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

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review


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
Title of host publicationOlympic Ethics and Philosophy
EditorsMike McNamee, Jim Parry
Place of PublicationLondon
Number of pages16
ISBN (Print)978-0-415-63511-0
Publication statusPublished - 24 Oct 2012

Publication series

NameEthics and Sport


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


Dive into the research topics of 'Pandora Logic: Rules Moral Judgement and the Fundamental Principles of Olympism'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this