Journal article 1367 views 617 downloads
Ethics, Brain Injuries, and Sports: Prohibition, Reform, and Prudence
Francisco Javier Lopez Frias,
Michael McNamee 
Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, Volume: 11, Issue: 3, Pages: 264 - 280
Swansea University Author:
Michael McNamee
-
PDF | Accepted Manuscript
Download (553.33KB)
DOI (Published version): 10.1080/17511321.2017.1342688
Abstract
In this paper, we explore the issue of the elimination of sports, or elements of sports, that present a high risk of brain injury. In particular, we critically examine two elements of Angelo Corlett’s and Pam Sailors’ arguments for the prohibition of football and Nicholas Dixon’s claim for the refor...
| Published in: | Sport, Ethics and Philosophy |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1751-1321 1751-133X |
| Published: |
2017
|
| Online Access: |
Check full text
|
| URI: | https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa34549 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Abstract: |
In this paper, we explore the issue of the elimination of sports, or elements of sports, that present a high risk of brain injury. In particular, we critically examine two elements of Angelo Corlett’s and Pam Sailors’ arguments for the prohibition of football and Nicholas Dixon’s claim for the reformation of boxing to eliminate blows to the head based on (a) the empirical assumption of an essential or causal connection between brain injuries incurred in football and the development of a degenerative brain disease known as chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE); and (b) John Stuart Mill’s rejection of consensual domination (ie voluntary enslavement). We present four arguments to contest the validity of Corlett, Dixon’s and Sailor’s positions. Specifically, we argue that (i) certain autonomy-based arguments undermine paternalist arguments for reform; (ii) the nature of the goods people pursue in their lives might justify their foregoing (degrees of) future autonomy; (iii) Mill’s argument against consensual domination draws on ambiguous and arbitrary distinctions; (iv) the lack of consensus and empirical evidence regarding CTE arising from brain injuries in sport underdetermines calls for reform. We conclude that these proposals for reforming or eliminating sports with high risks of brain injuries are not well founded. |
|---|---|
| Keywords: |
Brain injuries, autonomy, paternalism, football, consensual domination |
| College: |
Faculty of Science and Engineering |
| Issue: |
3 |
| Start Page: |
264 |
| End Page: |
280 |