To ensure that your initial post starts its own unique thread, do not reply to this post. Instead, please click the “Reply” link above this post.
Please read the description above and/or watch the video explaining the symposium and its requirements. If you are still unsure about how to proceed with the discussion, please contact me.
Prompt
According to Kant, there are two equivalent formulations of the categorical imperative (there are actually three, but we can ignore the third variant). According to the first formulation, we must only act on maxims (principles, rules) which can be made into universal laws. According to the second formulation, we must always respect humanity, in ourselves and others, by always treating humanity as an end and never merely as a means. This Symposium is about how these Kantian principles apply to combat sports.
In your initial post you should answer at least one of the questions below in light of the assigned chapter and readings from Kant. This means your initial post should demonstrate your understanding of Kantianism as well as answer at least one of the questions below.
In an essay titled “A Moral Evaluation of Mixed Martial Arts,” the philosopher Nick Dixon argues that it is morally problematic to participate in competitive mixed martial arts (MMA) contests,
The essence of the critique presented here is very simple: attempting to harm and injure another person is morally problematic, even if the victim is a willing participant in an organized MMA contest. … This objection to MMA is most naturally expressed in terms of Kant’s “ends in themselves” formulation of the categorical imperative. This principle enjoins us to “use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means.” Mixed martial arts fighters, that is, treat each other as objects to be hurt and injured and not as ends in themselves. … [A]ssault is an … uncontroversial instance of treating people solely as means, in that perpetrators ignore their victims’ pain and injury in order to achieve whatever goals they attain by their attack. Respecting people’s bodily integrity is central to treating them as ends in themselves, and deliberately injuring them treats them as having no more value than objects with no feelings. … [A]n assault in which hurting and injuring the victim as badly as possible is the direct goal is especially reprehensible. … The burden of proof, then, is on defenders of MMA to show why the practice is not a prime instance of treating opponents as worthless objects rather than as intrinsically valuable ends in themselves. (Dixon, 2015)
to enable others to participate in competitive MMA contests,
An even more appropriate target for moral criticism would be people who profit from MMA — managers, trainers, promoters, and so on … Since trying to hurt and injure other people is inherently wrong, those who create and profit from the institutions that make such immorality possible are morally culpable. (Ibid.)
and even to watch competitive MMA contests as a fan,
… the role of spectators, who derive pleasure from the spectacle of two people trying to injure one another, raises additional moral concerns. Many MMA spectators display a character flaw that is best expressed in the language of virtue ethics. Granted, some spectators may be purists who admire MMA participants’ skill and others may appreciate the bravery of fighters who push themselves to their physical and emotional limits in the ring. Little doubt exists, however, that the vast majority of fans are most excited by dramatic knockouts or stoppages after particularly savage blows or painful chokes or the manipulation of limbs. The amount of noise that spectators at televised MMA events make is proportionate to the amount of pain and injury caused. They cheer most loudly, that is, when a fighter is hurt by a powerful blow or painful wrestling move. Promotional video clips for upcoming bouts prominently feature fighters who are felled by heavy strikes, and one assumes that marketers are catering to the intended audience’s pre-existing tastes. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that a dominant motivation of MMA fans is to experience schadenfreude, the German word meaning pleasure at other people’s suffering. (Ibid.)
You can find a helpful discussion of Dixon’s essay on The Sports Ethicist podcast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9BNGgFWLBoLinks to an external site.
Questions:
Do you agree with Dixon that participating in a competitive MMA contest inherently involves disrespecting one’s opponent? Can one person punch and kick another in the attempt to cause damage and break their spirit, while also respecting that person as an end-in-themselves?
Supposing Dixon is correct about the immorality of MMA, are there other, non-combat sports that likewise violate the categorical imperative? Which ones and why?
In a competitive MMA contest both fighters agree to give and receive physical damage in order to test their skills and win a prize. Does securing the consent of one’s target make assaulting them okay, or is it always inherently wrong to assault someone? Are there some forms of treatment that a person cannot morally consent to?
Dixon’s analysis of why it is morally problematic to watch competitive MMA contests is framed in terms of Aristotelian virtue ethics (which we will cover in Week 4). Can a Kantian argument be made for the same conclusion? What would it be?
This symposium is a chance for you to discuss together contemporary ethical issues and the questions they raise, your own response to those issues and questions, and whether these align with or do not align with a Kantian approach. The aim is not to simply assert your own view or to denigrate other views, but to identify, evaluate, and discuss the moral reasoning involved in addressing the ethics of combat sports.
References
Dixon, N. (2015) A Moral Critique of Mixed Martial Arts. Public Affairs Quarterly, October 2015, 29(4), 365-384. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44714928
The Sports Ethicist. (2021, July 16) Examined Sport Ep 16 Dixon Moral Critique of MMA [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9BNGgFWLBo
693713
an hour ago
This week, you will consider how deontology applies to a controversy, dilemma, event, or scenario selected by your instructor. It is a chance for you to discuss together the ethical issues and questions that it raises, your own response to those, and whether that aligns with or does not align with a deontological approach. The aim is not to simply assert your own view or to denigrate other views, but to identify, evaluate, and discuss the moral reasoning involved in addressing the chosen issue.
Your posts should remain focused on the ethical considerations, and at some point in your contribution you must specifically address the way someone with a deontological view would approach this issue by explaining and evaluating that approach.
If you have a position, you should strive to provide reasons in defense of that position.
693713
an hour ago
Ashford University | PHI208 SYMPOSIUM
As mentioned in the week 1 video, weeks 2, 3, and 4 will have a symposium discussion. The word “symposium” is a Greek word that refers to a banquet held after a meal, an after-party of sorts that usually included drinking, dancing, recitals, and engaging conversations on the topics of the day. The word also happens to be the title of the classic text by Plato, whose work you read last week. As you can probably guess, that work features a group of men who take the idea of engaging conversation to a whole new level and practically compete against one another in a sport of wit and words.
For our purposes in this course, the symposium discussions will not involve dancing, recitals, or a banquet, but they will provide food for thought on current ethical issues and direct application of the ethical theory discussed in each of these weeks. It is impossible these days to turn on the news or log on to social media without encountering a controversy that cries out for ethical discussion. For these symposiums, your instructor will choose a topic of current ethical interest and any resources associated with it. Your task is to consider how the ethical theory of the week might be used to examine, understand, or evaluate the issue.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|