蚂蚁、蚱蜢、蚱蜢和蟋蟀在乌托邦中同居:伯纳德·科茨分析游戏玩法和美好生活的人类学基础

IF 1.2 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS Journal of the Philosophy of Sport Pub Date : 2021-08-25 DOI:10.1080/00948705.2021.1969241
Francisco Javier López Frías
{"title":"蚂蚁、蚱蜢、蚱蜢和蟋蟀在乌托邦中同居:伯纳德·科茨分析游戏玩法和美好生活的人类学基础","authors":"Francisco Javier López Frías","doi":"10.1080/00948705.2021.1969241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this article, I consider Alkis Kontos’ and Allan Bäck’s critiques to Suits that his theory of games and good living lack ontological grounds or rests on the wrong foundations. Taking these critics as my point of departure (not as my critical target), I provide an analysis of the main tenets of Suits’ anthropology. This anthropology partly lays the grounds that Kontos and Bäck claim Suits’ theory lacks. I proceed as follows, I examine Suits’ early works, to which Kontos and Bäck had access, to argue that they contain an anthropology, albeit in an embryonic state. Subsequently, I examine Suits’ latter works, which remained inaccessible to Kontos and Bäck when they formulated their critiques, to identify and explain the key elements of Suits’ anthropology.","PeriodicalId":46532,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Philosophy of Sport","volume":"49 1","pages":"117 - 133"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ants, grasshoppers, asshoppers, and crickets cohabit in Utopia: the anthropological foundations of Bernard Suits’ analyses of gameplay and good living\",\"authors\":\"Francisco Javier López Frías\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00948705.2021.1969241\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In this article, I consider Alkis Kontos’ and Allan Bäck’s critiques to Suits that his theory of games and good living lack ontological grounds or rests on the wrong foundations. Taking these critics as my point of departure (not as my critical target), I provide an analysis of the main tenets of Suits’ anthropology. This anthropology partly lays the grounds that Kontos and Bäck claim Suits’ theory lacks. I proceed as follows, I examine Suits’ early works, to which Kontos and Bäck had access, to argue that they contain an anthropology, albeit in an embryonic state. Subsequently, I examine Suits’ latter works, which remained inaccessible to Kontos and Bäck when they formulated their critiques, to identify and explain the key elements of Suits’ anthropology.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46532,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Philosophy of Sport\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"117 - 133\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Philosophy of Sport\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2021.1969241\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Philosophy of Sport","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2021.1969241","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要在本文中,我认为阿尔基斯·孔托斯和艾伦·贝克对《诉讼》的批评认为,他的游戏与美好生活理论缺乏本体论基础或建立在错误的基础上。以这些批评家作为我的出发点(而不是作为我的批判目标),我对Suits人类学的主要原则进行了分析。这种人类学在一定程度上奠定了Kontos和Bäck声称Suits理论所缺乏的基础。我继续如下,我研究了Suits的早期作品,Kontos和Bäck可以接触到这些作品,认为它们包含了人类学,尽管处于萌芽状态。随后,我研究了Suits的后几部作品,这些作品在Kontos和Bäck提出批评时仍然无法获得,以确定和解释Suits人类学的关键元素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Ants, grasshoppers, asshoppers, and crickets cohabit in Utopia: the anthropological foundations of Bernard Suits’ analyses of gameplay and good living
ABSTRACT In this article, I consider Alkis Kontos’ and Allan Bäck’s critiques to Suits that his theory of games and good living lack ontological grounds or rests on the wrong foundations. Taking these critics as my point of departure (not as my critical target), I provide an analysis of the main tenets of Suits’ anthropology. This anthropology partly lays the grounds that Kontos and Bäck claim Suits’ theory lacks. I proceed as follows, I examine Suits’ early works, to which Kontos and Bäck had access, to argue that they contain an anthropology, albeit in an embryonic state. Subsequently, I examine Suits’ latter works, which remained inaccessible to Kontos and Bäck when they formulated their critiques, to identify and explain the key elements of Suits’ anthropology.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Philosophy of Sport (JPS) is the most respected medium for communicating contemporary philosophic thought with regard to sport. It contains stimulating articles, critical reviews of work completed, and philosophic discussions about the philosophy of sport. JPS is published twice a year for the International Association for the Philosophy of Sport; members receive it as part of their membership. To subscribe to either the print or e-version of JPS, press the Subscribe or Renew button at the top of this screen.
期刊最新文献
Spontaneous movement: an exploration of the concept Strength as phenomenon: a pure phenomenology of sport Wonder and the sublime in surfing and nature sports Cowboy professionalism: a cultural study of big-mountain tourism in the last frontier Why do birds have wings? A biosemiotic argument for the primacy of naturogenic sporting sites
×
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