Leon Culbertson - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Uploads

Papers by Leon Culbertson

The critical theorisation of sport has drawn on a wide range of social thought. Frankfurt School ... more The critical theorisation of sport has drawn on a wide range of social thought. Frankfurt School Marxism, Gramscian influenced hegemony theories, figurational sociology and the works of Bourdieu and Foucault, have all been prominent influences for the analysis of sport. Work such as this fails to place sufficient emphasis on the role of individual praxis, resulting in general conceptualisation, and a failure to account for concrete particularities. In addition, the issue of temporality is largely ignored within the theorisation of sport. This thesis treats the work of theorists influenced by the concept of hegemony as a point of departure from which to rethink the critical theorisation of sport. Having identified a number of problems with the hegemonist position, which stem from a failure to consider the constituting role of individual praxis, the thesis explores the potential of an approach to the theorisation of sport which draws on elements of the work of Jean-Paul Sartre. The in...

Choice Reviews Online, 2001

Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 2010

The paper highlights the centrality of some concepts from philosophy of sport for philosophical a... more The paper highlights the centrality of some concepts from philosophy of sport for philosophical aesthetics. Once Best (BJA, 1974) conclusively answered negatively the fundamental question, 'Can any sport-form be an artform?', what further issues remained at the intersection of these parts of philosophy? Recent work revitalizing this interface, especially Mumford's Watching Sport (2012), contested Best's fundamental distinction between purposive and aesthetic sports, and insisted that purist viewers are taking an aesthetic interest in sporting events. Here, we defend Best's conception against considerations Mumford hoped would bring the aesthetics of art and sport closer together, thereby elaborating the aesthetics of sport. But, against Mumford's resolutely psychological conception of an aim, we follow Best to defend the centrality, for purposive sports, of the means/ends contrast even when taking an aesthetic interest in such sports. We conclude with general...

Routledge Handbook of Athlete Welfare, 2020

Jean-Paul Sartre articulated two distinctly different conceptions of the role of the intellectual... more Jean-Paul Sartre articulated two distinctly different conceptions of the role of the intellectual. He cited the events of May–June 1968 as central to the precipitation of circumstances that necessitated a move from the classic to the revolutionary intellectual (sometimes also referred to by Sartre as the ‘leftist’ or ‘new’ intellectual). This chapter will argue that it would be a mistake to regard a specific set of political events as solely responsible for bringing about this alteration in Sartre’s position. The chapter will attempt to place Sartre’s changing conception of the role of the intellectual within the wider context of his own pre-reflective ‘fundamental project’ as an intellectual. The chapter will explore the dialectical relationship between Sartre’s abandonment of literature as a bourgeois art form in favour of existential biography, his political writing and action and his changing conception of the role of the intellectual. This will be done in a manner that is broad...

The paper highlights the centrality of some concepts from philosophy of sport for philosophical a... more The paper highlights the centrality of some concepts from philosophy of sport for philosophical aesthetics. Once Best (BJA, 1974) conclusively answered negatively the fundamental question, ‘Can any sport form be an artform’, what further issues remained at the intersection of these parts of philosophy? Recent work revitalizing this interface, especially Mumford’s Watching Sport (2012), contested Best’s fundamental distinction between purposive and aesthetic sports, and insisted that purist viewers are taking an aesthetic interest in sporting events. Here, we defend Best’s conception against considerations Mumford hoped would bring the aesthetics of art and sport closer together, thereby elaborating the aesthetics of sport. But, against Mumford’s resolutely psychological conception of an aim, we follow Best to defend the centrality, for purposive sports, of the means/ends contrast remains, even when taking an aesthetic interest in such sports. We conclude with general speculations ab...

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2020

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2016

This paper explores the view that, on Mumford's account of the purist, to the degree that the pur... more This paper explores the view that, on Mumford's account of the purist, to the degree that the purist adopts an aesthetic perspective, he or she doesn't watch the sport in question, and to the degree that he or she does watch the sport, there is a loss of aesthetic appreciation. The idea that spectators oscillate between partisanship and purism means that the purist is unable to avoid either the Scylla of not actually watching the sport, or the Charybdis of loss of aesthetic appreciation at any given point. Ultimately there seems to be both a sport-shaped hole and an aestheticshaped hole in Mumford's account of the purist. It is argued that oscillation is incapable of dealing with the problem precisely because it is disjunctive in nature and entails the spectator either watching sport from an aesthetic perspective or from a partisan perspective at any given time. An alternative conception of the aesthetic is considered that offers one way of dissolving the purist's dilemma. KEYWORDS aesthetics; partisan and purist; sport spectatorship.

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2015

Modifying a contrast found in Dixon (2001), Stephen Mumford (2012; 2012a) distinguishes between '... more Modifying a contrast found in Dixon (2001), Stephen Mumford (2012; 2012a) distinguishes between 'partisan' and 'purist' ways of watching sport. Recognising that the extreme partisan and extreme purist positions do not explain the nature of sports spectatorship, Mumford follows Dixon in adopting the idea of moderate partisanship (any spectator who is neither all-partisan nor all-purist). He outlines three theories of spectatorship designed to address the issue of the relationship between the partisan and the purist ways of viewing sport. The true perception theory regards the moderate fan as able to see the event as it really is, rather than concentrating on an aspect (as the extreme purist and extreme partisan do). The mixture theory is the view that 'the moderate partisan has both partisan and purist perceptions of sport in some mixed way' (2012a: 373). The oscillation theory, which Mumford favours, holds that the moderate sports fan switches or oscillates between competitive (partisan) and aesthetic (purist) ways of watching sport. This paper does not offer an alternative theory to Mumford's account. Instead, it explores the possibility of dissolving the problem. Mumford is troubled by the distinction, and feels that he requires a theory to solve the problem he thinks it raises (and thereby explain the relationship between partisan and purist ways of viewing sport). The idea that purist and partisan ways of viewing sport are the only two options is explored, and a number of other possibilities are outlined. The paper considers the picture that appears to have motivated the idea that there is a problem here in need of a solution. One alternative picture is offered by means of a discussion of the phenomenon of aspect-perception, which, it is argued, is not a helpful model for thinking about football (soccer) spectatorship. This alternative picture is not a rival theory, but one possible example designed to show that there are other ways of thinking about football spectatorship that dissolve the problem with which Mumford is concerned.

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2017

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2017

Stephen Mumford develops his view of sport spectatorship partly through a rejection of an argumen... more Stephen Mumford develops his view of sport spectatorship partly through a rejection of an argument he attributes to Best, which distinguishes between two categories of sports, the 'purposive' and the 'aesthetic', on the basis of the claim that they have different principal aims. This paper considers the principal aim argument and one feature of Mumford's rejection of that argument, namely, Best's observation that the distinctions to which he draws attention are based on logical differences. The paper argues that Mumford misconstrues Best's argument by taking it to be about the intentions of players and athletes, while it is actually about a specific feature of the rules of each sport.

Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 2017

This paper examines one component of Stephen Mumford's case for the claim that we should regard s... more This paper examines one component of Stephen Mumford's case for the claim that we should regard sport, art and the aesthetic as more closely connected than has tended to be the case, under the influence of the work of David Best, in recent years. Mumford's rejection of what I call 'the drama argument' is examined in detail and it is argued that all but one element of his case fails to do the job he envisages.

Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 2016

The philosophy of sport is concerned with the conceptual analysis and interrogation of ideas and ... more The philosophy of sport is concerned with the conceptual analysis and interrogation of ideas and issues of sports and related practices such as coaching, sports journalism and sports medicine. At its most general level, it is concerned with articulating the nature and purposes of sport. The philosophy of sport is never fixed. Its methods (see below) require of scholars in the philosophy of sport to develop inherently self-critical thinking, continuously challenging their own preconceptions and guiding principles both as to the nature and purposes of philosophy and of sports. The philosophy of sport not only gathers insights from the various fields of philosophy (noted below) as they open up our appreciation of sports practices and institutions, but also generates substantive and competing views of sport itself:

The critical theorisation of sport has drawn on a wide range of social thought. Frankfurt School ... more The critical theorisation of sport has drawn on a wide range of social thought. Frankfurt School Marxism, Gramscian influenced hegemony theories, figurational sociology and the works of Bourdieu and Foucault, have all been prominent influences for the analysis of sport. Work such as this fails to place sufficient emphasis on the role of individual praxis, resulting in general conceptualisation, and a failure to account for concrete particularities. In addition, the issue of temporality is largely ignored within the theorisation of sport. This thesis treats the work of theorists influenced by the concept of hegemony as a point of departure from which to rethink the critical theorisation of sport. Having identified a number of problems with the hegemonist position, which stem from a failure to consider the constituting role of individual praxis, the thesis explores the potential of an approach to the theorisation of sport which draws on elements of the work of Jean-Paul Sartre. The in...

Choice Reviews Online, 2001

Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 2010

The paper highlights the centrality of some concepts from philosophy of sport for philosophical a... more The paper highlights the centrality of some concepts from philosophy of sport for philosophical aesthetics. Once Best (BJA, 1974) conclusively answered negatively the fundamental question, 'Can any sport-form be an artform?', what further issues remained at the intersection of these parts of philosophy? Recent work revitalizing this interface, especially Mumford's Watching Sport (2012), contested Best's fundamental distinction between purposive and aesthetic sports, and insisted that purist viewers are taking an aesthetic interest in sporting events. Here, we defend Best's conception against considerations Mumford hoped would bring the aesthetics of art and sport closer together, thereby elaborating the aesthetics of sport. But, against Mumford's resolutely psychological conception of an aim, we follow Best to defend the centrality, for purposive sports, of the means/ends contrast even when taking an aesthetic interest in such sports. We conclude with general...

Routledge Handbook of Athlete Welfare, 2020

Jean-Paul Sartre articulated two distinctly different conceptions of the role of the intellectual... more Jean-Paul Sartre articulated two distinctly different conceptions of the role of the intellectual. He cited the events of May–June 1968 as central to the precipitation of circumstances that necessitated a move from the classic to the revolutionary intellectual (sometimes also referred to by Sartre as the ‘leftist’ or ‘new’ intellectual). This chapter will argue that it would be a mistake to regard a specific set of political events as solely responsible for bringing about this alteration in Sartre’s position. The chapter will attempt to place Sartre’s changing conception of the role of the intellectual within the wider context of his own pre-reflective ‘fundamental project’ as an intellectual. The chapter will explore the dialectical relationship between Sartre’s abandonment of literature as a bourgeois art form in favour of existential biography, his political writing and action and his changing conception of the role of the intellectual. This will be done in a manner that is broad...

The paper highlights the centrality of some concepts from philosophy of sport for philosophical a... more The paper highlights the centrality of some concepts from philosophy of sport for philosophical aesthetics. Once Best (BJA, 1974) conclusively answered negatively the fundamental question, ‘Can any sport form be an artform’, what further issues remained at the intersection of these parts of philosophy? Recent work revitalizing this interface, especially Mumford’s Watching Sport (2012), contested Best’s fundamental distinction between purposive and aesthetic sports, and insisted that purist viewers are taking an aesthetic interest in sporting events. Here, we defend Best’s conception against considerations Mumford hoped would bring the aesthetics of art and sport closer together, thereby elaborating the aesthetics of sport. But, against Mumford’s resolutely psychological conception of an aim, we follow Best to defend the centrality, for purposive sports, of the means/ends contrast remains, even when taking an aesthetic interest in such sports. We conclude with general speculations ab...

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2020

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2016

This paper explores the view that, on Mumford's account of the purist, to the degree that the pur... more This paper explores the view that, on Mumford's account of the purist, to the degree that the purist adopts an aesthetic perspective, he or she doesn't watch the sport in question, and to the degree that he or she does watch the sport, there is a loss of aesthetic appreciation. The idea that spectators oscillate between partisanship and purism means that the purist is unable to avoid either the Scylla of not actually watching the sport, or the Charybdis of loss of aesthetic appreciation at any given point. Ultimately there seems to be both a sport-shaped hole and an aestheticshaped hole in Mumford's account of the purist. It is argued that oscillation is incapable of dealing with the problem precisely because it is disjunctive in nature and entails the spectator either watching sport from an aesthetic perspective or from a partisan perspective at any given time. An alternative conception of the aesthetic is considered that offers one way of dissolving the purist's dilemma. KEYWORDS aesthetics; partisan and purist; sport spectatorship.

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2015

Modifying a contrast found in Dixon (2001), Stephen Mumford (2012; 2012a) distinguishes between '... more Modifying a contrast found in Dixon (2001), Stephen Mumford (2012; 2012a) distinguishes between 'partisan' and 'purist' ways of watching sport. Recognising that the extreme partisan and extreme purist positions do not explain the nature of sports spectatorship, Mumford follows Dixon in adopting the idea of moderate partisanship (any spectator who is neither all-partisan nor all-purist). He outlines three theories of spectatorship designed to address the issue of the relationship between the partisan and the purist ways of viewing sport. The true perception theory regards the moderate fan as able to see the event as it really is, rather than concentrating on an aspect (as the extreme purist and extreme partisan do). The mixture theory is the view that 'the moderate partisan has both partisan and purist perceptions of sport in some mixed way' (2012a: 373). The oscillation theory, which Mumford favours, holds that the moderate sports fan switches or oscillates between competitive (partisan) and aesthetic (purist) ways of watching sport. This paper does not offer an alternative theory to Mumford's account. Instead, it explores the possibility of dissolving the problem. Mumford is troubled by the distinction, and feels that he requires a theory to solve the problem he thinks it raises (and thereby explain the relationship between partisan and purist ways of viewing sport). The idea that purist and partisan ways of viewing sport are the only two options is explored, and a number of other possibilities are outlined. The paper considers the picture that appears to have motivated the idea that there is a problem here in need of a solution. One alternative picture is offered by means of a discussion of the phenomenon of aspect-perception, which, it is argued, is not a helpful model for thinking about football (soccer) spectatorship. This alternative picture is not a rival theory, but one possible example designed to show that there are other ways of thinking about football spectatorship that dissolve the problem with which Mumford is concerned.

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2017

Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2017

Stephen Mumford develops his view of sport spectatorship partly through a rejection of an argumen... more Stephen Mumford develops his view of sport spectatorship partly through a rejection of an argument he attributes to Best, which distinguishes between two categories of sports, the 'purposive' and the 'aesthetic', on the basis of the claim that they have different principal aims. This paper considers the principal aim argument and one feature of Mumford's rejection of that argument, namely, Best's observation that the distinctions to which he draws attention are based on logical differences. The paper argues that Mumford misconstrues Best's argument by taking it to be about the intentions of players and athletes, while it is actually about a specific feature of the rules of each sport.

Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 2017

This paper examines one component of Stephen Mumford's case for the claim that we should regard s... more This paper examines one component of Stephen Mumford's case for the claim that we should regard sport, art and the aesthetic as more closely connected than has tended to be the case, under the influence of the work of David Best, in recent years. Mumford's rejection of what I call 'the drama argument' is examined in detail and it is argued that all but one element of his case fails to do the job he envisages.

Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 2016

The philosophy of sport is concerned with the conceptual analysis and interrogation of ideas and ... more The philosophy of sport is concerned with the conceptual analysis and interrogation of ideas and issues of sports and related practices such as coaching, sports journalism and sports medicine. At its most general level, it is concerned with articulating the nature and purposes of sport. The philosophy of sport is never fixed. Its methods (see below) require of scholars in the philosophy of sport to develop inherently self-critical thinking, continuously challenging their own preconceptions and guiding principles both as to the nature and purposes of philosophy and of sports. The philosophy of sport not only gathers insights from the various fields of philosophy (noted below) as they open up our appreciation of sports practices and institutions, but also generates substantive and competing views of sport itself: