Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Furthering Interpretivism’s Integrity: Bringing Together Ethics and Aesthetics

2012; Taylor & Francis; Volume: 39; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/00948705.2012.725908

1543-2939

César R. Torres,

Genetics and Physical Performance

Abstract One important limitation of the current renditions of interpretivism is that its emphasis on the moral dimension of sport has overlooked the aesthetic dimension lying at the core of this account of sport. The interpretivist's failure to acknowledge and consider the aesthetic implicitly distances this realm from the moral. Marcia Muelder Eaton calls this distancing the separatist mistake. This paper argues that interpretivism presupposes not only moral but also aesthetic principles and values. What it sets out to demonstrate is that interpretivism is an integralist, or nonseparatist, account of sport, one in which ethical and aesthetic values are not exclusive. Making explicit and specifying interpretivism's combined moral-aesthetic approach to sport not only helps to better distinguish the whole range of values that make up sport as well as their interconnection but also encourages sportspeople to pursue more coherent sport and, thus, more enriching lives. Keywords: interpretivismethicsaesthetics Notes 1. This paper is a revised and shorter version of the Presidential Address I delivered at the annual meeting of the International Association for the Philosophy of Sport held in Rochester, NY in September of 2011. I would like to thank the audience of that occasion as well as Prof. J.S. Russell and the other contributors to this special issue for their insightful comments.In this paper, I make no distinction between 'moral' and 'ethics' and therefore use them interchangeably. 2. See Carwyn Jones (2010 jones, c. 2010. Doping in cycling: Realism, antirealism and ethical deliberation. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport XXXVII: 88–101. [Google Scholar]) for a review of the realist-antirealist debate within the confines of broad internalism. This debate is so large that it exceeds the scope and purpose of this article. However, I must say that my view is aligned with the realists. See, for example, Torres (2009 torres, c.r. 2009. What is wrong with playing high? Journal of the Philosophy of Sport XXXVI: 1–21. [Google Scholar]), and Torres and Hager (2011 and 2005).The next two paragraphs, with some additions and modifications, have been borrowed from Torres (2009, 3–4). 3. Notice that Suits acknowledges the possibility of the gratuitous logic working in one of two (mutually compatible) ways: imposing unnecessarily difficult physical hurdles to accomplish the goal and choosing an unnecessarily difficult goal. 4. See, for example, Kretchmar (2003 and 2005). 5. Futebol arte is sometimes opposed to futebol-força (strength football). Gilson Gil (1994 Gil, G. 1994. O drama do 'Futebol-arte': o debate sobre a seleção nos anos 70. Revista Brasileria de Ciências Sociais, XXV: 100–109. [Google Scholar]) and João Ricardo Carneiro Moderno (2006 Moderno, R. 2006. "Estética del fútbol: la teoría de la formatividad de Luigi Pareyson y el fútbol-arte". In ¿La pelota no dobla? Ensayos filosóficos en torno al fútbol, Edited by: Torres, C.R. and Campos, D.G. 231–253. Buenos Aires: Libros del Zorzal. [Google Scholar]), among others, discuss this tension in Brazilian football. Daniel G. Campos (2010 campos, d. 2010. On the value and meaning of football: Recent philosophical perspectives in Latin America. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport XXXVII: 69–87. [Google Scholar]) also makes reference to it. 6. Notice that Eaton does 'not claim that aesthetic experiences or considerations are never separable from others sorts' but that 'it is not a requirement of the aesthetic that all other interests or concerns are blocked off or out' (2001, 62). 7. I would like to stress that I am not advancing the position that the aesthetic is a condition of the moral but rather that moral and aesthetic values are typically engaged in combination. 8. My comments refer to and are restricted to the literature published in English. 9. See, for example, the articles on the aesthetics of sport in the anthologies edited by Morgan and Meier (1995 Morgan, W.J. and Meier, K.V., eds. 1995. Philosophic inquiry in sport, 2nd ed., Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. [Google Scholar]), and Holowchack (2002). See also the essays in Whiting and Masterson (1974 Whiting, H.T.A. and Masterson, D.W., eds. 1974. Readings in the aesthetics of sport, London: Lepus. [Google Scholar]). Needless to say, there are many more. 10. Durà-Vilà (2010 DURà-VILà, V. 2010. "Why playing beautifully is morally better". In Soccer and philosophy: Beautiful thoughts on the beautiful game, Edited by: Richards, T. 141–148. Chicago, IL: Open Court. [Google Scholar]), Ilundáin-Agurruza and Torres (2010 Ilundáin-Agurruza, J. and Torres, C.R. 2010. "Embellishing the ugly side of the beautiful game". In Soccer and philosophy: Beautiful thoughts on the beautiful game, Edited by: Richards, T. 185–196. Chicago, IL: Open Court. [Google Scholar]), and Lacerda and Mumford (2010 mumford, s. 2010. Breaking it or faking it? Some critical thoughts on the voluntary suspension of play and six proposed revision. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy IV: 254–68. [Google Scholar]), and Mumford (2012 Mumford, S. 2012. Watching sport: Aesthetics, ethics and emotion, London and New York: Routledge. 2012 [Google Scholar]) among others, touch on both the ethics and aesthetics of sport. 11. Interpretivists could argue that the two related principles presupposed by their theory are friendly to aesthetics. They could further argue that interpretivists' attempts 'to show the game in its best light' (2007, 55) is not limited to what is 'morally best' but rather to what is 'aesthetically best'. One retort to this point is that although interpretivists might not have explicitly favored the moral over the aesthetic, the way in which they have articulated their theory has neglected the latter while abundantly referring to the former. If the favoritism is not formal, it is at least implicit in interpretivism's genealogy. This is precisely why I contend that interpretivism only manifests a soft version of the separatist mistake: while the aesthetic is implied, renditions of the theory have consistently overlooked it in favor of its moral implications. On the other hand, interpretivism's aesthetic overlook, even if inadvertent, points to the main concerns of its proponents, which clearly did not include the aesthetic. Finally, the claim that interpretivism is amenable to what is 'aesthetically best' is not equivalent to argue, as I do, that it is an integralist theory with a combined moral-aesthetic point of view. My argument is not only about the compatibility of the moral and the aesthetic but rather about their connection. In this sense, I acknowledge, as interpretivists would argue, that the aesthetic is implied in their theory. However, by not recognizing this implicitness and focusing on the theory's moral relevance, interpretivists have advanced a de facto distance between the moral and the aesthetic. 12. Goalkeepers are exempted from this offence within their own penalty area. 13. The next three paragraphs, with some additions and modifications, have been borrowed from Torres (2009 torres, c.r. 2009. What is wrong with playing high? Journal of the Philosophy of Sport XXXVI: 1–21. [Google Scholar], 6). 14. My view of the aesthetics relies on that of Eaton (2001 Eaton, M. 2001. Merit, aesthetic and ethical, New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]). For an introduction to the development of aesthetics as the study of a certain kind of value, see Robert Stecker (2010, ix–xi and 1–6). 15. Here it is important to clarify that Eaton admits subscribing to 'aesthetic realism' (2001, 51–3). 16. Other internal goods of sport might include, for example, some restorative skills and tactical patterns (Torres and Hager 2011, 45). It is worth noting here that in spite of their meta-ethical differences, MacIntyrean and interpretivist views could be aligned (Torres and Hager 2011, 41–6). 17. For an introduction to the ethics of performance-enhancing substance see Simon (2010, 71–110).