| Philosophy on steroids: a reply. | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 20706791 Owner: NLM Status: MEDLINE |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
Brent Kious has recently attacked several arguments generally adduced to support anti-doping in sports, which are widely supported by the sports medicine fraternity, international sports federations, and international governments. We show that his attack does not succeed for a variety of reasons. First, it uses an overly inclusive definition of doping at odds with the WADA definition, which has global, if somewhat contentious, currency. Second, it seriously misconstrues the position it attacks, rendering the attack without force against a more balanced construal of an anti-doping position. Third, it makes unwarranted appeals to matters Kious considers morally 'clear', while simultaneously attacking a position many others take to be equally morally 'clear', namely that of anti-doping. Such an inconsistency, attacking and appealing to the moral status quo as befits one's argument, is not acceptable without further qualification. Fourth, his position suffers from a general methodological flaw of over-reliance upon argumentation by analogy. Moreover, it is argued that the analogies, being poorly selected and developed, fail to justify his conclusion that the anti-doping lobby lacks philosophical and moral authority for its stance. These issues are symptomatic of a more fundamental problem: any attempt at providing a blanket solution to the question of whether doping is morally acceptable or not is bound to run up against problems when applied to highly specific contexts. Thus, rather than reaching any particular conclusion for or against doping products or processes in this article, we conclude that an increased context-sensitivity will result in a more evenhanded appraisal of arguments on the matter. |
| | |
Authors:
|
Oskar MacGregor; Mike McNamee |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Comment; Journal Article |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Theoretical medicine and bioethics Volume: 31 ISSN: 1573-0980 ISO Abbreviation: Theor Med Bioeth Publication Date: 2010 Dec |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2010-11-09 Completed Date: 2010-11-26 Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 9805378 Medline TA: Theor Med Bioeth Country: Netherlands |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 401-10 Citation Subset: E; IM |
Affiliation:
|
Department of Philosophy, History and Law in Healthcare, School of Human and Health Sciences, Swansea University, Singleton Park, Swansea SA28PP, UK. 571823@swansea.ac.uk |
Export Citation:
|
APA/MLA Format Download EndNote Download BibTex |
| MeSH Terms | |
Descriptor/Qualifier:
|
Athletic Performance* Choice Behavior / ethics Coercion Doping in Sports / ethics*, psychology Humans Personal Autonomy Sports / ethics*, psychology Steroids / administration & dosage*, adverse effects |
| Chemical | |
Reg. No./Substance:
|
0/Steroids |
| Comments/Corrections | |
Comment On:
|
Theor Med Bioeth. 2008;29(4):213-34
[PMID:
18941924
]
|
From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine
Previous Document: Dietary broccoli sprouts protect against myocardial oxidative damage and cell death during ischemia-...
Next Document: Technical feasibility of laparoscopic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection for patients with low rec...