Bracketed Morality In Sport
Travis M Haug & Nick Crawford
KIN
Debate Project
Intro:
We are staying away from Youth sport solely focusing on Collegiate and Elite level sports.
Statement:
A Bracketed Morality is an appropriate characteristic for Collegiate and Elite level sports.
Oxford Reference:
Bracketed Morality – The suspension, during competition, of the high-level of ethical morality necessary
for everyday life





Gives rise to Game reason theory
1st moral exchange that occurs in sport is different than everyday life
2nd not all action supportive of self-interest is morally appropriate
When people enter a sport they shift their perspective to egocentric reasoning
Does bracketed morality extend to behavior
Morality – Of, pertaining to, or concerned with principles of rules of right conduct or the distinction
between right and wrong; ethical
Defining the problem
What is sport?
Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines sport as “to play in a happy and lively way”
Google defines sport as “an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or
team competes against another or others for entertainment.”
Dictionary.com defines it as “an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess
and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, etc. diversion;
recreation; pleasant pastime.”
Bernard Suits –
Autotelic event or activity – An event or activity valued for itself
Instrumental Activity or event – event or activity valued not only or even primarily for itself but for some
further payoff that the event or activity is expected to provide
Game Reasoning and Interactional Morality (Bredemeier & Shields) FOR BRACKETED MORALITY

Sport is a world set apart from the world of everyday life
o When entering sport moral transformation in which egocentricity is redefined as
appropriate resulting in “bracketed morality”
o Reflection on Bracketed morality is game reasoning
o Haan’s model of interaction morality
Bracketed Morality In Sport




Travis M Haug & Nick Crawford
KIN
Debate Project
 It defines moral reasoning as embodied in moral action rather than abstracted
from a specific context
 reflects the development of capacities for inductive moral construction as
opposed to Kohlberg’s emphasis upon the deductive reasoning used to
determine moral judgment
 It is not grounded in a universal principle of justice that defines the right; rather,
Haan’s moral ground of respect for persons pertains to the procedures
employed in negotiating the situational good
 It represents a more flexible interpretation of structuralism that is not based on
a view of invariant, sequential, cognitively based moral stages
o Communication is at the heart of Haan’s model or moral action – She contends that
human exchange leads to the informal construction of intersubjective understandings
that regulate moral life
Authors prefer the distinction drawn by meier (1981), who defines sport as a subset of games
and states that games and sport may or may not also be characterized as play. Although the
present investigation focuses on reasoning about sport, we hypothesize that game reasoning is
relevant to all types of competitive games
Sport is separated from daily life both spatially and temporally
o Emphasize the temporary and nonconsequential nature of sport and allow for the
dissolution of the artificial inequity of game winners and losers by restoring players
normal life status as equalized moral agents following the games conclusion
o 2nd sport frees participants to bracket normal moral considerations allowing
concentration of decision-making power and moral responsibility in the roles of coaches
and officials.
o 3rd Game rules provide consensual external regulation – the need for players to engage
in moral exchange is reduced by a rule structure
 Rules equalize opportunity and safeguard the welfare of participants
o Although sport I framed differently than everyday life the separation is by no means
absolute
o Bredemeier and shields have posited that the separate or bracketed natre of sport
encourages a specific pattern of moral engagement.
Life Story moral dilemmas
o Whether to keep apromise and return some money needed by the protagonist to aid his
hungy kin; the other centers on a middle-aged married man who is involved with his
young secretary.
o Sport story: Female basketball player who must decide whether to help an endangered
opponent who has been playing dirty
o Tom: a football player who is told by his coach to try to injure an opposing halfback
Game Reasoning
o Authors Hypothesize that Bracketed morality is a positively sanctioned form of moral
balancing that may be contextually appropriate within the realms of competitive games
and sport because these unique contexts:
 Create an artificial scarce goal – winning
 Place participants’ interests in opposition – competing players or teams
Bracketed Morality In Sport

Travis M Haug & Nick Crawford
KIN
Debate Project
 Have no significant intended “real-life” implications – play is “time out”
 Possess consensual structure by which behavior is extremely regulated – rules,
officials
 The primary structure is the form of moral balance that an individual seeks to
achieve
 If we are both striving for fame and fortune – Why on earth would I
strive for a balance?
 “Football players let their pads do the talking” As stated in Bredemeier & Shields
 Moral dialogue and balancing occur in sport, but the competitive context and
limited channels for communication encourage moral adaptations
o Assimilative moral reasoning was used more to resovle sport than life dilemmas. In
sport, whereas accommodative and equilibrative reasoning was used significantly more
to resolved life than sport dilemmas
Discussion
o Egocentrism is the hallmark of immature reasoning in everyday life, but the sport realm
provides socially legitimated opportunities to suspend the usual requirement that
others’ interests be given equivalent consideration to those of the self
 The assimilative nature of this reasoning does not necessarily reflect a selfish
orientation; rather, the process of zero-sum competition is facilitated by each
party assuming self-interest as the primary focus
o
Bracketed Morality In Sport
Travis M Haug & Nick Crawford
KIN
Debate Project
Against Bracketed Morality – Outline



Sports as defined by “….” is physical activity that provides fun and enjoyment but also allows
individuals to seek challenge and pursue excellence
I argue that “bracketed morality” for participation in elite & collegiate level sports is not an
appropriate characteristic that should constitute this level of athletics
o Bracket Morality
o has implications (affecting physical and moral well-being) of participants
o Bracketed morality
 Pushes people to view sports as a means to an end
 Perpetuates gamesmanship
 And has consequences well after the game
Collegiate and Pro athletics are extremely competitive
o Stakes become high – Cause people to forget other reasons for participation
o Our society – is so focused on winning at all cost it has
 Corrupted the fun, enjoyment, and striving together in participation instead of
against
 If sport is all about winning….What is the point of playing sport?
o Sport is now all about external rewards
 Who has the best players, winning titles, and money
 This promotes what shields and bredemeier call decompetition
 Decompetiton is referring to sport as “going to war” or seeing the
opponent as the enemy
o Shields and Bredemeier say Competition or “contests” should be meaningful to both
observers and participants
 Their definition of competition is that it is a cooperation or partnership
 Don’t be misled by these words
 Competitions are interdependent activities
o Without one participant you would not have the other
o “opponents need each other to play the game”
 This strongly pushes back against bracketed morality
o Participants should seek personal excellence by striving with the
other participants instead of
o Going to battle or “becoming a different person on the field
o Do you think that collegiate and pro athletes are striving to make
each other better now?
 I don’t think so…It’s all about winning
 Reasons why this happens is because of
 A free scholarship, to “make it big”, and a hefty
paycheck
 This makes me believe that sport should be seen as more meaningful
o Bracketed Morality also perpetuates gamesmanship
 This win-at-all-cost viewpoint is the practice of winning games by questionable
methods without actually violating the rules
Bracketed Morality In Sport
o
o
o
o
Travis M Haug & Nick Crawford
KIN
Debate Project
 Gives athletes an egocentric perspective upon entering sport that is seen
as appropriate
 And this is in opposition to sportspersonship
 In gamesmanship, bracketed morality allows participants to bend the rules to
gain a strategic advantage
Think of coaching for example:
 Coaches are judged primarily on what? Wins and losses
 Coaches can then decide to bend the rules to recruit a student with marginal
academic standing or to look the other way when a star athlete misbehaves. –
Jameis Winston for example
This type of activity is causing coaches to focus primarily on winning at all cost, thus
ignoring some of the main values and basic ethical principles when necessary to achieve
the end goal “winning”
 It is coercing athletes to do anything necessary to strive for the scarce benefits
that few achieve instead of the basic benefits it’s designed to promote for all
 This leads into my next point…
Bracketed morality can affect participants well after the end of a game
 Bredemeier and Shields suggest that participants enter sport through a moral
transformation
 Allowing them to objectify their opponents
o Making it “OK” to intentionally cause harm or injury for strategic
gain
o Participants can even seek enjoyment from causing pain and
harm to opponents
 This is what Bandura would call moral disengagement
 Allowing participants to neglect their instinctive moral
values
 Also to justify immoral behaviors of Say
facemasking that wide receiver
I have a problem believing that this suspension of moral judgment is appropriate in any
form of athletics
 There should be no lesser expectation in sport than there is for everyday life
 Shouldn’t sports build character? If that were true, wouldn’t the highest levels
contain the most character?
 From Mike Tyson biting ears off to Richard Sherman’s post-game
interviews
o Sport is not building the type of character that we insist it
is…through bracketed morality
 Sports with bracketed morality is to our society what gladiators were to
Rome.
 Athletes are still human beings!
 Therefore morally appropriate behaviors should still be expected on the
playing fields
 Thank you
Bracketed Morality In Sport
Travis M Haug & Nick Crawford
KIN
Debate Project
Against Bracketed Morality – Negative Rebuttal – 2 minutes




Bracketed morality and commercialization makes sport become all about winning
o Winning is an important part of the game, but isn’t the moral values of the participants
equally as important?
 Don’t we want participants to gain values and pursue excellence by moral ways?
 Is it really “ok for athletes to intentionally cause harm and injury to other
participants? Wasn’t that participant who got facemasked in Nick’s argument
seeking the same personal excellence?
 Think about how many times the public has criticized athletes for using steroids,
blood doping, or using questionable methods to win….well bracketed morality
gave these athletes justification for their actions
Collegiate and professional sports are not all about “entertainment”
o Participants are seeking
 Challenge and have desire for competitive success
 Don’t these players have a right to strive for both and not to be objectified or
intentionally harmed?
Being unburdened of this extent of “bracketed morality” is a bad thing!
o There is no way we know for sure that it can be “turned off”
o Mitch Abrams suggests that players that play higher contact sports are desensitized by
the physical contact of their sport. They are trained to be aggressive and violent making
it difficult for them to turn it off in regular life.
o When athletes are placed on such a high pedestal, they get a mentality that they can do
anything that they want
 Which leads to violence and aggression off the field
Therefore Bracketed morality can be a very dangerous aspect of sport and I believe that it is not
appropriate for collegiate and professional sports
Negative Rebuttal – 1 minute
Nick is being extremely over dramatic but Athletes can be desensitized with sport!
o

A three-year study showed that while male student-athletes make up 3% of the
population on 10 division 1 college campuses, they account for 19% of sexual assaults
and 35% of domestic assaults on college campuses (Benedict/Crosset Study)
o Professional athletes are not punished by leagues, teams, or criminal justice systems as
harshly or consistently as the general public.
 Did you know that in 2013, of the 84 arrests between 2000 and 2013 for
domestic violence in the NFL, No player received more than a one-game
suspension?
Bracketed morality has implications on the physical and moral well-being of participants.
o promotes sport as a
 Means to an end
 Gamesmanship – and bending the rules
 And has consequences well after the game – especially if people get hurt from
objectification
o Therefore bracketed morality is not appropriate in collegiate and professional sport
Bracketed Morality In Sport
Travis M Haug & Nick Crawford
KIN
Debate Project
o
Coaches can “improve” their record by recruiting players who have marginal academic standing or by
not enforcing team policies on star athletes when they misbehave

Wouldn’t all players be unburdened if they each acted morally?
o If morality was consistently upheld in games, wouldn’t they be unburdened as they had
with bracketed morality?
 They would see each other as necessary for improvement
 They would strive together instead of against
o Whether they inhibit inhumane behavior or proactively perform humane acts
 This would promote a greater respect for each other, the game, and the
spectators
In fact, does the higher status and wealth of professional and elite athletes play a part in convicting
these athletes of charges off the field? Ray rice almost got away with a 2 game suspension….until
Gamesmanship VS. Sportsmanship


Gamesmanship
o Point is to Win
o Winning is everything
Sportsmanship
o Fair Play
o Integrity
o Striving together instead of against
Entertainment

Hockey Rink - Once the gloves come off
o Gladiators – Ancient Greece - Killing each other for entertainment?
o Mike Tyson -
Scarce Benefits vs. General Benefits


Scarce Benefits –
Basic Benefits -