文献一覧: 重松大 (著者)

4 0 0 0 OA 「自由意志によるドーピング問題」をめぐる倫理間対話 ―なぜドーピングをしてはいけないのか―

著者: 竹村瑞穂重松大小林大祐
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.33, no.1, pp.27-40, 2011 (Released:2012-12-17)
参考文献数: 9

The purpose of this paper is to explore the ground for putting a ban on doping in competitive sport circles, especially focusing on the doping problem as “the issues of that with free will”. The IOC and also some researchers have suggested the reason for prohibiting doping but it's still quite contentious.The object and methods in this paper are as follows: We consider “the issues of doping with free will” (object) in the way of applied ethics with four ethical theories as the framework for researching. The adopted frameworks are as bellow (method).1) the theory of virtue2) the theory of liberalism3) the theory of utilitarianism4) the theory of dutyWe can find some prior views about the topic in terms of the theory of virtue andliberalism, whilethe views based on the theory of utilitarianism and duty are our original one.It would be clarified that the view of virtue doesn't make sense and the view of utilitarianism can only show the prospective judgment. The limit of the theory of liberalism and the significance of the theory of duty would also be shown in this paper as a conclusion.Arguments on the doping issues in terms of the theory of duty, however, are limited on “doping negatively affecting the human body”. It means “doping issues that do no harm to human body in sport” should be treated as different problems that concernwith the essence of sport. Finally, we will suggest that both “the bioethical research” and “the philosophy of sport” should be pursued in the research on doping issues.

3 0 0 0 スポーツを見ることの概念的研究:―蓮實のスポーツ批評とウィトゲンシュタインのアスペクト論から―

著者: 重松大
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.31, no.1, pp.27-44, 2009

The purpose of this paper is to understand “seeing” sports by interpreting Hasumi's “criticism on sports” through Wittgenstein's arguments on “aspect”. In arguing on “aspect”, Wittgenstein showed some figures such as “duck-rabbit”, “double cross” and a “triangle” which we can see as two or more different things. In this paper we pointed out three important features of such arguments as follows: 1) If you want to tell someone what aspect you see, you should say “I see it as...” rather than “I see this” pointing at it with your finger. 2) Seeing an aspect is not a “perception of a property of a thing” but “perception of a thing”, so it is a matter of “what it is”. 3) When you see a thing, it is in a context of familiarity that you know what that thing is. This is called “context-ladenness of perception”. From such viewpoints, we can interpret Hasumi's words “see movement as movement” as “see an aspect of movement” or “see movement in its nature”. When we see a movement or a play in fascination, we see it in this way. This is distinguished from seeing just the result of the movement, which is external to the movement. However, Hasumi's word “movement” seems to be vague and to have multiple meanings. It can be aptly and consistently understood as “movement seen in its nature” or, in Wittgenstein's terminology, in its “inner relation”. This is a kind of circular argument but it is the essential nature of the structure of our perception i.e. “context-ladenness of perception”. We can also point out that although Hasumi is a “nonprofessional”, not an athlete or a coach or even a professional sport critic, he sees movement. Nevertheless, there is a difference between a professional and nonprofessional in what they see. A professional sees an event in the sport with more knowledge compare to a nonprofessional. Knowledge here is the context of the event, and we can understand this as that they see different things from the viewpoint of “context-ladenness of perception”. Through acquiring more knowledge and practice with using it, we can see sports in the same way as a professional. In short, of our perception is there a structure of “context-ladenness” and thus we can say as follows. 1) Seeing sports is seeing sports itself in its inner relation to the context. 2) A nonprofessional can see sports as well as a professional but in a sense they see different things because their knowledge, which are parts of the context, are different.

2020-12-29 13:31:58
3 + 7 Twitter

3 0 0 0 OA スポーツを見ることの概念的研究

著者: 重松大
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.31, no.1, pp.27-44, 2009 (Released:2012-12-17)
参考文献数: 19

The purpose of this paper is to understand “seeing” sports by interpreting Hasumi's “criticism on sports” through Wittgenstein's arguments on “aspect”. In arguing on “aspect”, Wittgenstein showed some figures such as “duck-rabbit”, “double cross” and a “triangle” which we can see as two or more different things. In this paper we pointed out three important features of such arguments as follows:1) If you want to tell someone what aspect you see, you should say “I see it as...” rather than “I see this” pointing at it with your finger.2) Seeing an aspect is not a “perception of a property of a thing” but “perception of a thing”, so it is a matter of “what it is”.3) When you see a thing, it is in a context of familiarity that you know what that thing is. This is called “context-ladenness of perception”.From such viewpoints, we can interpret Hasumi's words “see movement as movement” as “see an aspect of movement” or “see movement in its nature”. When we see a movement or a play in fascination, we see it in this way. This is distinguished from seeing just the result of the movement, which is external to the movement.However, Hasumi's word “movement” seems to be vague and to have multiple meanings. It can be aptly and consistently understood as “movement seen in its nature” or, in Wittgenstein's terminology, in its “inner relation”. This is a kind of circular argument but it is the essential nature of the structure of our perception i.e. “context-ladenness of perception”.We can also point out that although Hasumi is a “nonprofessional”, not an athlete or a coach or even a professional sport critic, he sees movement. Nevertheless, there is a difference between a professional and nonprofessional in what they see. A professional sees an event in the sport with more knowledge compare to a nonprofessional. Knowledge here is the context of the event, and we can understand this as that they see different things from the viewpoint of “context-ladenness of perception”. Through acquiring more knowledge and practice with using it, we can see sports in the same way as a professional.In short, of our perception is there a structure of “context-ladenness” and thus we can say as follows.1) Seeing sports is seeing sports itself in its inner relation to the context.2) A nonprofessional can see sports as well as a professional but in a sense they see different things because their knowledge, which are parts of the context, are different.

2014-03-24 04:28:15
3 + 6 Twitter