Conceptualizing `Fair Play': A Review of the Literature

Abstract

The notion of `fair play' is generally understood to be important in sport and in life yet it is not clear what precisely it refers to, why it is valued, what ethical principles, if any, it is grounded upon, and what kind of good it involves. The product of this confusion is a lack of consensus in conceptualizing `fair play', which is reflected in a wide range of conceptions offered in the sport philosophical literature. In this paper I offer a critical review of the `fair play' literature in sports philosophy and the mainstream ethical theories that underpin them in order to formulate and present a preferable conception of `fair play'. First, I consider the historical roots of the concept in sports contexts. Second, I present six competing conceptions of `fair play': (i) formalism, (ii) `fair play' as play, (iii) `fair play' as `respect', (iv) `fair play' as a contract or agreement, (v) `fair play' as a system of rational norms and (vi) `fair play' as virtue. I argue that all these accounts are lacking since they fail, in varying degrees, to consider the ethos of games that is partly generative of a richer concept of `fair play' which I articulate and defend.