CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF DOPING IN SPORT

Abstract

The debate concerning the use of performance-enhancing technologies constitutes one of the most controversial issues in contemporary philosophy of sport. While the dominant body of literature primarily emphasizes the detrimental effects of doping on athletes’ health, the fairness of competition, and the preservation of the spirit of sport, several philosophers have advanced arguments in favour of its legalization under specific conditions. The aim of the present article is to critically discuss two representative articles by Claudio Tamburrini, addressing, respectively, the relationship between hypoxic air machines and doping, and the justification of sanctions imposed on athletes for anti-doping rule violations. The study is based on a philosophical analysis of arguments as its methodological approach and employs Sigmund Loland’s three ideal-typical approaches to technologies of athletic preparation as its theoretical framework. Tamburrini’s arguments are first presented in detail and subsequently critically examined in relation to the concepts of justice, equality of opportunity, autonomy, and the spirit of sport. The analysis shows that, despite their philosophical originality and their contribution to the contemporary debate on doping, Tamburrini’s arguments fail to provide sufficient ethical justification for the acceptance of doping in competitive sport. More specifically, they rely on assumptions that are not adequately justified and ultimately lead to problematic conclusions regarding the nature, purpose and internal values of sport.