In a previous posting I have argued that participating in sport
has instrumental value because it fosters certain virtues, see Nietzsche
sport and suffering .
It fosters these virtues because competition makes sport difficult to some
degree. In this posting I want to do two things. I want to examine Gwen
Bradford’s ideas about achievement (1). In conjunction with this examination I
will argue that because sport is difficult it also has intrinsic value.
How does Bradford define achievement? Bradford is only concerned
with achievements that require some minimal amount of effort. For instance for most
people the tying of their shoelaces wouldn’t be an achievement. According to
Bradford achievements have two elements. They consist of a process and a
product. For instance winning an Olympic medal would be a product. Running in
the race to win the medal would be the process. In some cases the product might
be part of the process. For instance for an amateur marathon runner running the
race would be the process and the product of his achievement. Whether the
product is an achievement depends on how it was caused. First the process must
be difficult and the level of difficulty must be above some threshold. Secondly
the achiever must cause his achievement.
However it isn’t enough that the agent causes the achievement. Someone
can cause something due to being lucky but this wouldn’t be an achievement. An
achiever must competently cause his achievement by being responsible for it. For
someone to win a race because he competently causes his victory by training
correctly would be an achievement, for someone to win a race because his
competitors are disqualified for taking the wrong course wouldn’t be. Let us
accept Bradford’s definition and that for something to be an achievement that it
must have a product and a process with the process being difficult and competently
caused by the achiever.
Let us now consider the value of achievement. Achievements
as defined above are difficult and as I have previously argued doing difficult things
has instrumental value because it fosters certain virtues. However achievements
also seem to foster another type of value and I now want to consider this
value. Bradford introduces the idea of an essentialist value. If some capacity
is essential to human beings then the exercise of this capacity is of value to
human beings. It is tempting to equate essentialist value with intrinsic value.
In what follows I will regard essentialist value as intrinsic value. Bradford
suggests that the exercise of the will is an essential capacity of human
beings. Indeed if someone never exercised his will it would be difficult to see
him as a person and he might be regarded as a wanton. Let us accept that doing
something difficult requires effort and that effort involves someone exercising
his will. It follows that if achievements must be difficult to some degree that
achievements have intrinsic value for persons. In what follows I will restrict
my discussion to persons rather than human beings. Some human beings might lack
a will but this can’t be true of persons. Any person must have a will to some
degree. This difference will matter later. Bradford also suggests that a
capacity for practical rationality is an essential capacity for human beings.
Once again some human beings might be unable to act rationally and I will
restrict my discussion to persons. Someone who cannot use practical rationality
cannot govern himself and so cannot be regarded as autonomous. It follows if
someone who isn’t autonomous for at least some of the time that he cannot be
regarded as person because practical rationality is an essential capacity for a
person. It further follows if achievement must include the exercise of
practical rationality that achievement has intrinsic value. Let us
accept that achievements have intrinsic value because they involve the exercise
of the will and practical rationality. Bradford further argues that combining
the exercise of the will and rationality further increases this value, I will
not pursue this further here. In what follows ‘value’ will refer to intrinsic
value unless it is specified otherwise.
I now want to question whether using Bradford’s account
sport can be considered as an achievement. This question matters because
intuitively sporting achievements seem to be real achievements but Bradford’s account
might make it appear that they aren’t. If they aren’t then perhaps we need to
reject her account. There is no problem with the first element in Bradford’s
account. Achievements must be difficult and sporting achievements are difficult
so it follows that the first element in her account is satisfied. The second
element is more problematic. In Bradford’s account for some outcome to be an
achievement the achievement must be competently caused. According to Bradford an
achiever competently causes an outcome if he has enough justified, true beliefs
(JTBs) about his actions which cause the outcome. However Bradford herself
admits that competence causation creates a problem if we are to regard some
things as achievements.
“In fact, for some activities, their success may depend on
not consciously entertaining any beliefs. I have in mind here in particular
athletic activities, or other physical activities such as music performance or
dance.” (2)
It would appear that because an athlete might not have JTBs
about his activity during the process part of a ‘sporting achievement’ that
‘sporting achievements are aren’t genuine achievement.
Before accepting the above we should examine two questions.
First might an athlete have had JTBs which competently caused his performance
at some time? Secondly does the fact that an athlete isn’t consciously aware of
any JTBs during his performance mean he doesn’t have any JTBs?
Let us consider the first question. Consider an author who
had enough JTB’s to write a book who dies prior to its publication. Few would
deny that his book was an achievement and this example seems to suggest that it
isn’t necessary for some outcome to be considered as an achievement is that the
achiever had enough JTBs at the time of the outcome. All that is necessary is
that the achiever had enough JTBs at some time which caused the outcome.
However caution is needed. In this example the time when the author’s
achievement was recognised and when the achievement was accomplished needn’t be
the same. Perhaps the achievement was accomplished during the writing or on the
completion of the book rather than at the date of publication. If we accept the
above then perhaps as achiever must have some JTBs which caused the achievement
at the same time as it was achieved. However if we consider athletes and
musicians it would seem that the time when an achievement is accomplished and
recognised are the same.
Let us turn to my second question. Must an athlete consciously
be aware of any JTBs during his performance? Let us accept that an athlete must
have some JTBs which cause his achievement. For instance he must have JTBs
about his training and diet. But is he consciously aware of them whilst
accomplishing his achievement? I would suggest not. If an athlete is aware of
enough JTBs prior to accomplishing his ‘sporting achievement’ and aware of them
afterwards then I would suggest that he unconsciously has them during the
process. I would further suggest that if an athlete has enough unconscious JTBs
whilst accomplishing his ‘sporting achievement’ that his achievement is competently
caused and provides it is also sufficiently difficult that it is a genuine
achievement. If we accept the above then we can accept ‘sporting achievements’
as real achievements and have no need to reject Bradford’s account.
I now want to examine two consequences connected to the value of sporting achievement that seem to follow from accepting Bradford’s account. First I will suggest that sporting achievements are generally less valuable than some other achievements. Secondly I will suggest any enhancement diminishes the value of sporting achievements. Intuitively my first suggestion seems correct. For whilst finding a cure for some disease and winning an Olympic medal are both achievements it seems natural to think that finding a cure for the disease is of the greater value. However caution is needed as much of the value of curing a disease is due to benefits it confers to others rather than the value of the achievement itself. In this posting I’m only interested in the latter. The question is whether finding a cure for a disease has greater achievement value than winning an Olympic medal. I will now argue that it has. Let us assume for the sake of argument that both achievements are equally difficult. I will now argue that the value resulting from competent causation is less in the case of winning the medal. Let us assume that more JTBs are needed to find a cure for a disease than to win an Olympic medal. This alone is not sufficient to guarantee greater value due to competent causation when discovering a cure for a disease. Whether something is competently caused might depend on the percentage of possible JTBs the agent has. Let us assume that the number of possible JTBs is much greater in finding a cure for a disease that the researcher has a lower percentage of JTBs than the athlete has about how to win his medal. It might be concluded that competent causation generates more intrinsic value for the athlete than the researcher. This conclusion would be mistaken. The value due to competent causation depends on how much rationality the achiever employs in exercising his JTBs and not on how many JTBs he possesses or the percentage of possible JTBs he possesses. Let us accept that sporting achievements usually require less JTBs and that less rationality is used in exercising them than is the case in many other achievements. It follows provided the degree of difficulty remains the same that sporting achievements tend to have less essentialist value than other achievements. This conclusion depends on the modifications I have made to Bradford’s account. I have substituted essential properties for persons instead of for human beings. Bradford suggests that the exercise of our physical abilities might be an essential property of human beings and as a result have intrinsic value in the same way as the exercise of the will and rationality. Sporting achievements might gain intrinsic value this additional way and as a result sporting achievements would not tend to have less value than other achievements. Nonetheless if we restrict essential properties to persons rather than human beings sporting achievement tend to have less achievement value than some other forms of achievement. Secondly let us consider whether enhancement lowers the value of sporting achievements. Using Bradford’s account doing something difficult increases the exercise of will. If someone uses enhancing drugs then he makes achievements less difficult. Making something less difficult means less need for the exercise of the will. It follows because the exercise of the will is one thing that contributes to the value of achievement that enhancement lowers the intrinsic value of sporting achievements. More generally sportspersons who cheat in order to win deprive themselves of some of the intrinsic value of sport. Much the same conclusions can be reached when considering cognitive enhancement. Cognitive enhancement, either by pharmacological or other means, makes the exercise of rationality easier even if the amount of rationality required remains the same. As I have argued above easier achievements require less exercise of the will and as a result are less difficult and possess less less intrinsic value. I would suggest that it also lowers the instrumental value but I won’t pursue this suggestion further here.
As we age what we can achieve becomes more modest. It might be suggested that as we age we should accept that achievement has less value in our lives. I am reluctant to accept this suggestion. In positive psychology the Perma model developed by Martin Seligman (3) includes accomplishment or achievement as an important element of our happiness. I now want to suggest that Bradford offers an incomplete account of the value of achievement because it doesn’t account for the long term value of achievements. According to her account achievements gain their intrinsic value because they fosters the exercise of the will and rationality. The value of this exercise persists after being exercised according to her account but this value would appear to be short term. Let us return to our researcher who found a cure for some dreadful disease. Years later he takes pleasure in his achievement because it prevents harm. He also takes pride in it because he achieved it. The fact he achieved something appears to have long lasting non-instrumental value. Pride means it matters to him that he achieved it and not someone else. If we accept Bradford’s account then his achievement no longer has any intrinsic value to the achiever because it no longer fosters the exercise of his will or rationality. However if someone takes pride in some past achievement he values it because it was his achievement in addition to valuing because of its benefits. It would seem that because Bradford’s account seems unable to account fully for pride in past achievements that it is an incomplete account. In the above I’ve slightly amended Braford’s account by substituting persons for human beings when considering essential or intrinsic value. I now want to argue that if we accept this amendment that we can account for the intrinsic value of past achievements. Let us accept that not all human beings are persons. Let us also accept that a person must care about something or else he has no real shape and is a defective sort of person. What he cares about define his values. Someone’s most important values are defined by what he is proud or ashamed of. Let us return to our researcher. As he ages he is pleased with his past achievement but he is also proud of having been an achiever. The fact he was an achiever is part of what defines him as a person and so is an essential part of him. It follows that past achievements can have essentialist or intrinsic value for persons.
What conclusions can be drawn from the above? It is generally acknowledged that playing sport has value because of its health benefits and I have argued it also has instrumental value by fostering some virtues. However if we accept the above it also has intrinsic value. In addition it would seem that the intrinsic value of sporting achievements is generally less than that from other achievements. The above also suggests that the use of enhancing drugs lowers the value of sporting achievements. Lastly even if our capacity for achievements becomes more modest as we age our past achievements retain some intrinsic value to us as long as we remain as a person.
- Gwen Bradford, 2015, Achievement, Oxford University Press.
- Bradford, Kindle location 1360.
- Martin Seligman, 2011, Flourish. Nicolas Brealey Publishing
No comments:
Post a Comment