From Kent Bach, a quick follow up to the last post on philosophy of sport. In the May 24 1973 Journal of Philosophy, Joseph Ullian reviewed Paul Weiss’s Sport: A Philosophic Inquiry. (The link is to JSTOR, so if you don’t have access to that you won’t be able to follow the link.)

The review is a classic negative review – I don’t think I’ve ever seen something quite so harsh. The final paragraph is:

He who is fond of either sport or philosophy can save himself a thoroughly distasteful experience by avoiding Weiss’s book. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine anyone who might be pleased by it.

To put that in context, some of the examples quoted from the book provide pretty compelling evidence for the conclusion. And some of the awkward constructions in that conclusion are parodies of the kinds of phrases used ad nauseum in the book. The second most charming aspect of the book (as far as I can tell from Ullian’s review) is when Weiss says, “A woman is less abstract than a man because her mind is persistently oriented towards bodily problems,” and then spends five or six pages drawing out the sporting philosophical consequences of this. The most charming is when Weiss recommends that “Negros” be handicapped in sporting events to make it all somehow fair.

I trust philosophy of sport has improved a touch in the thirty intervening years. Thanks again to Kent Bach for bringing this to my attention.