Acta Universitatis Carolinae Kinanthropologica (AUC Kinanthropologica) is an international peer reviewed journal for the publication of research outcomes in the humanities, the social sciences and the natural sciences, as applied to kinathropology. It is a multidisciplinary journal accepting only original unpublished articles in English in the various sub-disciplines and related fields of kinanthropology, such as Anthropology, Anthropomotorics, Sports Pedagogy, Sociology of Sport, Philosophy of Sport, History of Sport, Physiology of Sport And Exercise, Physical Education, Applied Physical Education, Physiotherapy, Human Biomechanics, Psychology of Sport, Sports Training and Coaching, Sport Management, etc. The journal also welcomes interdisciplinary articles. The journal also includes reports of relevant activities and reviews of relevant publications.
The journal is abstracted and indexed by CNKI, DOAJ, EBSCO, ERIH PLUS, SPOLIT, SPORTDiscus, and Ulrichsweb.
AUC KINANTHROPOLOGICA, Vol 54 No 1 (2018), 62–72
Three models of failed athletic contests
Arvi Pakaslahti
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14712/23366052.2018.6
zveřejněno: 21. 06. 2018
Abstract
Arvi Pakaslahti’s model of failed athletic contests (the Two Ideals Model) and Mika Hämäläinen’s most recent model of failed athletic contests (the Four Items Model) are the two most sophisticated models of failed athletic contests in the philosophy of sport literature. In this paper, I argue that the Two Ideals Model is a more plausible model of failed athletic contests than the Four Items Model. However, I also argue that the Two Ideals Model is an incomplete model of failed athletic contests. I suggest that instead of accepting the Two Ideals Model, it would be better to endorse what I call ‘the Three Ideals Model’.
klíčová slova: injustice; athletic skill; athletic superiority; official result; official final ranking
reference (6)
1. Dixon, N. (2003). On winning and athletic superiority. In: Boxill, J. (Ed.), Sports Ethics: An Anthology (pp. 116–129). Malden: Blackwell Publishing. PubMed
2. Hämäläinen, M. (2014). Three standards of athletic superiority. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 41(3), 289–302. CrossRef
3. Hämäläinen, M. (2015). The concept of betterness and sport competitions. Ph.D. diss. University of Turku.
4. Hämäläinen, M. (2016). Who was the better athlete? Which was the better team? Acta Universitatis Carolinae. Kinanthropologica, 52(1), 5–14. CrossRef
5. Loland, S. (2002). Fair Play in Sport. London: Routledge. PubMed Central
6. Pakaslahti, A. (2016). Betterness, injustice and failed athletic contests. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 43(2), 281–293. CrossRef PubMed Central
Three models of failed athletic contests is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
157 x 230 mm
vychází: 2 x ročně
cena tištěného čísla: 190 Kč
ISSN: 1212-1428
E-ISSN: 2336-6052
