Polemika s protiargumenty Iva Jiráska vůči třem nejčastějším zdůvodněním amorálnosti "dopingu"
| Autoři | |
|---|---|
| Rok publikování | 2018 |
| Druh | Článek v odborném periodiku |
| Časopis / Zdroj | Filosofický casopis |
| Fakulta / Pracoviště MU | |
| Citace | |
| www | https://kramerius.lib.cas.cz/search/i.jsp?pid=uuid:f6be3e92-48e1-11e1-5015-001143e3f55c#periodical-periodicalvolume-periodicalitem-article_uuid:f1a1c875-7d7a-45f7-bdf1-851209ff7ea2 |
| Klíčová slova | doping; performance-enhancing substances; ethics; moral reasoning; Ivo Jirasek; Robert L. Simo |
| Popis | Ivo Jirasek, in the chapter "Doping" of his monography Philosophical Kinanthropology: The Meeting Point of Philosophy, Body and Movement (Filosoficka kinantropologie: setkani filosofie, tela, a pohybu; Olomouc 2005), attempts to challenge three arguments most frequently put forward in justification of the appropriateness of banning certain substances used by some athletes to enhance their performance. Jirasek treats as invalid the argument that says performance-enhancing substances are harmful for the user, as this conflicts with a liberal emphasis on individual freedom. Apparently, the argument that the doping of some leads to the doping of others is also insufficient, because we would be denying free will to individuals and assuming that their behaviour is always conformist. It is also not enough to condemn doping as deceptive and unfair conduct, because then all other means by which athletes enhance their performance would have to be eliminated. The aim is to demonstrate the unsustainability of Jirasek's arguments against these three frequent justifications. |