Is there a place for Objectivism in sports?

[The Anthem]

This was kind of inspired by the topic "One Other Thing I noticed about AS" where sports are mentioned minimuly in Atlas Shrugged. Sports weren't shown in Galt's Gulch, is that a sign of what Ayn Rand thinks about sports? Also, a lot of sayings in sports seem anti obejctivist, (e.g. theres no "I" in team). It seems like the best way to win a game in sports is to think of the team ahead of you. Think of a ball hog in basketabll, say he enjoys dunking, so he tries to dunk every time he gets the ball. Unless he's Michael Jordan the team won't win becuase no one else will have the ball. Do you think its possible to be an objectivist athlete? It seems to me that a selfish athlete would never win.

[Thales]

There is no "We" either.

The pursuit of team sports very much fits in with Objectivist ethics. Your goal is to be the best team player you can be -- by passing the ball, or whatever -- so that you help win the game. If you're a really good player you will be rewarded for this on an individual level. The best players get the biggest contracts, usually.

[D'kian]

What Thales said.

And in the second place there is such thing as individual sports. Tennis, skiing, track and field, etc.

[KendallJ]

This question arises with any form of cooperative endeavor. As though somehow the members of a team can't be trading with one another. Follow this line of thinking and large corporations are also inherently not Objectivist. The members of a team work together by voluntary association to mutual benefit. They are simply traders.

[Capitalism Forever]

What I find remarkable is that many people--apparently even students of Objectivism!--equate sports with team games. Are skiing, swimming, and horse racing not sports?

[Julie McCrea]

This was kind of inspired by the topic "One Other Thing I noticed about AS" where sports are mentioned minimuly in Atlas Shrugged. Sports weren't shown in Galt's Gulch, is that a sign of what Ayn Rand thinks about sports? Also, a lot of sayings in sports seem anti obejctivist, (e.g. theres no "I" in team). It seems like the best way to win a game in sports is to think of the team ahead of you. Think of a ball hog in basketabll, say he enjoys dunking, so he tries to dunk every time he gets the ball. Unless he's Michael Jordan the team won't win becuase no one else will have the ball. Do you think its possible to be an objectivist athlete? It seems to me that a selfish athlete would never win.

There is no "I" in team....but "Me" certainly is in the word. A team is only as good as the members within it. The concept of team is often skewed. It is not a collection of clones. Why are there star atheletes on a team? Why is there a MVP award? People who have it within them to excell, are going to stand out within the perameters of the team. It is their nature to do so. I have never encountered a team situation without leaders and followers, those who lift the assembled group and those who somewhat drag it down. It is man's nature to be a leader or a follower. I hear my coworkers describe us as a "team" , fully aware that I will carry the majority of the workload. I don't mind classifications. They can call us whatever they like. It won't change how I handle the goals I set for myself or the company I work for.

[The Anthem]

Hm, I think I made a stupid topic. When I thought of the question I was thinking of team sports in my high school. The only way a team can truly work is if they are all fighting towards the same goal. In High School sports, they may not be. They may want to impress colleges, members of the opposite gender, etc. When I apply my question to professional sports the answer is the same as the above posters. By the way, I should have reffered to sports as team sports so as not to arouse confusion. I know of track, swimming, etc.

[Thales]

Hm, I think I made a stupid topic.

Absolutely not. The question is often asked. It's a good one.

[The Anthem]

It just seemed stupid becuase it was an uneeccessary question. I could have reached the same conclusion if I had thought longer.

[Clawg]

It just seemed stupid becuase it was an uneeccessary question. I could have reached the same conclusion if I had thought longer.

Then let's close this forum. All questions can be answered by thinking longer

[mrocktor]

"Like I always say, there's no "I" in team. There's a "me" though, if you jumble it up" - Gregory House

[JMeganSnow]

Then let's close this forum. All questions can be answered by thinking longer

Not true. Frequently you need to go out and get more data before you can answer your questions.

[D'kian]

It just seemed stupid becuase it was an uneeccessary question. I could have reached the same conclusion if I had thought longer.

To quote from one of my favorite teachers "There are no stupid questions, only stupid people too glad to remain ignorant."

[Mammon]

The big team competitive sports, like baseball, football, basketball, soccer, etc... are nothing more then symbols of collectivism, brute force, and mindless repetition. Throwing, hitting, kicking a ball or similiar object around produces nothing of value in and of itself, so people project some vague values all over the activity and postulate some meaning out of it.

Mix that in with a culture that already bows at mystic alters of collectivism and anti-thought and you get the mondern incarnation of the sports industry. A whole bunch of grown men around playing a childs game and millions of people are fascinated and entertained by this. Fascinated to the point where it eventually becomes a form of tribalism where these ball throwing over-paid idiots* become representatives of some geographic area. I'm sure we could replace our elections with sports games and 3/4 of the country wouldn't bate an eyelid. It's all about "my team is greater then your team!" -- which is exactly like the current political system. I'm sure switching the two would go over really well with the American people; in fact, we should throw some singing and dancing in there too like -- Who Wants To Dance There Way To The Congressional Conference Champions?!**

To answer the OP's question. No. There isn't any place in sports for Objectivism. Objectivism requires some rational thinking on the part of the individual, and apart from maybe Micheal Jordan, I'm yet to see that happen in the major sports industry. The small individual-based sports, maybe. But, if someone sees any semblance of Objectivist ethics in the bigger sports (see above) is just the person who "sees it" rationalizing and projecting.

*An interesting fact slipped by me a couple months ago. The tutoring services on my college campus said that 56% of our athletes... DONT KNOW HOW TO READ! I asked around and turns out, this is the case on a lot of college campuses, but it's played down significantly. I mean, a college is a useless place without it's sports teams right?

**Brought to you by Fox Sports: The Highest Rated Politicoball News Source.

Edited June 10, 2008 by Mammon

[West]

The big team competitive sports, like baseball, football, basketball, soccer, etc... are nothing more then symbols of collectivism, brute force, and mindless repetition. Throwing, hitting, kicking a ball or similiar object around produces nothing of value in and of itself, so people project some vague values all over the activity and postulate some meaning out of it.

Would you say that working for a steel corporation is nothing more than a symbol of collectivism, brute force, and mindless repetition? Pouring steel, as well as all of the other actions taken to produce certain results, produce nothing that is a value in and of itself. Would you then say that people project some vague values all over those activities and postulate some meaning out of it?

To answer the OP's question. No. There isn't any place in sports for Objectivism. Objectivism requires some rational thinking on the part of the individual, and apart from maybe Micheal Jordan, I'm yet to see that happen in the major sports industry. The small individual-based sports, maybe. But, if someone sees any semblance of Objectivist ethics in the bigger sports (see above) is just the person who "sees it" rationalizing and projecting.

Wow Mammon. I knew you didn't like sports, but I didn't think you'd ever make a 'criticism' like this. You say that there isn't any place in sports for Objectivism by giving your observation that there's a lack of "rational thinking". What do you think qualifies as a volitional act of cognition, much less an act of reason? In any endeavor where you are working within a team (corporations, sports, non-profit organizations, etc.), actions are taken (this implicitly requires a process of thinking to determine the best course of action to take) to ensure the success of the team, not at the sacrifice of the individual, but to the ultimate benefit to each individual with a stake in the venture. This relates to the 'harmony of interests' principle. When you see Steve Nash drive down the court, observe that there's an opening he can exploit, and does a fancy pass to a teammate, is he sacrificing himself? No--he's providing a means by which he'll accomplish the ultimate goal, which is winning the game (Entertainment is the service he provides and is paid for--winning is a part of that). There's one example--how am I "rationalizing and projecting"?

edit: reduced what I saw as being a little too ad hominem.

Edited June 10, 2008 by West

[ruveyn ben yosef]

There is no "We" either.

The pursuit of team sports very much fits in with Objectivist ethics. Your goal is to be the best team player you can be -- by passing the ball, or whatever -- so that you help win the game. If you're a really good player you will be rewarded for this on an individual level. The best players get the biggest contracts, usually.

If the goal for the team is victory (for the team), then it follows that each member of the team should perform optimally to bring that about. This means co-operative interaction and interplay among team members. I am assuming that each member of the team subscribes to the goal of -victory for the team-.

Take baseball for instance. It may be that the batter (who can, on occasion, belt the ball out of the park) is ordered by the coarch to lay down a sacrifice bunt to bring a man from third home to score. What should he do? Answer: he should obey orders. The coach judges that he has a better change of laying down a successful sacrifice bunt than he has to get a hit long.

Examples of this sort can be multiplied for other team sports. A team of both a constraint on individual inclination to go for glory and a force multiplier for each member's skill.

ruveyn

[The Anthem]

If the goal for the team is victory (for the team), then it follows that each member of the team should perform optimally to bring that about. This means co-operative interaction and interplay among team members. I am assuming that each member of the team subscribes to the goal of -victory for the team-.

Take baseball for instance. It may be that the batter (who can, on occasion, belt the ball out of the park) is ordered by the coarch to lay down a sacrifice bunt to bring a man from third home to score. What should he do? Answer: he should obey orders. The coach judges that he has a better change of laying down a successful sacrifice bunt than he has to get a hit long.

Examples of this sort can be multiplied for other team sports. A team of both a constraint on individual inclination to go for glory and a force multiplier for each member's skill.

ruveyn

What if he really enjoys seeing how far he can hit it? Should he sacrifice his enjoyment for the team?

[ruveyn ben yosef]

What if he really enjoys seeing how far he can hit it? Should he sacrifice his enjoyment for the team?

If he does so, he won't be on the team for long. When one joins a sports team he is making a commitment to play for the victory of the team. There are many sports where individual excellence is rewarded, so a person who is bound for glory could indulge in such sport. A person so motivated could participate in one on one competition (say, singles tennis) , or racing where the idea is to come in first.

ruveyn

This was kind of inspired by the topic "One Other Thing I noticed about AS" where sports are mentioned minimuly in Atlas Shrugged. Sports weren't shown in Galt's Gulch, is that a sign of what Ayn Rand thinks about sports? Also, a lot of sayings in sports seem anti obejctivist, (e.g. theres no "I" in team). It seems like the best way to win a game in sports is to think of the team ahead of you. Think of a ball hog in basketabll, say he enjoys dunking, so he tries to dunk every time he gets the ball. Unless he's Michael Jordan the team won't win becuase no one else will have the ball. Do you think its possible to be an objectivist athlete? It seems to me that a selfish athlete would never win.

Allow me to turn the question around. It there a place for team sports in Objectivism? The more general question is how can one reconcile the urge for individual attainment with team play? I sense there might be a tension between "going for glory" and doing what is good for the team (which means helping the team win).

ruveyn

[West]

The goal that you are trying to accomplish dictate the actions that are required to accomplish it (don't misconstrue this as the "end justifies the means," but instead the context, which includes the end, determines the proper means to accomplish said end). I'd question your choice to be involved in a team sport if your primary goal is to "gain enjoyment from seeing how far you can hit a ball." You will necessarily be up to bat less than if you were to be in your own backyard, swinging away at balls all day.

[volco]

That's why I only like Tennis, biking, hiking, kayaking. Unfortunately I'm recovering from a dislocated shoulder from a biking accident a year ago.

I hate soccer and the soccer fanatism (fanaticism difference?) that abounds down here and in Europe.

This was kind of inspired by the topic "One Other Thing I noticed about AS" where sports are mentioned minimuly in Atlas Shrugged. Sports weren't shown in Galt's Gulch, is that a sign of what Ayn Rand thinks about sports? Also, a lot of sayings in sports seem anti obejctivist, (e.g. theres no "I" in team). It seems like the best way to win a game in sports is to think of the team ahead of you. Think of a ball hog in basketabll, say he enjoys dunking, so he tries to dunk every time he gets the ball. Unless he's Michael Jordan the team won't win becuase no one else will have the ball. Do you think its possible to be an objectivist athlete? It seems to me that a selfish athlete would never win.

And who said sports are limited to team sports?

There's nothing wrong with teams either, remember how they all teamed up to take the Wayland Falkland Hotel? Or how is it imperative to team up with associates to run a business? The difference is that in team sports, success or failure is shared like pee in a pool. There's little accountability.

[EdSalti]

Do you think its possible to be an objectivist athlete? It seems to me that a selfish athlete would never win.

A aspect of this issue that I didn't see mentioned is that if you voluntarily enter into the team sport understanding the rules of the game require subjugating your individuality to the team and you are willing to do this for the benefit of the team, there is no conflict.

This is an important question because it can as well be asked: is it possible to be an Objectivist in the military, or in a corporation? Same answer. Of course, it is. The goals of the team and your goals must coincide or you shouldn't be there. Your reasons and your rewards can be many and varied, but as a team member you must be willing to pursue those goals within the framework you have chosen.

The hot-dogger on the b'ball court, the officer or NCO who works for promotion at the expense of the men or the mission, the corporate member who undermines fellow workers to make himself look good are all frauds who are on the wrong team for the wrong reasons. More often than not, they are recognized for what they are and are gotten rid of. More often than we'd like, some of them make it further than they should.