reflect this, ‘Second, this lit of examples ie very shot ‘Would we have seen something elee had we fovnd 10,20, or 30 exemaples of sportsman ship? And even if we had taken the time to Sevelop alist of 30 examples, could we ever De-absolatly ere that ie next example we encounter would not force us to modlly our conclusion? Probably not. We must astume ‘hat our list accurately represents all past, [present and future instances of good spats” smanship. Jn short, inductive reasoning operates ‘under tin uncertaintos: 1, Bromples may be binsed or simply wrong, That i, they may not be ex- Ample of the thing in queetion. 2, The list of examples may be mistead- ingly incomplete. One additional tern mmightforcea very different conchsion. However for el of the uncertainties raised ‘by the method and in epite of the inaccurate ‘conclusion that it produced on this occasion, ‘urreflections here were nota waste of tine.‘They lerted uso theissue of rule adherence. gona rll at tered fos ore eurteanddnnaling contain nad, dition, the aawer prods by this tind tras notfar off heat. Sportnanship fer {ba someting to do ith x comtiment tele sty by the leo the game, even though trad ot fo be mote ani Pitas of Intuitive Reasoning Here we took a single examgle of parca toni baketall aa eleavely wate akserving whether goed sportsmanship re. ned or dlsappene Our hope wns ind eal bang Bas of prac Guraasumption was that hrouphour vad sions, we removed cel foundation Stone(oepetsahip, good spornanthtp ‘would fll We fon tat, when we loked ceri vacintion of paying fey bythe ‘writen rule (he stan eat eat ath, Sportsmanship cesppesred ott leat gent dfnmer, Wewere-compelltocongiade at Ssdhevence to writen rlesdos not nessa iy salty the sequrements of spocamne ship. Ho much confidence shoot we place {nbs sppaen eight? 1s it posable Gwt any dioappearce of aporsmanahip diving, Gur veotore wos dle to some tases hl porto the smal, edinpsio ome bite promtted by our pu. rts or « coach about ut how fat ates Should go m stetehing he rdest Catatty, ths could havelsppene. Tat why twee importot to cert these resale by ater vatationd, fac, we did lone vp raaon where a een Kn of Slo 0g rabing an opponent o pomste ately, Files about traveling when Paying ona lppery betetall flog ac Sevag rl promote ames) drat eliminate the presence of sporemanstiy, Taisshauldhavehelped a cehilyourearir {enelation about he dshncionbotreen fe lowing the walten roles andthe regula ‘mens of good spertemanahip, Developing Piloeophie Skills 27 ‘Aaa check it would also Be wef to ask thers fo thik up thee own examples and counteexampler to sei they come to the Save er smo rela Most uportal it is ctl to continue with the vtaions and resultant desriptons until something gp fest ir id bare ‘You and I did not get that fa. Although we discovered tha samething tose te fe feast of sportsmanship ay Heiden behind serely folowing the wren mea at avoldng thar ication, we did not put our finger an what thot “tomathing’ i If we hadome up with more vations, wemigat dave obtained dearer, more significant te sills, and confidence incur coslstons shout tlatonships Denacen ral aerence ‘0d oportaranship would probaly have eased. We might even Inve rence the Point where we wold esi that eran ope. {iferaalianshipa ace necresary one, ha oe Jad dacovered at leat one frm rath sbout 001 sportsmanhip, Pitfalls of Deductive Reasoning pete sneer malades edetee Slnmy sata coy Sayer oe Selecta been hme een oan] Say eas fina tg he Peaisrenen echt cungracrnnmepesentae carn cape reicd nt mtacirne cue dee oe meee se dearer eye ars el penser nam wera ean ier va scapes ame28 Peseta Phstoeephy of Sport We need to have others certify our deduce tions tosce ithe teuly make as much sense 1s we oxginally thooght they did. Review Philosophy isthe art and scence of wonder- Ing aboutresity, posing questions related to that wonder, and pursuing answer to *hoce ‘questions reilectvely. Philosophie: questions are everywhere and ave virially impossible to avoid allogether. Almoct any question an be turned in philosophic and nonphilo- sophie directions, and plilasophere attempt to anewer questions refectively--without taking the empirial tur. There ave eeveral different types of philosophie questions, ‘which variously address the nature of things, vale, good behavior, Knowledge, snd beauty. ‘The tendency to ask and philosophic quettions is related to. one’s Philosophie curiosity, confidence, and com Inibment—measured in this chapter by the Philesophic Readiness Inventory Skill Ig Involved in finding, srcovers to philosophic questions, Pst, is important fo define the object to be analyzed. Analysis, ‘oa proceed ona given question using a vari ety of methods, including those that are in active, intuitive, and deductive in nature Zach one can be employed succesfully ad ‘an produce conclusions deserving varying, degrees of confidence Looking Ahead In chapter 2 you will ask questions shout the nature of hurman beings and use your reflective sils.to draw conclusions about ‘what people aro and what they arenot. You vill review the idea that a haanan being 48 & composite of mind and body and that physiz ‘aleducation shoul foci energies on te physical part of persons. In chapter 3 you twileview acnratng ain that a una, “elngiea whole individ an thes phyla station shoul focus tenga on hold pecsons. Allo hs preliminary hiking ine! Gieary to allow you to tevel hrotgh th ‘ore cific erin of Prt Ie where you ‘ellencounter dierent interpretations ofthe geod foand how spr, exec ecene and lyst eduction can contibut to Ther Sot wil be selecting on how the ace, Felted professions can best strengthen ne “fabric of our socety and improve the lives of Indlvidual people. Of course, you cannot do this until you know what itis to hea perzon: ‘Checking Your Understanding 1. Can you dese your awa readiness tedoplenopy terns of euety, tonfidence, and comaitnent On thé Tnsisofyour own personal expences Seltnclgiound, canyou expla your Seoresonbhe Piesohiclendines tae westoyt 2. Takes general question suc as, What Isthevalucof pont and descrbehow 2 philosopher Histian, sodelopat, ft phyllogiet night go abou! an forering it In genera, wt ei ferenor bree the way phlesopers ewer thar qutions aad the way Scholar inthe oer Alls answer tant 1 Denabe the range of phiorophie wesone. For eatple kd & tp Tkemodcan donce and formulate at least one question about it rem each of the five sens of phiksophy. 4. Explain why iis inpostant to begin phlosopie anal with dino,arfications, and descriptions of what aoe cetera Baise ce fsooes inning”? oe ae Key Terms Philosophy, p.4 Philosophie process, p. 4 mpltcal tam, p. 13 Philosophie turn, p. 14 Metaphysics, p. 16 Norms for the Philosophic Readiness Inventory Developing Philosopttc Stile 29 Asdology, p16 Fics, p.16 Epistemology, p: 17 ‘Aesthetics, p17 Inductive reasoning, p. 19. Intultive ressoning, p. 22 Dedtuctive reasoning. p. 25 Further Reading Fora comprehensive overview of the tre tonal eld of phlosopiy in relalonsp to sport, exercise science, and physical edtct- tion, see Osteshoude (990). Ror the best on- thalogies that addres the Sve types of plslosphic questions denied in Me chap- fer, ae Morgan and Mer (198) and Van derwerken and Wet (185). Fora helpful ‘cao ef eg pop ee Hater 985). Category Low Midate High Pee EPEC ELE PEELE set 33.70 82 10% Philosophie curiosity Set 3570 234 30.25 Philasoplie confidence sets 2m 231 rox Philosophie commmitraent ‘Total PRO yoo219 39 2072