A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä
Betterness, injustice and failed athletic contests
Tekijät: Pakaslahti A
Kustantaja: ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
Julkaisuvuosi: 2016
Journal: Journal of the Philosophy of Sport
Tietokannassa oleva lehden nimi: JOURNAL OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF SPORT
Lehden akronyymi: J PHILOS SPORT
Vuosikerta: 43
Numero: 2
Aloitussivu: 281
Lopetussivu: 293
Sivujen määrä: 13
ISSN: 0094-8705
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2015.1133247
Tiivistelmä
In this paper, I provide an account of failed athletic contests which consists of two ideals, the Athletic Superiority Ideal and the Just Results Ideal. Related to this, I argue that a sports contest can fail in terms of the Athletic Superiority Ideal without failing in terms of the Just Results Ideal and vice versa. In the process of doing the former, I argue that besides adjudicating errors, cheating, gamesmanship and (bad) luck, there are two other types of reasons because of which a sports contest can fail in terms of the Athletic Superiority Ideal. Finally, I argue that my account of failed athletic contests is more plausible than Mika Hamalainen's three-standard model of athletic superiority.
In this paper, I provide an account of failed athletic contests which consists of two ideals, the Athletic Superiority Ideal and the Just Results Ideal. Related to this, I argue that a sports contest can fail in terms of the Athletic Superiority Ideal without failing in terms of the Just Results Ideal and vice versa. In the process of doing the former, I argue that besides adjudicating errors, cheating, gamesmanship and (bad) luck, there are two other types of reasons because of which a sports contest can fail in terms of the Athletic Superiority Ideal. Finally, I argue that my account of failed athletic contests is more plausible than Mika Hamalainen's three-standard model of athletic superiority.
Turun yliopiston Tutkimustietojärjestelmän portaali