著者
長島 和幸
出版者
日本スポーツ教育学会
雑誌
スポーツ教育学研究 (ISSN:09118845)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.39, no.2, pp.13-26, 2020-01-31 (Released:2020-05-20)
参考文献数
28

The aim of this study is to establish Ichiro Hatta’s “konjo” theory through analysis of his criticism of this trending term, “konjo”, along with his “training” concept, both terms he used during the 1960s. The first analysis identifies Hatta’s definition of “takeyari konjo” and “makeinu konjo” in his criticism. These definitions condemned training methods as “irrational”. Athletes and coaches who were supposed to aim at winning, yet focused on cultivating just a “mental” side without accessing “authentic strength”. Therefore Hatta defined any victories as mere coincidences. Hatta’s concept of “konjo” was grounded in the importance of both the “physical strength and mental strength” components of athletic ability. The second analysis of this research clarifies Hatta’s focus on consistent victory by targeting athletes’ “physical strength and mental strength” under seven types of “training” provided in his coaching. In essence, this study finds Hatta’s “konjo” theory was different from the popularized notion during the 1960s. We can characterize his perspective as being “physical strength and mental strength”. As will be outlined, his theory was embodied in his coaching.

言及状況

外部データベース (DOI)

Twitter (4 users, 4 posts, 5 favorites)

八田一朗の「根性」論の独自性に関する一考察 https://t.co/ifRcvKOWqH 根性論が大嫌いなので根性論・論は大好き。さらっとした論文だけど面白い。よく馬鹿げた事みたいに書かれるライオンとのにらめっこも、危険距離を習得し、直ちに対応できるだけの姿勢と心構えを身に着けるためと

収集済み URL リスト