Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.754429
Title: Normative authority in elite male tennis : a philosophical analysis
Author: Sheridan, Heather P.
Awarding Body: University of Gloucestershire
Current Institution: University of Gloucestershire
Date of Award: 2002
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
Tennis, like any other practice, undergoes challenges and revisions to its nature. A number of technical and technological innovations have recently been implemented and/or suggested by a variety of interested parties including the introduction of shorter sets and tie-breaker sets, and a revised tennis seeding structure. These innovations, if adopted, will represent a new instantiation of the game. Thus, determining how decisions concerning the future development of the game ought to be made and who ought to make those decisions is of great importance in terms of how fair the decision-making process is and whether the decisions are good for the game itself. In response to these problems we develop a normative account of "fair play" from Macintyre's (1985) nee-Aristotelian position, emphasising the importance of the internal goods, practices, and traditions of tennis, and that decisions ought to be made by those who have relevant experience or knowledge of the practice of elite male tennis. This account, however, fails to provide a decision-making method and is vulnerable to the criticism that it is inherently conservative. We consider three theses that might fill this lacunae and from which a rational decision-making method to evaluate technical and technological innovations in elite male tennis could be developed. First, we consider Rawls's (1971) method of "reflective equilibrium" which allows us to clarify issues, and is both systematic and democratic, but it is too far removed from actual sporting practices, their ethos, histories and traditions to have any normative force. Secondly, we consider Rawls's (1987) "overlapping consensus" model which is conscious of the political situatedness of decision-making but it is inadequate since the consensuses which it reaches might be based on criteria external to the norms of sporting practices. In order to ensure that the consensus reached is based on a critical consensus of the internal norms of sporting practices, we consider Walzer's (1983) thesis that cultural spheres have internal norms which must be respected and which are the basis for normative judgements about justice or goodness within that practice. This thesis is sympathetic to, yet critical of, the internal goods, practice, and traditions of elite male tennis, and that decisions ought to be made by those who have experience or knowledge of the practice of elite male tennis. We conclude the thesis by presenting a tradition-practice bound decision-making model that can be used to evaluate technical and technological innovations in elite male tennis which is transparent, democratic, and respectful of the traditions and internal norms of tennis.
Supervisor: Mcnamee, Michael Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.754429  DOI: Not available
Keywords: B Philosophy (General) ; GV861 Ball games: Baseball, football, golf, etc.
Share: