In defense of medically supervised doping

IF 1.2 3区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS
E. Moore, J. Morrison
{"title":"In defense of medically supervised doping","authors":"E. Moore, J. Morrison","doi":"10.1080/00948705.2022.2066538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We propose that doping be legalized under medical supervision. First, we discuss two motivations for allowing medically supervised doping. We reject the ‘compromised choice/harm minimization’ motivation as unlikely to win the support of athletes. We agree that it could lead to an arms race. Instead, we favor full acceptance of doping under medical supervision and answer Reid’s spirit of sport objection to medical manipulation. After presenting a set of guiding principles, we use them to answer the arms race objection and rebut one of the most prominent objections in the literature about the safety of medically supervised doping, the game-theoretic objection.","PeriodicalId":46532,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Philosophy of Sport","volume":"49 1","pages":"159 - 176"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Philosophy of Sport","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2022.2066538","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

ABSTRACT We propose that doping be legalized under medical supervision. First, we discuss two motivations for allowing medically supervised doping. We reject the ‘compromised choice/harm minimization’ motivation as unlikely to win the support of athletes. We agree that it could lead to an arms race. Instead, we favor full acceptance of doping under medical supervision and answer Reid’s spirit of sport objection to medical manipulation. After presenting a set of guiding principles, we use them to answer the arms race objection and rebut one of the most prominent objections in the literature about the safety of medically supervised doping, the game-theoretic objection.
为医学监督下的兴奋剂辩护
我们建议在医学监督下使兴奋剂合法化。首先,我们讨论允许在医学监督下使用兴奋剂的两个动机。我们拒绝“妥协选择/伤害最小化”的动机,因为不太可能赢得运动员的支持。我们同意这可能导致军备竞赛。相反,我们赞成在医疗监督下完全接受兴奋剂,并回答里德反对医疗操纵的体育精神。在提出一套指导原则之后,我们用它们来回答军备竞赛的反对意见,并反驳文献中关于医学监督下的兴奋剂安全性的最突出的反对意见之一,博弈论的反对意见。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Philosophy of Sport (JPS) is the most respected medium for communicating contemporary philosophic thought with regard to sport. It contains stimulating articles, critical reviews of work completed, and philosophic discussions about the philosophy of sport. JPS is published twice a year for the International Association for the Philosophy of Sport; members receive it as part of their membership. To subscribe to either the print or e-version of JPS, press the Subscribe or Renew button at the top of this screen.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信