Pandora Logic: Rules, Moral Judgement and the Fundamental Principles of Olympism

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article is concerned with the role of moral principles, specifically the Fundamental Principles of Olympism, in the judgements of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) on matters of performance enhancement. The article begins with two pairs of distinctions, that between moral judgements and morally-laden judgements, and that between the moral judgement of cases and the ethical environment of a society. The article is concerned with working through the implications of those distinctions in the context of the IOC's judgements on performance enhancement. The article favours a particularist account of the moral judgement of cases, while preserving a place for meaningful general moral statements as contributions to the ethical environment of a society, but not as general action-guiding statements or principles that can be applied to judgements in specific cases. The article illustrates the implications of this conclusion in the context of the decision-making of the IOC on performance enhancement (the case of Alain Baxter is considered). It is argued that there is a danger of the decision-making of the IOC suffering deep confusion over the difference between general and particular statements, the nature of reasons and the logic of what it is to apply a general action-guiding statement.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)195-210
JournalSport, Ethics and Philosophy
Volume6
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2012

Fingerprint

Decision Making
Pandora
Logic
Moral Judgment
Fundamental
Olympics
Enhancement
Particularist
Confusion
Moral Principles
Danger

Keywords

  • Olympism
  • principles
  • rules
  • moral particularism
  • performance enhancement

Cite this

@article{2b3814b3a3504ebe9cda7aa7e23334da,
title = "Pandora Logic: Rules, Moral Judgement and the Fundamental Principles of Olympism",
abstract = "This article is concerned with the role of moral principles, specifically the Fundamental Principles of Olympism, in the judgements of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) on matters of performance enhancement. The article begins with two pairs of distinctions, that between moral judgements and morally-laden judgements, and that between the moral judgement of cases and the ethical environment of a society. The article is concerned with working through the implications of those distinctions in the context of the IOC's judgements on performance enhancement. The article favours a particularist account of the moral judgement of cases, while preserving a place for meaningful general moral statements as contributions to the ethical environment of a society, but not as general action-guiding statements or principles that can be applied to judgements in specific cases. The article illustrates the implications of this conclusion in the context of the decision-making of the IOC on performance enhancement (the case of Alain Baxter is considered). It is argued that there is a danger of the decision-making of the IOC suffering deep confusion over the difference between general and particular statements, the nature of reasons and the logic of what it is to apply a general action-guiding statement.",
keywords = "Olympism, principles, rules, moral particularism, performance enhancement",
author = "Leon Culbertson",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.1080/17511321.2012.666991",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
pages = "195--210",
journal = "Sport, Ethics and Philosophy",
issn = "1751-1321",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "2",

}

Pandora Logic: Rules, Moral Judgement and the Fundamental Principles of Olympism. / Culbertson, Leon.

In: Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2012, p. 195-210.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pandora Logic: Rules, Moral Judgement and the Fundamental Principles of Olympism

AU - Culbertson, Leon

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - This article is concerned with the role of moral principles, specifically the Fundamental Principles of Olympism, in the judgements of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) on matters of performance enhancement. The article begins with two pairs of distinctions, that between moral judgements and morally-laden judgements, and that between the moral judgement of cases and the ethical environment of a society. The article is concerned with working through the implications of those distinctions in the context of the IOC's judgements on performance enhancement. The article favours a particularist account of the moral judgement of cases, while preserving a place for meaningful general moral statements as contributions to the ethical environment of a society, but not as general action-guiding statements or principles that can be applied to judgements in specific cases. The article illustrates the implications of this conclusion in the context of the decision-making of the IOC on performance enhancement (the case of Alain Baxter is considered). It is argued that there is a danger of the decision-making of the IOC suffering deep confusion over the difference between general and particular statements, the nature of reasons and the logic of what it is to apply a general action-guiding statement.

AB - This article is concerned with the role of moral principles, specifically the Fundamental Principles of Olympism, in the judgements of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) on matters of performance enhancement. The article begins with two pairs of distinctions, that between moral judgements and morally-laden judgements, and that between the moral judgement of cases and the ethical environment of a society. The article is concerned with working through the implications of those distinctions in the context of the IOC's judgements on performance enhancement. The article favours a particularist account of the moral judgement of cases, while preserving a place for meaningful general moral statements as contributions to the ethical environment of a society, but not as general action-guiding statements or principles that can be applied to judgements in specific cases. The article illustrates the implications of this conclusion in the context of the decision-making of the IOC on performance enhancement (the case of Alain Baxter is considered). It is argued that there is a danger of the decision-making of the IOC suffering deep confusion over the difference between general and particular statements, the nature of reasons and the logic of what it is to apply a general action-guiding statement.

KW - Olympism

KW - principles

KW - rules

KW - moral particularism

KW - performance enhancement

U2 - 10.1080/17511321.2012.666991

DO - 10.1080/17511321.2012.666991

M3 - Article

VL - 6

SP - 195

EP - 210

JO - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy

JF - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy

SN - 1751-1321

IS - 2

ER -