 |
|||
| Volume 1, Issue 1, 2007 | |||
| Moral Imperatives and Modern Sport | |||
|
Steven Aicinena, The University of Texas of the Permian Basin, aicinena_s@utpb.edu |
|||
|
Abstract Sport serves as a beacon of humanity but it also serves as a source of darkness. The natural law guides humanity toward moral and civil behavior. The performance ethic motivates individuals to act with self-interest and to engage in behavior that causes conflict and pain. Behavior called for by natural law is reflective of that prescribed by many of the world’s great religions. The propensity of sport participants to intentionally harm others, lie, cheat, seek revenge, utilize harsh, divisive and inflammatory language, and demonstrate prideful behavior as a response to the performance ethic is examined through the filter of the natural law and scriptures of various world religions. We are the authors of actions we take in sport and in life. If sport is to have a positive affect upon participants and society, the natural law should be adhered to at all times and the performance ethic’s calling denied. Moral Imperatives and Modern Sport
The strength, speed, size and agility of modern athletes arouse awe within those who witness their performances. During competitions athletes exhibit excellence in skill, courage and the ability to perform under pressure. Commitment, selflessness, adaptability, teamwork and many other qualities associated with desirable social character are demonstrated on fields, tracks and courts world-wide (Rudd, 2005). Societies celebrate athletic success and bestow attention, trophies of gold and great riches upon victors. The performances of athletes can inspire and enlighten us, for in sport the very best of humanity may be observed and confirmed (Hoffman, 1999). Sport shines as a beacon of humanity.
Sport can also serve as a source of darkness. Immoral, prideful and selfish behaviors are commonly observed in athletic settings. Competitive environments are too often characterized by egoism, unfairness, malice, and violence. Sports serve as a crucible in which participants are tested. The consequence of the sport experience may be the development of a morally refined individual or it may destroy one’s capacity to consider the feelings, rights and needs of others.
The performance ethic calls upon individuals to do anything and everything possible to realize athletic success (Coakley, 2004). In this paper behaviors taken as a consequence of adherence to the performance ethic will be examined through the moral filter of the natural law and sacred scriptures from the following religions: Islam, Jainism, Buddhism, Taoism, Sikhism, Judaism, Hinduism, Confucianism, and Christianity. The scriptures echo the calling of the natural law.
Readers may not be familiar with many of the scriptures presented in this paper as the religions represented are foreign to them. The Western world has been greatly influenced by religions founded upon the Bible, especially Protestantism. Protestants acknowledge the existence of a monotheistic God. In their religion moral behavior is mandated by the creator of the universe as shared in their scriptures. The Protestant Ethic has been linked to the acceptance of capitalism in the Western world. It calls for worldly asceticism, rationalization, goal directedness, individualism, achieved status, work ethic and time ethic. Protestant Christianity has been supportive of competitive sport, especially in the United States (Coakley, 2004; Overman, 1997). Many fundamentalist Christian athletes believe their success and ability to dominate is a favor from God and they use their success as a means of witnessing and evangelizing to others. “Competitive selfishness” is fostered by the Protestant ethic (Holmes, 1919, p. 9).
Some religions associated with Eastern traditions acknowledge the existence of a god while others do not. The religious traditions of the East hold that the soul is the supreme and fundamental reality. The souls of all human beings emanate from the universal soul; therefore, all persons are related. Moral and immoral actions result in natural consequences or “karma.” The next life one experiences is dictated by the quality of actions taken during the current life (Holmes, 1919). The self is to be transcended and selfish desires are to be eliminated if Nirvana, or the blessed state, is to be achieved. The characteristics of Eastern religions make the goals of seeking glory, fame or riches at the expense of another illogical.
Sport-related behaviors to be examined in this paper include
intentional infliction of injury upon others, cheating,
lying, harsh, divisive and inflammatory speech, revenge
sought through physical and verbal behavior, and
egoism/pride. Each of these behaviors causes pain and
conflict between and within others. The reader will
unmistakably see that much of what is done in the pursuit of
athletic achievement is contrary to the natural law and
mandates of scared scriptures. The discussion concludes with
an explanation of why it is important to adhere to the
natural law in all aspects of our lives. The Natural Law
The natural law tradition of ethics may be traced back to ancient Greece. The Stoics believed that the universe is governed by practical reason and argued that since all humans have reason within them, we are capable of perceiving and following the universal or natural law (Dolhenty, 2006). The existence of universally desired values is assumed in natural law theory and it contends that responsibilities, duties, and rights are not arbitrary or dependent upon social norms. As such, natural law theory is incompatible with relativist and conventionalist views of moral behavior (Murphy, 2002). Natural law theory holds that moral standards of behavior arise from the fundamental laws of nature as do the laws of physics (McElroy, 1998). They have existed always.
Christian philosopher, Thomas Aquinas, likened the natural law to the eternal law of God which he believed to be discernable through reason (Dolhenty, 2006; Murphy, 2002). If Aquinas was correct, all mentally sound individuals perceive the natural law and choose how to respond to its calling. Proper actions, according to Aquinas, are motivated by love. The primary duty of all individuals is to do good and avoid evil. Natural law moral theory is reflected in the teachings of Maharishi Vedic Science and the Buddhist ethics of Buddahadasa Bhikkhu and Phra Prayudh Payutto (King, 2002; Nidich, Nidich & Alexander, 2005). It is also reflected in the writings of non-religious philosophers (Murphy, 2002).
Social behavior expected of individuals adhering to the natural law is very similar to that mandated by many of the world’s great religions, yet if natural law moral theory has any validity an individual need not be a part of a religion to perceive what moral behavior is. Smith (2000) described natural law as the plain person’s morality, and likened it to “common sense.”
According to Murphy (2002) the basic goods cataloged by natural law theorists include life, knowledge of the truth, physical health, mental health, justice, friendship, harmony, fairness, achievements, excellence, inner peace, avoidance of pain, play, and integrity. The goods identified above will be used as a means to evaluate the morality of commonly observed sport behavior from a natural law perspective throughout the remainder of this discussion. Reasonable beings would act in ways to see these basic goods realized in their lives, and in the lives of others. Actions taken in opposition to the basic goods are corrupt and immoral. They are unreasonable.
Scriptures make it clear that natural law has always existed
and is meant to govern human behavior:
Hinduism: “The
Brahmanas say that that Good Conduct, which is wonderful,
whose origin may be traced to very ancient times, which is
eternal and whose characteristics are unchangeable, which
differs from the practices to which even the good resort in
seasons of distress and represents their acts in other
situations, which is identical with heedfulness, over which
lust and wrath and other evil passions can never prevail...”
The Mahabharata, Book 12: Santi Parva: Mokshadharma Parva:
Section CCLXX (Ganguli, 1883). Confucianism: “The way which the superior man pursues, reaches wide and far, and yet is secret. Common men and women, however ignorant, may intermeddle with the knowledge of it; yet in its utmost reaches, there is that which even the sage does not know. Common men and women, however much below the ordinary standard of character, can carry it into practice; yet in its utmost reaches, there is that which even the sage is not able to carry into practice.” Doctrine of the Mean 12 (Legge, 1885, p. 127).
Christianity:
“For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous
before God, but those who do the law will be declared
righteous. For whenever the Gentiles, who do not have the
law, do by nature the things required by the law, these who
do not have the law are a law to themselves. They show that
the work of the law is written in their hearts, as their
conscience bears witness and their conflicting thoughts
accuse or else defend them…” Romans 2.13 -15 (NET,
2006).
Islam:
“He
hath created the heavens and the earth with truth.”
Qur’an 16.3 (Pickthall, 1930).
The natural law is referred to in the scriptures cited as The Tao, the law, and truth. The natural law can be perceived by human beings. It is everywhere, ever-present and we are free to acknowledge it. We may choose to follow its calling and engage in Good Conduct or we may choose to ignore it and engage in immoral behavior.
Because We Covet, We May Violate Natural Law in Sport
If natural law exists, why are individuals prone to violate it? Human beings have free will. Often we engage in behaviors that benefit the self at the expense of others. This is especially true within the sport context (Simon, 1991).
For those ascribing to the performance ethic, success and its associated extrinsic rewards is the primary goal of participation and its realization serves as a source of ego enhancement. When individuals act in ways that serve the self at the expense of others, the natural law is violated. In sport, for example, rules are formulated in order to make competition fair. Fairness is one of the basic goods of the natural law. Because not all can win a prize, the temptation to be dishonest and to break the rules is experienced. Though a fair and equitable athletic contest exists when all participants follow the rules, ultimately self-interest must be sacrificed if fairness is to exist. Many are unwilling to sacrifice self-interest. They covet success. To covet is to feel inordinate desire for something that rightfully belongs to another.
When athletes and coaches acknowledge that their dream of athletic achievement cannot be achieved through natural and legitimate means, they may choose to engage in illicit behavior. Sport participants are told, and they come to believe that if they desire athletic success badly enough (covet the prize) they must do “whatever it takes” to achieve it. Athletes and coaches who cheat, lie, steal and maim in order to experience success can state with all honesty that they are simply doing all that could be done to achieve the goal. They are demonstrating many of the values associated with desirable social character (Rudd, 2005). What could be so wrong with that?
Tommy Chaikin resisted taking steroids to become bigger, faster and stronger because of possible negative side effects and because he perceived it to be wrong. When he discovered training naturally would not allow him to achieve his goal of becoming a starting college football player he decided to do whatever it took to become one (Chaikin & Telander, 1988). He recalled:
No way was I going to mess with something as risky as steroids. I was going to build myself up naturally… That spring I got the crap knocked out of me… I finally said to myself, I’ve had enough of this and I started to look at those guys who were using steroids. They looked fine to me… and they were a whole lot bigger than I was. Maybe it was time for me to join the crowd. (p. 86)
He utilized a smorgasbord of steroids, grew bigger, stronger and more aggressive. He did find success on the field. But the consequences were injuries, mental illness and serious health consequences. The coveting of athletic goals led to his decision to take performance-enhancing drugs.
Adherence to the natural law results in physical and mental health, inner peace, the avoidance of pain and demonstration of integrity. Chaikin sacrificed all of these in the name of fleeting athletic success in response to his covetousness.
Sacred scriptures address covetousness and express that
individuals are often motivated to engage in undesirable
behavior as a consequence of its calling:
Taoism:
“There
is no guilt greater than to sanction ambition; no calamity
greater than to be discontented with one's lot; no fault
greater than the wish to be getting. Therefore the
sufficiency of contentment is an enduring and unchanging
sufficiency.” Tao Te Ching 46 (Legge, 1891a).
Christianity:
“Where do the conflicts and where do the quarrels among you
come from? Is it not from this, from your passions that
battle inside you? You desire and you do not have; you
murder and envy and you cannot obtain; you quarrel and
fight. You do not have because you do not ask; you ask and
do not receive because you ask wrongly, so you can spend it
on your passions.” James 4.1-3 (NET, 2006).
Hinduism:
“Desire is never extinguished by the enjoyment of desired
objects; it only grows stronger like a fire (fed) with
clarified butter.” Laws of Manu 2.94 (Bühler, 1886).
Islam:
“Hast thou seen him who maketh his desire his god, and Allah
sendeth him astray purposely, and sealeth up his hearing and
his heart, and setteth on his sight a covering?” Qur’an
45.23 (Pickthall, 1930).
Some claim that engaging in self-serving, anti-social and hurtful behavior in response to coveting is justifiable because sport, after all, is not real life. One athlete stated, “In life it’s more restricted. It’s harder to make decisions in life because there are so many people to think about, different people to worry about. In sports you’re free to think about yourself” (Bredemeier, Shields and Horn, 2003, p. 218). In other words, if a coach or athlete covets success and engages in harmful self-serving behavior it is justified because in sport we can be concerned with ourselves and no one else. The folly with such an argument is that ill-will, injured psyches and broken bones are taken “outside of the lines” when the contest is over. It is ludicrous to believe that once the final whistle blows ill will shall be no more or that broken bones and damaged psyches shall be miraculously healed.
Winning and losing come to those who covet and to those who fail to covet. Coveting can lead to a cheapening of the sport experience by motivating individuals to engage in antisocial behaviors and through the provision of successes that are tainted. The regrettable thing is that athletic achievement does not seem to provide lasting contentment. Do not coaches and athletes who win championships almost immediately begin to speak of the next championship? Is it not common to hear those involved in athletics state, “If you are not getting better, you are getting worse” and, “You are only as good as your last competition”? If victories really provided lasting contentment and satisfaction, how could the terms be pervasively used?
Sport participants can adhere to the mandates of the natural law and sacred scriptures by focusing upon individual excellence as they compete knowing that their current level of performance may not be great enough to bring about a championship, a victory, a starting position or a place on the varsity squad. Athletes can do their best and if their best is not good enough to achieve a desired goal for the moment, the fact should be humbly accepted. One can continue to strive yet understand this truth: not everyone is capable of athletic greatness. With such an orientation, the goods of the natural law can be achieved through moral behavior in sport. Health, friendship, harmony, fairness, achievements, excellence, inner peace, and integrity may come to characterize the sport environment.
Competition (seeking the prize together) in and of itself
does not require one to covet success or to engage in
behavior contrary to the natural law. It is when one
ascribes to the performance ethic that realization of
goodness is thwarted and one competitor seeks the prize at
the expense of another. The performance ethic demands that
sport participants do anything within their power to achieve
coveted success. The consequences may include infliction of
intentional injury, lying, cheating, revenge, the use of
harsh, divisive and inflammatory speech, and
prideful/egotistical behavior. All of these behaviors are
contrary to the natural law. Each is considered below. In Sport We Should Not Intentionally Inflict Harm upon Others
Sports are played throughout the world in which contact is a part of the game including basketball, soccer, football, ice hockey, lacrosse, field hockey, rugby and others. The use of force (contact) and the use of violence is not the same thing (Simon, 1991). Violence is physically assaultive behavior that can or does result in harm to others (Eitzen & Sage, 1997). When violence is used in sport, injuries are intended and the natural law is violated.
The use of intentional violence and the threat of violence as a means to achieve success are common in contact sports. Armstrong (1992) observed that sport involving contact is characterized by hostility; evil and satanic attitudes become common and intentional injuries become likely. Similarly Boxill (2003) stated, “The problem of anger, violence, and cheating is further increased [in contact sports] because of the fast pace of the game, the confined space, the elaborate set of rules, the contention of wills and the possibility of contact” (p. 110-11).
Intentional physical violence is commonly used in sport as a means to success, even in non-contact sports. The comments of an anonymous major league baseball pitcher can serve to illustrate this reality (Crossman, 2003):
I’m going to hit this one guy the next time I face him. He homered off me the last time, and he pimped it, and I’m going to pay him back. Nobody will have to tell me, and that’s usually how it is when you hit a guy. Usually you just know. Like if your superstar gets hit, you hit the other team’s superstar as soon as he comes up. Sometime you’ll hit a guy because he owns you – if he’s going to get on base anyway, he might as well take sore ribs there with him… It’s a part of the game. The only way you would feel bad about it is if you really hurt the guy. That’s why the biggest unwritten rule is to not aim for the head. Aim for the ribs or lower, and let it rip. (¶ 1–5)
The conventions associated with baseball, if the quote is generally reflective of reality, involve the use of intentional injury and the threat of intentional injury to achieve goals of dominance, victory or revenge.
In contact sports such as American football one of the greatest compliments afforded a player is to be bridled with the moniker “animal” (Melnick, 1992). An animal is someone who physically dominates others. Animals do not have a concern for the health and well-being of others. They are concerned with the self. They have no conscience.
Athletes intentionally harm others and coaches encourage the intentional harm of opponents in an effort to achieve athletic success. National Hockey League players have admitted that they intentionally harmed others known to have a preexisting injury (Kennedy, McEntegart, & Kim, 2002). Threats to further injure a debilitated player have been noted in the National Football League (Reilly, 1993) and former NFL coach Buddy Ryan offered a bounty to players who could injure an opposing quarterback or kicker (Saraceno, 1993). Temple University basketball coach John Chaney was suspended by the university’s president after instructing one of his players to intentionally “rough up” a player on an opposing team. The action resulted in an opponent suffering a broken arm (Temple Coach Chaney, 2005).
Enforcers or “goons” are used in sports, such as ice hockey to intimidate or purposely injure opponents. My students have stated on numerous occasions that their high school coaches taught them how to injure others utilizing illegal means and how to avoid detection by officials. When intentionally caused injuries result in torn ligaments and tendons, broken bones, paralysis or death is it acceptable for a coach or “goon” to state that the consequences were an unfortunate accident and they injuries are simply a part of the game?
The natural law calls for individuals to be concerned with physical health, justice, friendship, harmony, fairness, avoidance of pain, and integrity. When athletes play with intent to injure they disregard the natural law’s mandate to protect health and to avoid distributing pain. How can it be just to win as a consequence of intentionally injuring another? How can it be fair? How can such actions be taken in the name of harmony and friendship? How could a person of integrity ever purposely injure another in the quest for victory?
When individuals play with harmful intent and engage in
violence, they do so in variance with following scriptures:
Taoism:
“Yet there are some people whose behavior is unrighteous…
With violence they seize, with violence they demand.”
T'ai-Shang Kan-Ying P'ien 317-322 & 737-740
(Suzuki & Carus, 1906).
Contact sports test an athlete’s courage and ability to
overcome pain. Legally administered contact that is a part
of the game and allowed by the rules cannot be avoided if
one is to participate and demonstrate excellent performance.
Injuries will occur. Participants agree to such risks
knowingly. Many argue that in sports, violence is simply “a part of the game.” The truth is that even when participants understand that contact is a part of the game, the acceptance of cheap shots meant to harm is not agreed to. Physical injuries received as a consequence of revenge are not agreed to. Game transcending injuries “accidentally” distributed due to demands of coaches or the misguided convention common in a sport are not agreed to. When such injuries are distributed, the aggressor is guilty of violating the natural law and sacred scriptures’ guidelines for behavior. They are an unacceptable part of the game from a moral perspective.
When a batter faces a pitcher, the test should be whether the ball can be hit. It should not be a test of one’s ability to hit with the threat of being intentionally “beaned” in the back of one’s mind! A defensive lineman should be concerned with moving opponents, holding ground, rushing a passer or chasing down a running back in order to make a tackle. He should not be worried about protecting his knees from a planned, illegal hit. When intentional injuries become a part of a sport the sport is not what it should be but instead becomes what it should not be.
It must be noted that participation in contact sports is contrary to the natural law and sacred scriptures because injuries can be expected to occur. If health is valued, individuals should not participate in activities that will knowingly result in injury. If one is to participate in contact sports, how should they be played?
Athletes should play assertively but there should never be
intent to harm. When individuals participate in
any sport, they should respect the health and well-being
of others. Sadly, intent to harm is often observed in
sporting activities as a consequence of the demands made by
the performance ethic. Purposely injuring and intimidating
opponents through the threat of violence may increase the
odds of winning a contest. We Should not Lie in Relation to Our Sport Activities
Sport is replete with lies. One of the most notable in recent memory was that told by Rafael Palmeiro when he pointed his finger at a congressional subcommittee and stated, “I have never used steroids. Period” (Vecsey, 2005, ¶ 2). Nearly five months later, he was suspended by Major League Baseball as a consequence of a failed drug test – one that tested for steroids. Many coaches and athletes tell lies in an effort to cover up cheating. Palmeiro’s comments were a good example.
Lies are told during contests in order to increase the chances of winning. Athletes lie when they call a ball out in a tennis match to deny their opponent a point. Athletes lie when they fail to count a stroke in their golf score. They lie when they fake being fouled in order to get a call to go their way. They lie when they feign an injury to stop the clock or slow the momentum of an opponent during play.
Some lies are engaged in as an attempt to misrepresent one’s abilities or qualifications to compete and they are common in modern sport. Coaches and athletes regularly “stretch the truth” concerning the height of players. Collegiate athletes lie when they turn in work that they do not complete themselves (Farrell, 2002; Wertheim & Yaeger, 1999). When college recruits have others take standardized exams for them in an effort to meet college entrance and NCAA eligibility requirements they lie (Yeager & Wolff, 1997). It is a lie when birth certificates are altered so that children can win events such as the Little League World Series (Hoffer, 1993; Sullivan, Bower & White, 2001). It is a lie when instructors give athletes passing grades when acceptable work has not been done. In the NHL and NFL lies are regularly told concerning the health of players in injury reports as a means to mislead opponents (Kennedy, McEntegart & Kim, 2002).
If an individual lies in an effort to achieve success in athletics will he or she lie in the quest for success outside of the sport setting? Do lies, even in athletic settings, make the world a better place? Do not lies result in distrust, conflict, anger and discord in general? Lies do not foster personal or social harmony. They violate the natural law since integrity and knowledge of the truth are sacrificed.
Sacred scriptures make it clear that lies are
unacceptable:
Islam: “…And
if ye give your word, do justice thereunto, even though it
be (against) a kinsman…” Qur’an 6.151-153 (Pickthall,
1930).
If athletic competition is to be honorable and its effect is
to be the development and strengthening of good (moral)
character, lies cannot be ubiquitous. How can a moral
individual or society wink and nod at coaches, athletes and
programs that have achieved success through the purposeful
use of lies and deception?
We Should not Cheat in Sport Settings – It Is Stealing
When one fails to play by the rules, cheating occurs. The
cheater does not play the same game as the individual who
follows the rules. A true test of skill and strategy as
dictated by a sport’s rules and regulations is not realized.
In a real sense, victory is stolen by the cheater. Victory
won through cheating is worthless as it is neither deserved
or a sign of athletic superiority (Butcher & Schneider,
2003; Dixon, 2003). Cheating is morally wrong because it
takes unfair advantage of one’s opponent (Simon, 1991).
In many sports, violations of the rules become commonplace
and consequently are not thought of as cheating by
participants or observers: the violations become convention.
However the prevalence of conventional cheating does not
make it moral. Simon (2003) stated, “Conventions describe
accepted behavior but ethics is concerned with what
behavior is acceptable or ought to be
encouraged or condemned” (p. 18).
When cheating is common, those choosing not to deviate from
the rules are often handicapped. It is difficult to compete
on a level playing field when your opponents cheat. Perhaps
the most deplorable consequence of wide-spread cheating is
that individuals come to believe that they must cheat in
order to be competitive at all (Simon, 1991).
How widespread is cheating in modern sport? It occurs at all
levels of sport and in many forms. Many tactics such as
aggressive and dirty play, ingenuity and flat out cheating
reside in the gray area of baseball’s rules and conventions
(Zeller, 2003). During the 2006 Baseball World Series,
pitcher Kenny Rogers was accused of having pine tar on his
hand. Though he claimed that it was a clump of dirt, Rogers
was seen with the material on the same hand throughout the
playoffs. Bridge player, Boris Schapero, cheated in a world
championship tournament (Lewis, 2002). In an effort to win
fishing tournaments competitors have stuffed fish with
weights, brought large fish out of freezers and dropped them
into their tanks, and snuck strings of fish onto their boat
under their coats (Kennedy, Deitsch, & Lidz, 2002). Jockey
Billy Patin used an illegal electric device to shock his
horse into running a bit faster than normal in an effort to
win a major stakes race, the Arkansas Derby (Cook and Mravic,
1999). Cheating is common in auto racing. According to Lipsyte (2002), the NASCAR rule book is as, “variously interpreted as the Bible, not to try to beat it is considered a failure of character” (¶ 2). NASCAR driver Mike Skinner told his crew to do whatever it took to win. When asked if that meant cheating, he replied, “Sure. And I told the guys that if we get busted, I’ll pay the fine” (Lee, 2002, ¶ 6). One crew chief stated:
Yes, we will work in those gray areas [of the rules], but when it comes to blatant cheating to win, we’re not going to do that. Like I did last year in Daytona qualifying, that was just pure cheating. We’ll never do that. Cheat a little on the template here or there? Sure. Everybody out there does that (Lee, ¶ 30). Individuals with no physical or mental handicaps represented Spain in the 2000 Paralympics. Some of the following techniques were used to achieve excellence in performance: competitors sat on tacks, stuck themselves with pins, sat on ball bearings, tied piano wire around their scrotums and tied off their catheters until their bladders were nearly ready to burst (Reilly, 2000). There seems to be a common lack of understanding concerning what cheating really is. Perhaps there is no understanding. Briana Scurry, a U.S. Olympic and World Cup Team goalkeeper stated in regards to cheating, “Everybody does it. It’s only cheating if you get caught.” (Vescey, 1999, ¶ 10). What is the consequence of sport participants believing that cheating is acceptable? Lipsyte (2003) posed this rhetorical question, “…are there not dots to be connected between that first little lie to win a peewee game and the complex webs of deceit spun to win on Wall Street and in Washington” (¶ 6)?
The goods associated with the natural law include justice,
fairness, achievements and integrity. When individuals cheat
they steal. Achievement comes at the expense of justice,
fairness and integrity. Sacred scriptures emphasize that we
are not to take what is not rightfully ours: We Should not Seek Revenge as a Consequence of Our Anger and Frustration In the heat of a sport contest, tempers often flair and reaction may become as prominent as action (McNamee & Jones, 2003). When athletes and coaches feel cheated or embarrassed by opponents or referees, they feel frustration, anger and a desire to strike out at others verbally and physically. They do so in an effort to extract some sense of revenge. I have seen coaches curse at athletes when angry over poor performance or because athletes failed to do specifically what they were instructed to do. During the 2006 NCAA men’s basketball tournament I saw a coach throw a chair and later grab and shake a player. In a post-game interview after the loss, the coach wept as he told the media how much he loved his team and each player on it. I have been present when a coach picked up an athlete and threw him into a locker at half time of a football game in response to the player’s poor performance and demonstrated lack of intensity. Coaches have attacked referees during contests when they felt that calls did not go their way (MISL Coach Suspended, 2006). Spectator violence is a problem throughout the world. Fans have engaged in violent behavior in response to perceived unjust calls, undesirable outcomes, and as a means of celebrating victories. Though spectator violence has been a larger problem in the past, it is a problem for law enforcement officials and those who sponsor athletic events (Coakley, 2004). Athletes have attacked referees, opponents and coaches as a consequence of actual or perceived injustices, comments or gestures. Latrell Spreewell choked and later punched his coach in response to the coach asking him to throw crisper passes (Puma, 1997). On a single day, one professional basketball player was ejected from a game for throwing his mouthpiece at a referee while another participating in a different contest was suspended for intentionally throwing a forearm into the face of an opponent. The action required the victim to receive stitches (Reynolds, 2006; Robbins, 2006). Two days later a minor league baseball player hit an umpire with a baseball bat after he was ejected from the game. He justified his action thusly, "Regrettably, in the heat of the competition my emotions got the better of me” (Young Suspended, 2006, ¶ 18). Athletes have reacted to fan comments and demonstrated their pugilistic skills in the stands (McCallum, 2004). When things do not go as players desire they can be seen cursing at officials, coaches and each other in response to their displeasure, disappointment and anger. It is their means of achieving retribution. Retaliatory violence and verbal attacks cannot make bad situations better, they can only escalate problems, cause discord, and result in bruised egos and broken bodies. To seek revenge as a response to frustration and anger through verbal or physical means is to violate the natural law. Revenge cannot propagate knowledge of the truth, physical health, mental health, friendship, harmony, inner peace, or avoidance of pain. Revenge is also proscribed by sacred scriptures:
Christianity: “You have heard that it was
said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say
to you, do not resist the evildoer. But whoever strikes you
on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well.” Matthew
5. 38-39 (NET, 2006). The performance ethic holds an individual who does not engage in retaliatory behavior in contempt. Failure to respond quickly and forcefully to a violent or unfair act is viewed as a sign of weakness. Coaches and athletes who do not respond to violence with retaliatory acts of violence are believed to be handicapping their chances to find competitive success. They are viewed as weak and uncommitted.
When someone has been wronged by another in a sport setting, getting even and having the last word should not be the goal. Such attempts generally lead to an escalation of problems and discord. Athletes who engage in violent acts in response to another are guilty of violating the natural law as are coaches and athletes who verbally abuse others as a consequence of their anger, embarrassment and frustration. They act in a way that is contrary to scriptural guidelines and make they sport environment unwholesome.
Perhaps if coaches and athletes responded to egregious acts by looking at them as a test of their ability to behave in a right and just manner, conflict in sport caused by the goal of and acts of revenge would be decreased. All who observed the initial act and the appropriate response could see that in sport, individuals are capable of resisting the motivation to seek restitution on their own. Such “saintly” behavior is difficult given the conventions currently present in sport. Commitment to doing the moral thing is infinitely more difficult than instinctively responding to poor play, poor officiating and inappropriate actions and undesirable outcomes.
Harsh, Divisive and Inflammatory Speech Should not be Used in Sport
I have witnessed fist fights and other violent acts in sporting contests that occurred as a consequence of verbal sparring. The talking escalates in its frequency and comments become ever-more personal and degrading. Eventually one of the verbal combatants crosses the line from verbal aggression to engage in physical aggression. It happened during a pick-up basketball in my university’s gym as I was working on this manuscript.
Trash-talking, verbal intimidation and taunting are part of the modern competitive sport environment. By some, they are used as a means of getting an opponent’s mind off of their performance. Others use them as a means of psyching oneself up, making themselves feel powerful and strong. The use of trash talking, taunting, and verbal intimidation are appropriate when one answers the call of the performance ethic, but the sport environment is not made a better place. They do not assist one in achieving friendship, or harmony. Two examples follow.
Before one “Church League” softball game I overheard one of my teammates state, “We cannot lose to these f***ing Mexicans. They think that they’re great and their fans act like idiots.” During the game obscenities were uttered between competitors. Unnecessary and purposeful physical contact took place on the base paths and words were exchanged. At one point the benches cleared as opponents fought with each other. Harsh, divisive and inflammatory language contributed to the ugliness which marred the competitive contest. Praise the Lord!
Similarly, I overheard fifteen year old soccer players talk about the “f***ing Mexicans” that they were competing against. They questioned why the “Mexicans” just did not speak English. They claimed that the “Mexicans” were calling them names during the contest and that they were making fun of them - even though they weren’t. One could feel the tension as tempers grew hotter during the contest. Violent fouls were made. Fights resulted. Divisive, harsh and inflammatory speech… as well as ignorance motivated the violence. Similarly, trash talking has been identified by officials and players as a factor which has fueled fights between NBA players (McCallum, 1993).
Harsh, divisive and inflammatory speech is used by coaches to “motivate” their players. For example, I recall hearing a high school coach ask a player who had shied away from a hard-hit ground ball if he was a “pussy” and if he had to “squat to pee.” Though such language may have motivated the young man to greatness, in fact it did not. It served simply as a source of embarrassment.
Athletes and coaches also engage in the use of harsh, inflammatory and divisive language when they speak negatively or gossip about the actions and characteristics of others. What good can speaking negatively about others really do? How can it solve problems or foster unity? Why allow the damage done by a past deed continue to harm by recounting the act again and again? Why make something of nothing? What good comes from such talk?
Eveslage and Delaney (1998) observed that trash talking and verbal taunts are a common part of the normal interactions taking place between inner-city youths and within African-American culture. Simons (2003) noted that trash talking and taunting are a part of urban African American culture and stated that the attention paid to the behaviors is not warranted by the small impact that they have upon a sporting contest. He stated that the backlash against the use of trash talking and taunting was motivated by race and social class.
Race and social class may, in fact, not be the source of concern over the use of taunting and trash talking. Eveslage and Delaney observed that trash talking is not confined to Black America, the NFL, NBA or even the United States. Whites trash talk and taunt during athletic competitions as do Blacks. Americans engage in trash talking as do Eastern Europeans. I have heard wealthy and middle-class athletes curse, trash talk and taunt inside and outside of the sport context. Simon (2003) argued:
…all those who maintain that we should avoid making moral judgments about the behavior of others, particularly about the morality of other cultures, out of concern and respect for the differences among peoples, are themselves making a moral judgment. Rather than avoiding ethical judgment, they are committing one. p. 20 Could it be that the concern with trash talking, foul language and taunting is simply a consequence of the unnecessarily contentious environment that it causes? Can the use of trash talking, taunting and verbal intimidation be likened to throwing gasoline upon a fire? The logical consequence of such behavior is an explosion. It is argued here that harsh, inflammatory and divisive language which includes the use of obscenities, verbal intimidation, trash talking and taunting can serve to create hostile environments. Regardless of race or social class, why would anyone choose to use comments and engage in verbal behavior that makes an environment hostile, degrading and intimidating? Because it is “part of the game,” and because it is believed to help participants win. The natural law does not allow for the use of harsh, divisive and inflammatory speech. Such language is not conducive to the establishment of friendship, harmony or mental health. Neither is it sanctioned by sacred scriptures:
Christianity:
“And the tongue is a fire! The tongue represents the world
of wrongdoing among the parts of our bodies. It pollutes the
entire body and sets fire to the course of human existence –
and is set on fire by hell… no human being can subdue the
tongue; it is a restless evil, full of deadly poison. With
it we bless the Lord and Father, and with it we curse people
made in God’s image. From the same mouth come blessing and
cursing. These things should not be so, my brothers and
sisters. A spring does not pour out fresh water and bitter
water from the same opening, does it?” James 3. 6-11
(NET, 2006). If one is to adhere to the natural law and sacred scriptures harsh, inflammatory and divisive speech should be avoided. It does nothing to make the sport environment a positive place. It only serves to make the environment hostile and ripe for the germination of violence and discord. Sport Participants Should be Humble and not Prideful/Egotistical Pride is often thought to be a positive thing. In small degrees it is reflective of delight and satisfaction. Parents experience pride as a result of their children’s accomplishments. When their child gets his or her very first hit in a baseball or softball game there is delight and satisfaction. The child may feel glee and a sense of accomplishment. Little can be wrong with such feelings. In the English language pride is a word also used to convey a sense of conceit, arrogance, smugness and self-importance. There is a point it seems at which pride goes wrong. Parents can celebrate the athletic accomplishments of a child to extremes. The accomplishments, they believe, are proof of the child’s superiority and they communicate this belief. The athlete begins to feel special and entitled to preferential treatment. Because of the hubris and egoism that develops, they believe themselves to be above the rules of sport, the law, or restrictions imposed by social convention. They believe themselves to be superior to others. They use their celebrity as a justifiable cause to make complaints and to discount the efforts and abilities of others. They parade about courts and fields like peacocks on a meadow and bray loudly as does the ass. A prideful spirit is not in alignment with the natural law. A prideful spirit does not lead one to accept knowledge of the truth or to perceive and accept justice. Harmony with others becomes unlikely because the self and the celebration of the self get in the way. Sacred scriptures have much to say about pride and behaviors reflective of the prideful and egotistical:
Taoism: “He
who
stands on his tiptoes does not stand firm; he who stretches
his legs does not walk (easily). (So), he who displays
himself does not shine; he who asserts his own views is not
distinguished; he who vaunts himself does not find his merit
acknowledged; he who is self- conceited has no superiority
allowed to him. Such conditions, viewed from the standpoint
of the Tao, are like remnants of food, or a tumor on the
body, which all dislike. Hence those who pursue (the course)
of the Tao do not adopt and allow them.” Tao Te Ching 24 (Legge,
1891a). Could it be that the performance ethic serves to create and sustain prideful behavior since winning is thought to be everything? Achievement in light of the performance ethic’s calling is the ultimate goal and the victors reasonably are likened to gods. Who has the right to control the desires and behaviors of a god? The converse of pride is humility. Humility is demonstrated when in light of accomplishments, individuals simply express that they are pleased; they are modest and unassuming. It is experienced and displayed when an individual conceives that athletic accomplishments are temporal, that there will be other tests to face in other arenas at other times. It is achieved when one realizes with the experience of each victory that something still exists which is greater than the self, be it called the Truth, the Ultimate Reality, God or the athlete who will win on another day. Winning should always be accompanied by a degree of humility. “This humility should be a signal that serendipity, endowment, and other factors forever play a role in our testing achievements and our contesting victories” (Kretchmar, 2003, p. 134).
Humility is in agreement with the natural law.
The humble can readily seek knowledge of the truth,
recognize justice, experience harmony with others,
appreciate the excellence demonstrated by others, know inner
peace, and act with integrity rather than self-interest.
Sacred scriptures instruct that one should be humble: Christianity: “Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.” Matthew 5.5 (NET, 2006).
Taoism:
“Who
knows how white attracts, Yet always keeps himself within
black's shade, The scriptures point out that life is temporary and while wandering the earth that we are to have a humble spirit. To do so is to follow the natural law and to contribute to the creation of a caring and peaceful world. Many of the ills plaguing sport and society might be lessened if humility was to increase and pride was to decrease. All Sport Participants are Related The whisper of the natural law calling all humans to do goodness at all times is often ignored by sport participants. It is drowned out by the crescendo of demands made by the performance ethic. Athletes, coaches and parents do wrong to one another at the heading of its call in an effort to serve and gratify the self. The natural law is violated and the guidance of sacred scriptures is ignored. The natural law makes no distinction between skilled and unskilled, successful and unsuccessful, rich and poor, black and white, or sport and life. Likewise scriptures contend that all human beings are equal as far as their spirits are concerned. All inhabitants of the earth are brothers and sisters despite differences noted to exist between us:
Judaism and Christianity: “Do we not all have
one father? Did not one God create us?” Malachi 2:10 (NET,
2006). If all who are engaged in competition are related how can it be sensible to lie, to steal, to injure, to speak with harsh and divisive language, to seek revenge or to objectify others in the quest for athletic success? It makes no sense at all. We Should Treat Others as We Wish to be Treated in Sport Settings The “Golden Rule” is a commonly referred to guideline for moral behavior (DeSensi & Rosenberg, 2003). Simply stated, if you are to live a good life, you must treat others the same way you would like for them to treat you. The natural law is adhered to by those choosing to follow the golden rule. Life is protected. Physical and mental health are sought and guarded. Justice is sought and accepted. Friendships are developed and maintained. Harmony between individuals becomes possible. Fairness is commonplace. Inner peace is maintained. One does not purposely cause pain and integrity is easily demonstrated. The command for individuals to treat others as they wish to be treated is pervasive in sacred scriptures: Christianity and Judaism: “You must not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the children of your people, but you must love your neighbor as yourself.” Leviticus 19.18 (NET, 2006). Islam: “None of you [truly] believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.” An-Nawawi's Forty Hadiths: Hadith 13 (Sharaful-Deen, 2006). Hinduism: “One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one's own self. This, in brief, is the rule of Righteousness. One by acting in a different way by yielding to desire, becomes guilty of unrighteousness.” Mahabharata Book 13.113 (Ganguli, 1883). Confucianism: “Tsze-kung asked, saying, ‘Is there one word which may serve as a rule of practice for all one's life?’ The Master said, ‘Is not RECIPROCITY such a word? What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.’" Analects 15.23 (Legge, 1885, p. 86). If those involved in sport adhered to the Golden Rule, sport might become a means by which individuals could seek the prize together. Respect, consideration and courtesy would be commonplace. Rules would gladly be adhered to. The contest would yield a winner who would not boast or brag and the loser could appreciate the skills and abilities of the victor. Congratulations would be happily given and humbly accepted. There would be no animosity, bitterness or hatred found within sport settings. Participants could learn, grow and find contentment in their participation. The lessons learned could be taken off of the fields and courts and be used to fashion a more peaceful and caring society. The performance ethic as well as the pain, suffering and discord that it caused would be but a distant memory. It is Important to Follow the Natural Law in All Aspects of Life Those who choose to utilize immoral behavior in the sport context attempt to justify their actions by stating, “Sport is not life.” They further argue that the behavior they engage in within sport settings is not reflective of the type of person that they really are. When is someone a liar, cheat or thief? It is when they demonstrate the capacity to lie, cheat and steal. Our behavior, including that taking place in sport settings, is reflective of what and who we truly are. In the Biblical account of the fall of man, God asked Adam if he had eaten from the forbidden tree. In acknowledging that he had, Adam stated, “The woman whom you gave me, she gave me some fruit from the tree and I ate it” (NET, 2006, Genesis 3.12). The Biblical Adam did not accept responsibility for his choice. He chose to defy what he was instructed to do and blamed his actions upon the urging of another. In sport, we blame our immoral actions upon the demands of the sport culture and others in a position to influence our behavior. We feebly attempt to justify our immoral actions. The truth is that we are personally accountable for the actions we choose to take as coaches and athletes. When we engage in an immoral, hurtful behavior, we set into motion a chain of harmful events which ripple through eternity. We should be cognizant of the fact that the behaviors we exhibit and the choices we make are communicated to, and mimicked by, those who watch. Through our sporting behaviors we can be agents of change for good or for bad. Coaches and physical educators have defended the presence of athletics in our schools and colleges for over a century by claiming that sport is preparation for life. Indeed, sport participation has positive outcomes for many. Discipline, dedication, teamwork, decision-making, performance under pressure, achievement and a host of other positive behaviors are observed daily in the sport context. On the other hand, immoral behavior is not infrequently found within the sport context. It is said that the lessons learned on athletic fields are to be taken into the real world: to our businesses and to our families. Is it reasonable to teach our youths that the morality of actions is really dependent upon one’s goals, the situation and the time, or that success is to be equated with morality? Many live as did Heather Cuthrell, “I grew up my whole life where you did whatever you want during the week and then on Sunday you’re a Christian” (Miranda, 2006, p. 61). In sport, we do whatever we need to do in order to achieve success. We save our moral behavior for another time and another place, if it is something that we choose to acknowledge and employ at all. Choose the Path of Civilized Behavior The impartial application of moral rules is considered the cornerstone of moral character (McNamee & Jones, 2003). Because participants and observers care so deeply about sport, it is an ideal setting in which one can learn to respond to the calling of the performance ethic while adhering to the natural law. One of the greatest attributes of sport is that in the heat of battle we are free to choose the noble path of civilized behavior (Hoffman, 1999). Individuals can decide to act in accordance with the natural law at all times. Reflecting upon what is good, true and eternal makes such a choice possible when placed within the crucibles that are sport and life. Changing the moral climate in sport and society is likened to embarking upon a journey of a thousand miles. If we are to choose the path of civilized behavior, we must do so by taking one step, making one moral decision at a time, in all aspects of our lives. Each moral action brings us closer to the ultimate goal. We are the authors of our sporting actions (Kretchmar, 2003). When we choose to follow the natural law in sport and life, our stories uplift. They inspire and make the world a better place. When we choose to follow the performance ethic, we craft tales of selfishness, deceit, tragedy and horror. We move one step closer to the end of civility and toward to our ultimate destruction. These thoughts have been humbly offered for your contemplation.
References Armstrong, H. (1992). Competition and God’s law. In Sport and Religion, S. Hoffman, Editor. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 271-274.
Badi, J. (2002). Commentaries on Imam Nawawi's Forty Hadith. Retrieved April 7, 2006, from http://fortyhadith.iiu.edu.my/hadith32.htm
Boxill, J. (2003). The ethics of competition. In J. Boxill (Ed), Sports Ethics: An Anthology (pp. 108-115). UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Brar, S. (1998). Sri Guru Granth Sahib: Khalsa Consensus Translation. Retrieved April 6, 2006, from http://www.sikhs.org/english/frame.html
Bredemeier, B., Shields, D., & Horn, J. (2003). Values and violence in sports today: The moral reasoning athletes use in their games and in their lives. In J. Boxill (Ed), Sports Ethics: An Anthology (pp. 217-220). UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Bühler, G. (1886). The Laws of Manu. In Sacred Books of the East, Volume 25. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Retrieved April 6, 2006, from The Internet Sacred Text Archive: http://www.hinduwebsite.com/sacredscripts/laws_of_manu.htm
Butcher, R. & Schneider, A. (2003). Fair play as respect for the game. In J. Boxill (Ed), Sports Ethics: An Anthology (pp. 153-171). UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Chaikin, T., & Telander, R. (1988). The nightmare of steroids. South Carolina lineman Tommy Chaikin used bodybuilding drugs for three years. They drove him to violence, and nearly to suicide. Sports Illustrated, 69, 18, 82-88, 90, 92, 94, 97-98, 100-102.
Coakley, J. (2004). Sports in society: Issues and controversies (8th Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Cook, K., & Mravic, M. (1999). A shocker in Arkansas. Sports Illustrated, 90, 17. Retrieved May 19, 2005, from Academic Search Premiere Database.
Crossman, M. (2003). How’s that feel… To throw at a batter. Sporting News, 227, 26. Retrieved March 21, 2006, from SportDiscus with Full Text.
DeSensi, J & Rosenberg, D. (2003). Ethics and morality in sport management. Morgantown, WV: Fitness Information Technology, Inc.
Dixon, N. (2003). On winning and superiority. In J. Boxill (Ed), Sports Ethics: An Anthology (pp. 116-129). UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Dolhenty, J. (2006). An overview of natural law theory. Retrieved March 28, 2006, from http://radicalacademy.com/philnaturallaw.htm
Eitzen, S. & Sage, G. (1997). Sociology of North American sport (5th Edition). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Eveslage, S. & Delaney, K. (1998). Talkin’ trash at Hardwick High: A case study of insult talk on a boy’s basketball team. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 33, 3, 239-253.
Farrell, E. (2002). Charges of academic wrongdoing roil
another sports powerhouse. TheChronicle of Higher
Education, May 17, 2002, 48, 36, p. A43. Retrieved May
19, 2005, from ProQuest Database. Fausböll, V. (1881). The Sutta-Nipâta. Translated from the Pâli. In Sacred Books of the East Vol. X. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Retrieved April 6, 2006, from The Internet Sacred Text Archive: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/sbe10/index.htm
Ganguli, K. (1883). Mahabharata. Retrieved April 7, 2006, from http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m13/index.htm Goddard, D. & Borel, H. (1939). Laotzu's Tao and Wu Wei (Second Edition). Retrieved May 3, 2006, from The Internet Sacred Text Archive: http://www.sacred-texts.com/tao/ltw2/index.htm
Hoffman, S. (1999). The decline of civility and the rise of religion in American sport. Quest, 51, 69-84.
Hoffer, R. (1993). Field of schemes. Sports Illustrated, 78, 2. Retrieved May 19, 2005, from Academic Search Premiere Database.
Holmes, E. (1919). The creed of the Buddha (2nd Edition). New York: J. Lane. Retrieved November 3, 2006, from http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/cob/cob00.htm
Jacobi, H. (1884). Jaina Sutras. In Sacred Books of the East, Volume 22. Oxford: Clarendon Press Retrieved November 25, 2006, from The Internet Sacred Text Archive: http://www.sacred-texts.com/jai/sbe22/index.htm
Kennedy, K., Deitsch, R., & Lidz, F. (2002). Gone cheatin’. Sports Illustrated, 97, 9. Retrieved May 19, 2005, from Academic Search Premiere Database.
Kennedy, K., McEntegart, P., & Kim, A. (2002). The lying game. Sports Illustrated, 96, 18. Retrieved May 19, 2005, from Academic Search Premiere Database.
Khan, M. (2002). Sahih Bukkhu. Retrieved April 7, 2006, from World Islamic Mission: http://www.wim.no/modules.php?name=Hadith
King, S. (2002). From is to ought: Natural law in Buddahadasa Bhikkhu and Phra Prayudh Payutto. Journal of Religious Ethics, 30, 2, 275-293.
Kretchmar, R. (2003). In defense of winning. In J. Boxill (Ed), Sports Ethics: An Anthology (pp. 130-135). UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Lee, S. (2002). Whatever it takes. Sporting News, 226, 7. Retreived May 19, 2005, from Academic Search Premiere Database. Legge, J. (1891a). Tao Te Ching by Lao-tzu. In Sacred Books of the East, Vol 39. Oxford |