Violence in Sports - an Ethical Perspective Essay Example for Free

Violence in Sports an Ethical Perspective Essay Violence in sport has become far too commonplace. Aggressive sports such as football and hockey involve many aggressive tactics; however far too often do these aggressive tactics become overshadowed by deliberate acts of violence with the intent to cause bodily harm to an opponent. Many professional and non-profession athletes, as well as coaches, have adapted the mentality that winning is the common goal that all who participate in sport strive for and therefore feel that engaging in violent acts while competing should be permitted in achieving this goal. In sport winning is what each athlete strives for and seemingly they will consign in harmful acts of violence to achieve their goal. Former Boston Bruins player David Forbes was quoted â€Å" I just don’t see, no matter how wrong the act is, how anything that happens in an athletic contest be criminal†, (Gillespie). The mentality of being above the law that most professional athletes possess does not only affect the game in which they are playing. Many athletes who execute physical acts of violence while competing are more prone to committing such violent acts in their everyday lives, most commonly domestic violence. Harvard Law Review). Spectator violence and hooliganism are also primarily linked to the violence fans observe during sporting events. (Williams). Also, professional and amateur sport has become an integral part of our culture and society. Sports can be seen or heard, in one form or another, at any time of day or night. Professional athletes are amongst the most publicized people in the world. Thus, the words and actions of these athletes have been commonly mistaken as notions of acceptable conduct. Therefore, people, especially children, who view these acts of excessive and dangerous violence often imitate the aggressive acts they too frequently observe from professional and amateur athletes. The core of these on going problems is the lack of, or far too feeble disciplinary actions assigned to players who commit unlawful acts of violence while competing in sport. League officials must enforce harsh penalties for acts of violence during a sporting event. In more severe cases violence in sport should be treated as a criminal matter, where perpetrators can be tried and convicted in civil court. This paper will discuss the affects that violence in sport has on our society by discussing the sub branches of the Social Conflict Theory of sociology. In understanding the sociological affects of violence in sport it is possible to discuss how violence in sports affects our present day society, which closely follows Socrates’ pattern in achieving an ideal state. In applying Socrates’ pattern in achieving an ideal state along with the psychological aspects of Plato’s cardinal virtues it will be possible to come to an understanding on how to eliminate violence in sport. In conclusion, the paper will discuss why athletes, conscious of their actions or not, commit violent acts while competing by applying Psychologist Immanuel Kant’s Theory of Command Given by Reason. Unpunished acts of violence that occur while competing that goes without punishment ultimately leads to violence acts while not competing. There have been numerous accounts of athletes performing physical assault while not competing. The most prevalent form of violence carried out by athletes off the playing field is domestic violence. Football coach Joe Paterno of Penn State University was quoted â€Å"I’m going to go home†¦.. nd beat up my wife† after a pre-season loss (Harvard Law Review [HLR], 1996 p. 1048). Many people have speculated about why athletes are like likely to commit acts of domestic abuse. One of these speculations is that players such as enforcers â€Å"train to use violence and intimidation on the field and may have difficulty preventing these lessons from carrying over into their personal relationships†, (HLR, 1996 p. 1050). Another, more logical speculation is that â€Å"sport has had a kind of sanctuary atmosphere to it in terms of the legal system and police have kept their distance†, (Lapchick, 2000 p. ). For an athlete to be above the law simply because he or she is an athlete is irrational. However, â€Å"the public has gotten fed up with athletes crossing the violent lines, both on and off the court, and that may contribute to police entering the sanctuary†, (Lapchick, 2000 p. 1). If indeed the police begin to get involved when acts of violence are performed by athletes on and off the court, violence and physical aggression may not be as commonplace in the future as they are today. Irrational as it may be for sport to have its own sanctuary atmosphere in terms of the legal system, we as a society must question why we ultimately allow for this to occur. During the 2003- 2004 National Hockey League season Todd Bertuzzi of the Vancouver Canucks viciously attacked unsuspecting Colorado Avalanche forward Steve Moore. The attack left Moore with a broken neck which ultimately ended his NHL career. Although Bertuzzi was suspended for the remainder of the season and his team was fined $250,000 no criminal charges were laid. One can only wonder how an unprovoked attack on an unsuspecting victim which ultimately ended a career due to a broken neck cannot be treated as a criminal offense. The Bertuzzi incident is an ideal example which illustrates how our society allows professional athletes to advocate themselves above the law. The problem of violence in sport can be discussed using the sub branches of the Social Conflict Theory of sociology. The Social Conflict Theory of sociology deals with the ideology that the problems that society faces are the result of the way that society, as well as the economics of that society are organized. The sub branch of Social Conflict Theory that gives support to the explanation to why we as a society put professional athletes above the law is The Marxist Theory. The Marxist Theory can also be broken down even further into Instrumental Marxism and Structural Marxism theories. The general premises behind the two Marxist theories however are quite similar. Marxist sociologists view crime as an outcome of Capitalism. The upper class, or the Bourgeoises, control all modes of production. It is this system that creates the division between the classes. The upper classes have all they need; they are the wealthy class as well as the most powerful and influential. The lower class, or the Proletariat, on the other hand has virtually nothing. These are the people left with no power no influence and virtually nothing. The general concepts of the Marxist theory are: that the laws are set up to protect the interests as well as maintain their financial standing while nothing is given to the lower classes or the poor. In our society we view our professional athletes as the upper class or the Bourgeoises. Professional athletes are indeed wealthy, powerful and influential. Thus our current laws, according to the Marxist theories, are set up in a way to protect the interest of the upper class (including professional athletes) as well as not to ruin their social status. The Marxist Theories provide an explanation of how professional athletes, such as Todd Bertuzzi, can carry out intentional acts of violence and not be prosecuted while if others who are not part of the upper class (the Proletariat) were to carry out the same act of violence would be prosecuted in a civil court. Therefore, to eliminate violence in sport our society must not allow subcultures, hockey for an example, to follow a different set of laws than the rest of society. Today our society is divided into many different classes. There is the upper class, the upper-middle class, middle class and so forth. Our present day society closely follows Socrates’ pattern in achieving an ideal state. Socrates’ pattern divides society into three classes. The first of the three are the workers, craftsmen, farmers, shopkeepers ect. Another class is the auxiliaries or warriors, and the third class is the guardians or rulers. Each man in the state belongs in one or another of these classes. However to simply divide a society into three classes in an attempt to achieve an ideal state seems somewhat implausible. Plato believed that every man must possess the cardinal virtues to live a good live. These virtues: wisdom, temperance, justice and courage are essential in living a good life and therefore are essential in achieving an ideal state. These virtues however can be applied not only to everyday life, but also to subcultures, such as hockey or football. Plato believes for a state to be ideal it must possess wisdom. The concept of wisdom is understanding ones self and controlling self. If professional or amateur athletes were to possess the virtue of wisdom they ultimately possess self control. To say an athlete committed an act of violence unintentionally or because he or she was â€Å"caught up in the game† is absurd. To commit an act of violence with the intent to cause injury is premeditated. If all athletes were to possess the virtue of wisdom they would have complete control over one self. All athletes should also possess the virtue of courage. Courage can be defined by Plato as â€Å"preserving things which may rightly be feared† (Plato 31). In professional and amateur sport athletes need to respect and obey the rules and regulations. In other words athletes must fear the possible punishments, whether criminal or not, for violence to ultimately be terminated from sport. If athletes begin to feel that they are not above the law or that their subculture must follow the same laws as the remainder of society violence in sport will ultimately decrease. In the republic Plato describes temperance, the third virtue, as: â€Å"†¦ within man himself, in his soul, there is a etter part and a worse; and that he is his own master when the part which is better by nature has the worse under control† (Plato 32). Clearly the virtue of temperance is important to possess for violence to diminish in sport. To master oneself and have the worse under control would definitely decrease the amount of violence in sport. Also, for athletes to have temperance would make for a more exciting game. To have control over one’s self in a team game means putting the team before the individual. Doing so will lead to less violent acts and a more exciting team oriented style of play. The final and most important virtue is justice. Plato believes that if a community were to follow and obey the three previous virtues of wisdom, courage and temperance justice will automatically exist. This can also be applied to the subculture of sport. If all people within the subculture of sport such as the General Managers, league officials and athletes were to possess the three virtues of wisdom, courage and temperance justice would automatically exist and therefore violence in sport would be a criminal matter where perpetrators can be tried and convicted in civil court. In society there are two types of command given by reason; hypothetical and categorical imperatives. Immanuel Kant describes hypothetical imperatives as â€Å"an action that must be done to justify a means or reach a set goal†, (Kant 2). Categorical imperatives are â€Å"actions that are done because of their necessity to morality†, (Kant 2). Hypothetical and categorical imperatives are also present in subcultures. Athletes who commit violent acts while competing follow the hypothetical imperative command. They are driven by hopes of winning and will do whatever it takes to achieve this goal. This is a key factor in giving an explanation to why some athletes find reasoning in committing a violent act while competing in a sporting event. Also this gives explanation to why some athletes fell that no matter how wrong the act is, how anything that happens in an athletic contest be criminal. Following the hypothetical imperative is described as performing an action to justify a means or reach a set goal. If this action is violent many athletes will argue that it should not be considered criminal because it was a justified action executed to reach a set goal; a goal which they are entitled and expected to carry out. However, Kant would argue against this stating that the only ethical principle is universal, and therefore categorical, is â€Å"to treat oneself, always as an end, never as a mean†. For example in hockey a hypothetical imperative could be â€Å"if you don’t obey the rules you go to the penalty box†. A categorical imperative would be â€Å"Obey the rules, it is your duty†. If athlete’s were to take on a categorical imperative way of life sport violence would come to an end, not because it is right or wrong, but because it would be the athletes duty to treat oneself, always as an end, never as a mean. Nonetheless, it is illogical to assume that violence in sport will one day be non existent. It is not illogical to assume that if the subculture of sport and those who are in command adapt the categorical imperative ways that violent acts in sport will be considered a criminal matter. To live a good life it is essential to possess the cardinal virtues. The cardinal virtues are essential in achieving an ideal state. In achieving an ideal state Kant would argue that the only ethical principle is universal and therefore categorical is to treat oneself, always as an end, never as a means. By treating oneself always as an end, never as a means true justice in present day society will prevail and everyone who commits a violent act will be prosecuted in civil court regardless if they belong to a subculture or not.