<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">In reference to the monograph entitled “Sports and Ethics: Philosophical Studies”, published in the “Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research” quarterly (2014, vol. 62), and in particular in reference to the paper entitled “The Normative Ethics and Sport” (Kosiewicz, 2014, pp. 5-22), the article presents new and at the same time supplementary views on the relationships between sports and normative ethics. The main objective of the paper is to provide a rationale as to why these relationships may be viewed in the context of the assumptions of ethical pluralism, ethical relativism, ethical panthareism, and axionormative negationism.The text is of a strictly cognitive and extra-ideological nature and it attempts to avoid <bold>moral valuation</bold>, <bold>moralism</bold>, and <bold>moralizing</bold>. The view it postulates is also labeled as <bold>ethical negationism</bold>, which rejects the necessity for external support and enhancement of sports rivalry rules with moral principles. It assumes that regulations, book rules, and game rules as well as the principles of sports rivalry ought to be of an entirely amoral character, independent of ethics.The article suggests minimizing the impact of moral postulates on sport. It postulates a need for widespread propagation of this point of view in competitive, professional, spectator, and Olympic sport disciplines, as well as in <italic>top-level sports</italic> or <italic>elite sports</italic>. The views presented in the paper point to the need to separate <bold>normative ethics</bold> from sports as far as it is at all possible in contemporary sports indoctrinated with obligations or attitudes of a moral tenor. This is because <bold>normative ethics</bold> – according to the author - is <bold>relative ethics</bold>, depending on an unlimited number of variables, e.g., various social contexts or individual points of view.The text engages in a polemic with colloquial and evaluative opinions of those sports fans who by all means strive to bolster its formal, functional, and axiological status. A significant part of them erroneously attributes sports to an extraordinary moral mission related to promoting an intuitively understood good with a religious and extra-confessional tenor.</abstract>

In reference to the monograph entitled “Sports and Ethics: Philosophical Studies”, published in the “Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research” quarterly (2014, vol. 62), and in particular in reference to the paper entitled “The Normative Ethics and Sport” (Kosiewicz, 2014, pp. 5-22), the article presents new and at the same time supplementary views on the relationships between sports and normative ethics. The main objective of the paper is to provide a rationale as to why these relationships may be viewed in the context of the assumptions of ethical pluralism, ethical relativism, ethical panthareism, and axionormative negationism.The text is of a strictly cognitive and extra-ideological nature and it attempts to avoid moral valuation, moralism, and moralizing. The view it postulates is also labeled as ethical negationism, which rejects the necessity for external support and enhancement of sports rivalry rules with moral principles. It assumes that regulations, book rules, and game rules as well as the principles of sports rivalry ought to be of an entirely amoral character, independent of ethics.The article suggests minimizing the impact of moral postulates on sport. It postulates a need for widespread propagation of this point of view in competitive, professional, spectator, and Olympic sport disciplines, as well as in top-level sports or elite sports. The views presented in the paper point to the need to separate normative ethics from sports as far as it is at all possible in contemporary sports indoctrinated with obligations or attitudes of a moral tenor. This is because normative ethics – according to the author - is relative ethics, depending on an unlimited number of variables, e.g., various social contexts or individual points of view.The text engages in a polemic with colloquial and evaluative opinions of those sports fans who by all means strive to bolster its formal, functional, and axiological status. A significant part of them erroneously attributes sports to an extraordinary moral mission related to promoting an intuitively understood good with a religious and extra-confessional tenor.

Why Pluralism, Relativism, and Panthareism: An Ethical Landscape with Sport in the Background<xref ref-type="fn" rid="fn6_w2aab2b8b5b1b7b1ab1aaAa">*</xref>

Josef Pilsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw, Poland

Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Why Pluralism, Relativism, and Panthareism: An Ethical Landscape with Sport in the Background

In reference to the monograph entitled “Sports and Ethics: Philosophical Studies”, published in the “Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research”...

Why Pluralism, Relativism, and Panthareism: An Ethical Landscape with Sport in the Background*

Publié en ligne: 10 juil. 2015

Pages: 75 - 87

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/pcssr-2015-0015

Mots clés
professional and spectator sports, normative ethics, ethical pluralism, ethical relativism, ethical panthareism, ethical negationism

© Jerzy Kosiewicz

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Why Pluralism, Relativism, and Panthareism: An Ethical Landscape with Sport in the Background*

Publié en ligne: 10 juil. 2015

Pages: 75 - 87

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/pcssr-2015-0015

Mots clésprofessional and spectator sports, normative ethics, ethical pluralism, ethical relativism, ethical panthareism, ethical negationism

© Jerzy Kosiewicz

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Mots clés
professional and spectator sports, normative ethics, ethical pluralism, ethical relativism, ethical panthareism, ethical negationism