Something from Nothing or Nothing from Something? Performance-Enhancing Drugs, Risk, and the Natures of Contest and of Humans

Chapter
Part of the International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine book series (LIME, volume 52)

Abstract

In this undertaking, I examine enhanced performance in athletic competitions from an Aretic perspective—a philosophical view of competitive sport, which draws heavily from the virtue-based accounts of Aristotle and of the Stoics. Focusing on performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs), I analyze potential both for harm done to sport and for harm done to athletes. In the first part, I look at PEDs and their potential for harm to sport, independently of the issue of potential harm to individuals. Examining the nature of sport, I argue that sanction of the use of PEDs would not cause harm to sport. Though their use would seem to give athletes using them something for nothing, there seems to be nothing philosophically objectionable to something for nothing. In the second part, I look at use of PEDs and their potential for harm to individuals. Examining human nature from the Aretic viewpoint I commend, I argue that PEDs ought not to be sanctioned. On the one hand, given our current state of knowledge pertaining to their potential for harm to individuals, they are significantly dangerous. On the other hand, PEDs offer athletes who take them not a something-for-nothing, but a nothing-for-something exchange.

Keywords

Human Nature Competitive Sport Constitutive Rule Major League Baseball Social Sanction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Berlin, I. 1984. Two concepts of liberty. In Liberalism and its critics, ed. Sandel Michael. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bob Brecher, B. 1998. Getting what you want: A critique of liberal morality. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, W.M. 1980. Ethics, drugs, and sport. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport VII: 15–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, W.M. 1985. Paternalism, drugs, and the nature of sports. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport XII: 14–22.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, W.M. 1990. Practices and prudence. In Philosophic inquiry in sport, ed. W.J. Morgan and K.V. Meier, 71–84. Champaign: Human Kinetics.Google Scholar
  6. Cicero. 2001 [1913]. On duties. Trans. Walter Miller. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Gleaves, J. 2010. No harm, no foul? Justifying bans on safe performance-enhancing drugs. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 4(3): 269–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hobbes, T. 1994. Leviathan. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.Google Scholar
  9. Holowchak, M.A. 2002. Ergogenic aids and the limits of human performance in sport: Ethical issues, aesthetic considerations. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 29(1): 75–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Holowchak, M.A. 2004. Happiness and Greek ethical thought. London: Continuum Books.Google Scholar
  11. Holowchak, M.A. 2008. The Stoics: A guide for the perplexed. London: Continuum Books.Google Scholar
  12. Holowchak, M.A. 2009. Happiness and justice in liberal society: Autonomy as political integration. In Fundamentals of philosophy, ed. D. Stewart, J. Petrick, and H.G. Blocker. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  13. Holowchak, M.A., and H. Reid. 2011. Aretism: An ancient sports philosophy for the modern sports world. Lanham: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  14. Locke, J. 1975 [1706]. An essay concerning human understanding, ed. Peter H. Nidditch. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Mill, J.S. 1979. Utilitarianism. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.Google Scholar
  16. Mill, J.S. 1985. On liberty. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  17. Morgan, W.J. 2002. Sport in the larger scheme of things. In Philosophy of sport: Critical readings, crucial issues, ed. M.Andrew Holowchak. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  18. Simon, B. 1985. Fair play: Sports and social values. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  19. Simon, S. 2002. Sportsmanship and fairness in the pursuit of victory. In Philosophy of sport: Critical readings, crucial issues, ed. M. Andrew Holowchak. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  20. Suits, B. 2005. The Grasshopper: Games, life and utopia. Orchard Park: Broadview Press Ltd.Google Scholar
  21. Witgenstein, L. 1973. Philosophical investigations. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyRider UniversityLawrencevilleUSA

Personalised recommendations