IDO MOVEMENT FOR CULTURE

Background. Relevance of the research. This paper attempts to consider fairness in athletes in the context of the philosophy of sport. It is a non-empirical study in which a causal model of the pursuance of sporting utopia is discussed. Recent cases where the ontic order of sport has been broken by sprinters and swimmers, and the current case of Russian athletes (who have violated the rules of proper conduct in their personal lives), show how easily the state of a sports anti-utopia can be reached. The aim of the study is to explain the key rationis sufficientis and causa to achieve a sports utopia.
Research methods and organization. By using regressive deduction, reaching back to primary metaphysical premises, it explains the key reasons for achieving a sports utopia.
Results and discussion. The applied regressive reasoning model reveals that the success of a sports utopia as a variety of social utopia, is determined by authoritative judges managing the common good of the sports family. There is a reason why the sporting community is referred to as the sports family. Maintaining familial relationships is, in itself a utopia, i.e. a daunting but feasible task. And although the hopes of every family, as with the “sports family”, are its children, only the adult family members – capable of assuming responsibility for the common good – can maintain order in the family and render all its activities sensible. Similarly, the successful organization of competitions in the sports family, aiming at perfection according to the family’s ideals, is only possible if competitive order is preserved by: a) judge-categorizers responsible for maintaining sexual-somatic equality; b) judge-classifiers responsible for ontic equality (extra-sexual physicality) of the gymnasium (gym) ascetics; c) judge-exposers responsible for revealing the ontic inequalities of doping abusers; and d) judge-moderators responsible for ensuring moral equality between competitors. In the discussed causal model I did not initially identify that a “new child” had entered the sports social system – a child born into a world of liberal usurpation, with whom the establishment of a familial relationship regarding freedom, morality, ideals and authority would be very difficult. I had not thought about this which it appears is key to understanding the cause of the failure of sports competition in humanistic terms, i.e. the cause of the deconstruction of the sports utopia.
Conclusion. If it had not been for these judges’ authoritative enforcement of moral and ontic equality among athletes, (without diminishing athletes’ contributions to the creation of fair competition) it could be assumed that liberally, relativistically and individualistically disposed athletes would not have been able to tackle their humanistic tasks by themselves.