文献一覧: 松宮智生 (著者)

16 0 0 0 OA 注釈総合格闘技のユニファイド・ルールにおける反則行為

著者: 松宮智生
出版者: 国士舘大学体育・スポーツ科学学会
雑誌: 体育・スポーツ科学研究 = Kokushikan society of sport science (ISSN:18809316)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.17, pp.49-58, 2017-03-01

2023-07-30 18:41:45
1 知恵袋
15 + 35 Twitter

http://id.nii.ac.jp/1410/00012427/

14 0 0 0 OA スポーツにおけるルールの根拠に関する一考察 ―ルールの妥当性の根拠を導く解釈的アプローチ―

著者: 松宮智生
出版者: 日本体育・スポーツ哲学会
雑誌: 体育・スポーツ哲学研究 (ISSN:09155104)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.34, no.1, pp.37-51, 2012 (Released:2012-12-17)
参考文献数: 48

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the basis of the validity of rules of game.The traditional framework of the discussion (formalism vs. ethos theory, internalism vs. externalism, etc.) cannot answer the issue mentioned above.The author seeks to verify whether the basis of the effectiveness of rules (the basis for rules to function as rules) is the basis of validity of the rules (the basis for the appropriateness of the content of the rules).The author then presents a framework for discussion of positivism vs. interpretivism. This structure of discussion corresponds to the legal positivism vs. Dworkin dispute in the philosophy of law.Positivism emphasizes norms based on facts such as written rules and customs and is effective for discussing the rationale for the effectiveness of rules.Interpretivism, in contrast, focuses on the interpretation of rules supporting integration of the rule system and is useful for discussing the rationale for the validity of rules. An interpretive approach seeking to find the ethos (or principles) of games may identify the basis of the validity of rules.Even if a player engages in conduct conforming to the rule of games, i.e., rational behavior to win without violating the rules, his/her actions may be criticized by those who watch. If so, the validity of the rules that are the basis for rational behavior may be questioned. The problem is the relationship between the ethos (or principles) of games and the rules.

2023-09-11 07:56:00
14 + 71 Twitter

6 0 0 0 OA スポーツにおける男女二元制に関する一試論 : 性別確認検査における女子競技者の基準を起点に

著者: 松宮智生
出版者: 国士舘大学体育学部附属体育研究所
雑誌: 国士舘大学体育研究所報 = The annual reports of health physical education and sport science (ISSN:03892247)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.35, pp.19-27, 2017-03-31

In sports, athletes are divided by sex for most events. Since 1966, various methods have been used in testing to confirm sex. In some instances where competitors have been disqualified from women’s events, however, that testing has violated personal privacy and its results have yielded information unknown even to the competitors. Currently, the criteria for women are set based on levels of testosterone produced in the body, but the obvious reality is that there are no absolute standards that allow for clear distinctions between men and women. Various sexual identities are currently recognized, and systems are being developed to protect the rights of sexual minorities. Division of the sexes is considered a given in sports, but new systems of categories will probably need to be designed for sports as well. This paper presents a tentative proposal regarding competition formats as a basis for future discussions. Systems such as open categories that are open to both sexes and categories that are not segregated by sex could enable sports participants to approach their bodies and their sexual identities in a positive manner.

2022-04-24 22:21:21
6 + 0 Twitter

http://id.nii.ac.jp/1410/00012523/

3 0 0 0 OA 総合格闘技 (MMA) のユニファイド・ルール

著者: 松宮智生
出版者: 国士舘大学体育学部附属体育研究所
雑誌: 国士舘大学体育研究所報 = The annual reports of health physical education and sports science (ISSN:03892247)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.34, pp.23-31, 2016-03-31

2021-11-23 13:47:42
3 + 2 Twitter

http://id.nii.ac.jp/1410/00010809/

2 0 0 0 スポーツにおけるルールの根拠に関する一考察:―ルールの妥当性の根拠を導く解釈的アプローチ―

著者: 松宮智生
出版者: 日本体育・スポーツ哲学会
雑誌: 体育・スポーツ哲学研究 (ISSN:09155104)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.34, no.1, pp.37-51, 2012

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the basis of the validity of rules of game. The traditional framework of the discussion (formalism vs. ethos theory, internalism vs. externalism, etc.) cannot answer the issue mentioned above. The author seeks to verify whether the basis of the effectiveness of rules (the basis for rules to function as rules) is the basis of validity of the rules (the basis for the appropriateness of the content of the rules). The author then presents a framework for discussion of positivism vs. interpretivism. This structure of discussion corresponds to the legal positivism vs. Dworkin dispute in the philosophy of law. Positivism emphasizes norms based on facts such as written rules and customs and is effective for discussing the rationale for the effectiveness of rules. Interpretivism, in contrast, focuses on the interpretation of rules supporting integration of the rule system and is useful for discussing the rationale for the validity of rules. An interpretive approach seeking to find the ethos (or principles) of games may identify the basis of the validity of rules. Even if a player engages in conduct conforming to the rule of games, i.e., rational behavior to win without violating the rules, his/her actions may be criticized by those who watch. If so, the validity of the rules that are the basis for rational behavior may be questioned. The problem is the relationship between the ethos (or principles) of games and the rules.