Competitive Team Sport Without External Referees: The Case of the Flying Disc Sport Ultimate

IF 1.6 Q2 ETHICS Sport Ethics and Philosophy Pub Date : 2022-07-21 DOI:10.1080/17511321.2022.2101682
G. Thonhauser
{"title":"Competitive Team Sport Without External Referees: The Case of the Flying Disc Sport Ultimate","authors":"G. Thonhauser","doi":"10.1080/17511321.2022.2101682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Ultimate is a competitive team sport that is played, even at the highest level of competition, without external referees. The key to Ultimate as a self-refereed sport is the so-called ‘Spirit of the Game’. As this paper aims to show, the Spirit of the Game closely resembles Habermas’s theory of communicative action. This suggests that Habermas’s theory might be used to spell out the philosophical presuppositions of the Spirit of the Game. Most importantly, the requirements for players to serve as referees of their own game specified in the ‘Rules of Ultimate’ turn out to be reformulation of the four validity claims of communicative action. Moreover, the Spirit of the Game can be interpreted as aiming towards facilitating real-life decision-making procedures that resemble as much as possible Habermas’s concept of an ideal speech situation. On the other hand, Ultimate might serve as a case study for exploring how Habermas’s idea of rational deliberation works in the practice of a competitive sporting environment. Most importantly, it makes manifest that self-refereeing is a trust-based system. This suggests that communicative rationality can only unfold its power—the unforced force of the better argument—within a context in which participants trust that everyone participates in good faith towards the common goal of finding the best decision. Hence, investigating the case of Ultimate allows us to draw broader conclusions about the requirements for rational deliberation to work in practice.","PeriodicalId":51786,"journal":{"name":"Sport Ethics and Philosophy","volume":"27 1","pages":"85 - 100"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sport Ethics and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2022.2101682","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Ultimate is a competitive team sport that is played, even at the highest level of competition, without external referees. The key to Ultimate as a self-refereed sport is the so-called ‘Spirit of the Game’. As this paper aims to show, the Spirit of the Game closely resembles Habermas’s theory of communicative action. This suggests that Habermas’s theory might be used to spell out the philosophical presuppositions of the Spirit of the Game. Most importantly, the requirements for players to serve as referees of their own game specified in the ‘Rules of Ultimate’ turn out to be reformulation of the four validity claims of communicative action. Moreover, the Spirit of the Game can be interpreted as aiming towards facilitating real-life decision-making procedures that resemble as much as possible Habermas’s concept of an ideal speech situation. On the other hand, Ultimate might serve as a case study for exploring how Habermas’s idea of rational deliberation works in the practice of a competitive sporting environment. Most importantly, it makes manifest that self-refereeing is a trust-based system. This suggests that communicative rationality can only unfold its power—the unforced force of the better argument—within a context in which participants trust that everyone participates in good faith towards the common goal of finding the best decision. Hence, investigating the case of Ultimate allows us to draw broader conclusions about the requirements for rational deliberation to work in practice.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
没有外部裁判的竞技团体运动:飞盘运动的终极案例
极限是一项竞技性的团队运动,即使是在最高水平的比赛中,也没有外部裁判。作为一项自我裁判的运动,极限运动的关键是所谓的“比赛精神”。正如本文旨在表明的那样,博弈精神与哈贝马斯的交往行为理论非常相似。这表明哈贝马斯的理论可以用来阐明游戏精神的哲学前提。最重要的是,“终极规则”中对玩家作为自己游戏裁判员的要求是对交流行为的四种有效性主张的重新表述。此外,游戏精神可以被解释为旨在促进现实生活中的决策程序,尽可能地类似于哈贝马斯理想演讲情境的概念。另一方面,《终极》可以作为一个案例研究,探索哈贝马斯的理性思考理念如何在竞技体育环境的实践中发挥作用。最重要的是,它表明了自我审查是一个基于信任的系统。这表明,交际理性只有在参与者相信每个人都真诚地朝着寻找最佳决策的共同目标参与的背景下,才能展现出它的力量——更好的论点的非强制性力量。因此,对Ultimate案件的调查使我们能够得出关于理性审议在实践中发挥作用的要求的更广泛的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
23.10%
发文量
20
期刊最新文献
Book Symposium: Alfred Archer and Jake Wojtowicz’s Why it’s OK to be a Sports Fan Fair Play Principle in Esports Be a good sport: A care ethical inquiry into sport parenting Weight in sport: changing the focus from ‘weight-sensitive sports’ to risk groups of athletes The etymological evolvement and redefinition of ‘game’
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1