Sport As An Equal Opportunities Utopia

Relevance of the research.The paper is essay consideration in philosophy of sport on fairness of the athletes. Is non-empirical studies in which a causal model of pursuance of a sport utopia is discussed. The recent cases of breaking the sport ontic order by olympic athletes who violated the rules of proper conduct in their personal lives, show how easily the state of sport anti-utopia can be reached. The object of the study is to explain the key rationis sufficientis and causa for achieving the sport utopia. Research methods and organization. By way of a regressive deduction, reaching back to the primary metaphysical premises, it explains the key reasons for achieving the sport utopia. Results and discussion. The applied regressive reasoning model reveals that the success of sport utopia, being a variety of social utopia, is determined by authoritative judges managing the common good of the sport family. There is a reason why the sport community is referred to as the sport family. Maintaining familial relationships is a utopia itself, i.e. a daunting but feasible task. And although the hope of each family, also of the “sport family”, are its children, only the adult family members – capable of assuming the responsibility for the common good – can maintain order in the family and render all its activities sensible. Similarly, the successful organization of competitions in a sport family aimed at perfection according to the family’s ideals is only possible, if the order of competitions is preserved by: a) judges-categorizers responsible for maintaining sexual-somatic equality; b) judges-classifiers responsible for ontic equality (extra-sexual physicality) of the gymansion ascetics; c) judges-exposers responsible for revealing ontic inequalities of doping abusers; and d) judges-moderators responsible for the moral equality between competitors. In the discussed causal model I did not see initially that a “new child” had entered the social system of sport – a child born in the world of liberal usurpations, with whom the establishment of a familial relation regarding freedom, morality, ideals and authority would be very difficult. I did not think about this reason, which is key to understand the cause of the humanistic failure of sport competition, i.e. the cause of deconstruction of the sport utopia. Conclusion. If it had not been for these judges’ authoritative enforcement of moral and ontic equality among athletes, then – without diminishing the athletes’ contribution to the creation of fair competition – it could be assumed that the liberally, relativistically and individualistically disposed athletes would not have been able to tackle their humanistic tasks by themselves.