Makalah Rview Jurnal Internasional

1. 1
MAKALAH REVIEW
JURNAL SPORT, PHILOSOPHY, AND THE QUEST FOR KNOWLEDGE
Dosen Pengampu :
Dr. Made Pramono, S.S. M.Hum.
Disusun Oleh :
Lailatul Rohmah
NIM. 20060484059
Kelas 2020B
UNIVERTAS NEGERI SURABAYA
FAKULTAS ILMU OLAHRAGA
JURUSAN PENDIDIKAN KESEHATAN DAN REKREASI
2020/2021

2. i
KATA PENGANTAR
Puji syukur kehadirat Tuhan Yang Maha Kuasa karena telah memberikan kesempatan
pada penulis untuk menyelesaikan makalah ini. Atas rahmat dan hidayah-Nya lah penulis dapat
menyelesaikan makalah yang berjudul Review Jurnal Sport, Philosophy, And The Quest For
Knowledge
.
Makalah yang berjudul Review Jurnal Sport, Philosophy, And The Quest For Knowledge
disusun guna memenuhi tugas dari Bapak Dr. Made Pramono, S.S. M.Hum. pada mata kuliah
Filsafat dan Sejarah Olahraga di Universitas Negeri Surabaya. Selain itu, penulis juga berharap
agar makalah ini dapat menambah wawasan bagi pembaca dari review jurnal Sport, Philosophy,
And The Quest For Knowledge.
Penulis mengucapkan terima kasih sebesar-besarnya kepada Bapak Dr. Made Pramono,
S.S. M.Hum. selaku dosen mata kuliah Psikologi. Penulis juga mengucapkan terima kasih pada
semua pihak yang telah membantu proses penyusunan makalah ini.
Penulis menyadari makalah ini masih jauh dari kata sempurna. Oleh karena itu, kritik dan
saran yang membangun akan penulis terima demi kesempurnaan makalah ini.
Kediri, 11 Maret 2021
Lailatul Rohmah

3. ii
DAFTAR ISI
KATA PENGANTAR.....................................................................................................................i
DAFTAR ISI...................................................................................................................................ii
BAB 1 ............................................................................................................................................. 1
JURNAL ........................................................................................................................................ 1
BAB 2 ............................................................................................................................................. 1
REVIEW JURNAL..................................................................................................................... 11
BAB 3 ........................................................................................................................................... 13
KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN ................................................................................................... 13
DAFTAR PUSTAKA.................................................................................................................. 14

4. 1
BAB 1
JURNAL
Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 2009, 36, 40-49
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Sport, Philosophy, and the Quest for Knowledge
Heather L. Reid
In his seminal work, Homo Ludens, Johan Huizinga argues persuasively that sport is a form of
play. This view is widely accepted among sport philosophers today, as evidenced by the use of
terms such as ‘nonserious,’ ‘autotelic,’ and ‘gratuitous’ to describe the subject of our study. At
the same time this play-paradigm seems at odds with the modern world, which takes sports very
seriously, puts them in the service of deliberate ends, and views them (or competition at least) as
essential for human thriving. Indeed our modern use of sport seems to better resemble
ancient Greece, where athletic contest (agōn) served specific political and educational goals.
Huizinga claims that the ancient Hellenes simply became unaware of their contests’ autotelic
character (5: 30–31); my own concern is that we moderns are becoming unaware of–or indifferent
to–sport’s contemporary ends.1 Insofar as we still value the social and educational potential of
sport in the modern world, we can benefit from a study of its corresponding function in the ancient
world. What my own study of these phenomena reveals is that sport’s social and
educational benefits derive not from its playful character, but from its philosophical origins as a
knowledge-seeking activity.
Like philosophy, democracy, and other forms of competitive truth seeking that emerged in
ancient Greece, athletic contests display the characteristics of authentic questioning, impartial
testing, and public demonstration of results; fea tures that endure in such modern practices as
courtroom trials and scientific exper iments. Hellenic sport was born with these knowledge-
seeking characteristics, not least because it was conceived in response to an emerging
philosophical recogni tion of the fallibility of humanity and its traditional hierarchies. By setting
up rational, impartial, and publicly observed selection methods, both athletics and philosophical
inquiry managed to subvert worldly power and authority, thereby fostering agreement among
diverse communities without suppressing individual ity. Later sport and philosophy were
adapted to the educational function of culti vating individual virtue (aretē) or, in modern
parlance, moral character. As we continue to pursue social and educational goals through sport,
it is important to understand how these functions were related in ancient times to sport’s philo
sophical characteristics. Indeed we may better put sport in the service of humanity today, by
viewing it not merely as playful, but also as philosophical; as an expres sion of what Aristotle
called the natural and universal human desire to learn and know (1: 980a).
The author <reid@morningside.edu> is with Morningside College, Sioux City, IA 51101.
40
Sport, Philosophy, and the Quest for Knowledge 41

5. 2
I. Contests of Truth: The Social Function
of Truth-Seeking Athletics
“Olympía, déspoin’ alatheías” (Olympia, mistress of truth). So begins Pindar’s eighth Olympian
Ode (10: pp. 136–7). The ancient association between Olympia and knowledge seeking derives
partly from the existence of an oracle at the site, but also from the less tangible sentiment that
athletic results from Olympia were reliable indicators of truth about the gods’ wishes and the
relative merits of ath
letes and their tribes. There was nothing new or revolutionary in the association of athletics and
truth. Our earliest accounts of sport-like activities (up to a millen nium before the Olympic
Games) among Mesopotamians, Egyptians, Assyrians, Minoans, and Hittites, show royals using
athletic display as public evidence for social standing and worthiness to lead. Rarely, if ever,
though was the worthiness of the ruler actually challenged.2 What was distinctive about Hellenic
athletics and Olympic style contests was that they were knowledge-seeking, rather
than presumption-affirming. Their outcomes were generally uncertain, they were gov
erned by impartial rules, and they were subject to public scrutiny. As a result, Hellenic athletics
were from the start subversive. But what they subverted specifically were dogmatic and
relativistic standards for truth (i.e., those controlled by worldly rank and power) and what they
promoted were more impar tial and universal standards, capable of settling disagreements among
diverse and even warring tribes. Philosophical inquiry emerges in 6th century Ionia as
an approach to studying nature that has similar characteristics and similar results. Having
encountered competing religious and mythological claims from neighbor ing cultures, the
Presocratic philosophers sought a more impartial and demon strable method of understanding
nature—one that bypassed worldly authority and social hierarchies. The dreams of athletic glory
still harbored by underprivileged youth are evidence that social subversion remains part of our
modern conception of sport. But sport’s power to challenge social hierarchies faces erosion–as
it always has–by those in power who would be subverted. To preserve sport’s socially
subversive function, we must appreciate its connection to authentic ques tioning, impartial
testing, and public display of evidence.
Uncertainty and Authentic Questioning
The Greek term ‘philosophia’, which literally means “love of wisdom” (9: p. 1980),3 seems to
have been coined in the 6th century BCE by Pythagoras, who used it to describe those rare
thinkers, like himself, who acknowledged not their wisdom but rather their ignorance (2: 1.12). It
was of course Socrates who made this conception of philosophy famous by declaring more than
a century later that his renowned “wisdom” derived precisely from the awareness that he
lacked knowledge. We cannot truly love and desire what we think we already possess; so we are
philosophers only as long as we pursue authentic questions with uncertain answers.4 Sport,
likewise, is philosophical only as long as it is actually open to finding answers which may conflict
with what people already believe. The contest must not be designed simply to affirm the status-
quo, or any other preferred out come: it has to reflect the spirit of really wanting to know. When
challengers boxed the pharaoh in Ancient Egypt, the question of who would win was neither
42 Reid

6. 3
authentic nor was its answer uncertain. Although such contests were intended to reassure
subjects of the pharaoh’s divine invincibility, they begged their own ques tion. Philosophical
sport begins with authentic questions derived from real uncer tainty about outcomes.5
But where did such “authentic questions” come from? What prompted Preso cratic
philosophy and contemporary athletics as described in Homer and practiced at Olympia to
embrace the uncertain, impartial, and public pursuit of truth? The answer quite simply is:
closely competing claims among divergent stakeholders. Mycenean funeral games, perhaps the
earliest form of philosophical sport, settled competing claims to the deceased’s property.
Patroclos’ funeral games as depicted in Homer’s Iliad take this concept further by negotiating
Achilles’ and Agamem non’s competing claims to honor and authority. Later, at Olympia, the
religious puzzle of who should have the honor of lighting the sacrificial flame came to
be solved by a simple footrace from the edge of the sanctuary to the altar.5 And in 6th century
Ionia, increased contact among diverse cultural traditions in the absence of overarching
authority prompted the development a more universal method of truth-seeking.6 It shouldn’t be
a surprise that the method they invented (now known as philosophy and early natural science)
resembled athletic games, since all were responses to competing truth-claims.
What was distinctive—and subversive—about the athletic and philosophical methods of
truth-seeking is that the answering of the questions they ask is dele gated to the contest rather
than tradition or authority. In this way they exhibit the characteristically philosophical quality of
uncertainty, or acknowledged igno rance. Although modern sport no longer addresses questions
about religious favor or worthiness to lead, it still negotiates competing claims to excellence and
often decides the distribution of cash, prizes, and educational opportunities. It is impor tant,
therefore, to remain sensitive to the authenticity of our questions by keeping social
presumptions from compromising the integrity of the contest. The athletic success of
marginalized classes and races certainly has helped to subvert modern social hierarchies, and it
is widely recognized that preemptive exclusion of par ticipants based on class or race runs
counter to the logic of philosophical contest. But exclusion based on sex and inequities derived
from financial disparity persist in sport, drawing little criticism, perhaps because they reflect our
presumptions about athletic excellence. Sport’s ability to subvert social hierarchies requires
first that we honor its philosophical heritage of authentic questioning.
Open and Impartial Testing
The very act of authentic questioning displays intellectual humility with respect to the truth, but
for sport to be philosophical, humility must also be reflected in the construction of the test. If
one’s method for resolving disputes is simply to let the local sovereign decide, or even to set
armies to battle, one hasn’t fully acknowl
edged the limitations of the human mind. Insofar as “truth” is understood as some thing
universal and eternal, knowledge of such truths must be reliable and demon strable; not just a
matter of belief, persuasion, or worldly power (military, political, or otherwise). As Heraclitus
taught us about the river, the world of senses is con stantly in flux;7 if we are to know something
universal we must therefore approach it through reason. This is why the Pythagoreans sought to
understand the kosmos
Sport, Philosophy, and the Quest for Knowledge 43
using impartial criteria such as number and proportion.8 It is also why Olympia’s judges and
organizers (the so-called hellanodikae), enforced contest rules very strictly while rejecting all

7. 4
subjectively-judged events. Since their goal was to ded icate truly pleasing victors to a supremely
wise god, their own biases and prefer ences couldn’t be allowed to interfere. Impartial
mechanisms for truth-seeking act to neutralize the effects of human fallibility and worldly bias,
providing equal
opportunity for diverse possibilities: athletes, ideas, even hypotheses. The basic features of
Olympic-style sports, such as common starting lines and level playing fields, exhibit the
philosophical drive for rational impartiality. Already in Homer’s Bronze Age, the fair
construction of contests is emphasized. In the chariot race, for example, there is no permanent
track, so a common starting line is literally drawn in the sand and the reliable elder Phoenix is
sent off to ref eree the turnaround point. The starting positions are determined by drawing
lots, and when young Antilochos recklessly cuts off Menelaos at a narrow stream crossing, a
dispute erupts over the validity of the results. A serious discussion and redistribution of prizes
ensues until the community is satisfied with the end result. The Homeric creed “to always be the
best and outdo others” (4: 11.784) generated authentic questions about who was the best. In the
context of hand-to-hand combat, the truth of a warrior’s aretē is important, and contests
provided a rela tively impartial mechanism not just to affirm, but to impartially test it.9 Insofar
as the community’s welfare depends on contest results (whether they are imagined to represent
god favor or military prowess), it is essential to sport’s social and philo sophical functions that
contests be constructed and conducted impartially. Modern sports rules generally respect the
principles of impartial testing; competitors even switch sides in field and court games just in
case some advan tage has slipped through the cracks. On the other hand, the competitive and
often greed-fueled drive to gain any advantage possible sets up an antagonistic relation ship
between competitors and officials that often leaves the purpose of the contest behind. Just as
with scientific experiments, the value of the results depends on the integrity of the test. Not only
must competitors obey the contest rules, officials must meticulously enforce them. The
proliferation of doping in the 1980s and 1990s was due not only to unscrupulous competitors,
but also to financially-inter ested foxes guarding the drug-testing hen house; it took the
establishment of an impartial and independent drug-testing body (WADA) to gain any real
traction on the issue. To be sure a variety of stakeholders can serve their interests though sport.
But the goods that all of us seek—results, revenue, honor, entertainment— depend for their
value ultimately upon the integrity and impartiality of the contest.
Public Display of Evidence
The third characteristic of philosophical sport is public observation of the contest and the effect
this has on their acceptance of the results.10 Rooting for one’s favorite athlete or team is as much
a part of sports as arguing for one’s thesis is part of philosophical inquiry. In neither practice,
however, should the winner be determined by who supports it or even how many support it.
Rather, each candi
date should be subjected to the rational and impartial test before everyone’s eyes. The public’s
interest in accurate results requires that popular opinion defer to
44 Reid
demonstrable evidence. Public demonstration leads to acceptance of contest results by fostering
consensus without appeal to tradition, authority, faith, or violence. Indeed the unifying and
pacifying effects of athletic games were thought to contribute to the Achaean victory over the
Trojans and the Hellenic victory over the Persians. Olympia’s sacred truce made the Games a rare

8. 5
opportunity for diverse (and often warring) tribes to come together for a common cause of
worship. Intellectuals came to exchange ideas just as boxers came to exchange blows. Indeed
intertribal contact at Olympia fostered the economic development of trade, as well as the political
negotiation of peace.
But getting rivals to agree on anything—even to imagine that they could agree—takes more
than a safe time and place. It takes common interest in a common cause. Since the worshippers at
Olympia had a common interest in selecting victors who would please the relevant god—they
took a common inter
est in the validity of contest results. In this regard, nothing was left to chance. A month-long pre-
Olympic training camp was held at Elis under the supervision of holy-men to assure the
worthiness of every candidate. At the Games competitors were literally stripped of their cultural
differences and socially-constructed inequalities and a stadium was built so that everyone could
observe the process. No doubt political rivalries were played out in the Games, but the public
scrutiny facilitated acceptance of the results even when they subverted personal preference or
conventional wisdom. Most important, the cooperation expressed in the Games paved the way for
economic and military cooperation without subjection to a single authority. Through the use of
such mechanisms as blind review and public presentation, philosophers and scientists engage in
a similar kind of competitive cooperation for the common cause of truth, one ideally independent
of power, politics, cultural ideology.
Modern sport is still subject to widespread public scrutiny, albeit increasingly through the
medium of television. What has changed is the influence on the con test of unseen factors such
as doping. In some sports this has eroded public confi dence in the validity of results and thereby
reduced their unifying power. An excellent example is the Tour de France, which found a
winner in Lance Arm strong who was able to unify diverse people in the common cause of
fighting cancer. After Armstrong’s retirement, cycling’s long-term doping problems
were unmasked and the sport has been scrambling to restore its public credibility and hence its
value to sponsors. Even Armstrong harnessed his comeback bid to a respected dope-testing
expert who promised to monitor the champion and place his test results on the Internet for all to
see. Once a sport loses public credibility, its potential for social subversion dries up. Both the
impartiality of the test and the authenticity of the question are drawn into doubt, and we regress
to the pharaoh’s boxing match with its dispassionate and incredulous spectators. In the
modern world, sport remains a worthy way to challenge social hierarchies and assump tions, but
only insofar we values and preserve its ancient philosophical structure. Sport must be open to
authentic questions, secure the impartiality of its tests, and strive for public transparency in its
results.
Sport, Philosophy, and the Quest for Knowledge 45
II. Contests of Virtue: The Educational Function of Ancient Athletics
In Ancient Greece, the social function of athletics was already well-developed by the time that
gymnastics became an integral part of education for excellence (aretē). Confusion abounded even
in Plato’s time about how exercises apparently focused on the body could build the moral strength
we like to call ‘character.’ No doubt it was the youth’s obsession with sports that led Socrates into
Athens’ gym
nasia where he learned and adapted tricks from the athletes’ trade to turn young men’s souls
away from victory and toward wisdom. But this philosophical jour ney, at least for Plato, does
not leave athletics behind. Rather the force of character revealed and developed through sport

9. 6
seems essential for those who would become philosopher-kings in the Republic. This is because
the body (sōma) was to the ancient mind inanimate. Intentional physical movement was a
product and expres sion of the mind/soul (psychē). The fit athletic body, as a product of
voluntary and intentional movement, is merely testament to the aretē of the soul. Athletics func
tioned within ancient education not merely as physical training, but as a way to cultivate strong,
truth-seeking souls that would ultimately serve their communi ties. Their goals were not so
different from ours; let us observe their methods.
Socratic Contest
It is well known that Socrates turned the natural investigations of the Presocratics toward the
explicitly educational ends of moral philosophy. Less well known are the connections between
the Socratic method known as elenchos and athletic con test. Plato’s persistent use of athletic
settings and metaphors is more than literary window-dressing. The Socratic dialogues exhibit
the same characteristics of truth seeking as athletics described above. Like competitive sport,
they expose imper fections, test for improvement, and provide public evidence of their
findings. Socrates adapts this athletic framework, along with its attendant lust for
victory (philonikia), away from the relativistic goal of defeat and toward the idealistic goals of
truth and virtue, that is, philosōphia.
Socrates was put on trial for corrupting the youth by publicly exposing local wise men’s
ignorance. The social subversion already associated with Greek athletics was certainly part of his
aim. Indeed he compares his “labors” in Apology to those of the athletic Heracles, who liberated
the Greeks from onerous monsters and tyrants (22a). But Socrates’ shame game (indeed the verb
for Socratic examination, elenchō, means to disgrace or put to shame) has the
explicitly educational function of motivating Athenian youths to inquire for themselves rather
than pay sophists for gimmicky answers.11 Just as athletes are motivated by losing, or at least the
risk of losing, to spend long hours in training and preparation, Socrates’ disclosure of ignorance
is designed to motivate serious philosophical inquiry. In this sense it is a benefit and he describes
it as a service both to the city and to the god, adding that the city should reward him like an
Olympic victor,
46 Reid
since champions only make the city think itself happier, whereas Socrates offers them a chance
at true happiness (36e).
This idea that agonistic struggle (with its shaming and defeat) can be per ceived as an
educational service remains central to justifications for scholastic athletics today. Socrates’ use
of dialectic clearly aims at the improvement of the individual. “You love to win, Socrates,” says
Callicles in Gorgias (515b); it is a charge the philosopher does not deny. But Socrates is less
interested in winning the argument, than he is in winning over his interlocutors to the practice of
phi losophy. He exemplifies–if he doesn’t invent–the friendship aspect of competi tion,
explaining his challenge to Callicles as a test of the soul analogous to a stone that tests gold
(486c).12 Socrates’ elenchos is also described as an intellectual undressing comparable to
athletic nudity and aimed explicitly at psychic improve ment.13 He insists that everyone
participate, chastising the aged Theodorus for refusing to enter the philosophical conversation
by comparing him to a voyeur at a Spartan wrestling school. Replies Theodorus, “The Spartans
tell one either to strip or to go away; but you seem rather to be playing the part of Antaeus.

10. 7
You don’t let any comer go till you have stripped him and made him wrestle with you in the
argument.” Socrates’ response is telling:
That, Theodorus, is an excellent simile to describe what is the matter with me. But I am more
of a fiend for exercise than Sciron and Antaeus. I have met with many and many a Heracles
and Theseus in my time, mighty men of words; and they have well battered me. But for all
that I don’t retire from the field, so terrible a lust has come upon me for these exercises. You
must not begrudge me this, either, try a fall with me and we shall both be the
better. (Theaetetus 169bc)
Importantly, and unlike today’s scholastic sports, submission of oneself to the contest is
required—but all contestants are expected to benefit, not just the winners.
As philosophers we value the challenge and even refutation of our arguments. Why is public
discourse about the value of failure in sports so rare? Misapprehen sion of athletic goals—even
in educational settings—explains this phenomenon. Colleges and universities use sports as a
means to financial ends and students do the same. Since financial (but not educational) results
depend on winning, its pri macy in that environment goes largely unquestioned. Public risking
and losing, on the other hand, the value of which is educational (but not financial) is
generally avoided—and at the expense of moral education.
Struggling With Souls in Plato
In Plato’s Republic, athletics are woven into education explicitly for the purpose of developing
souls capable of philosophy and, eventually, community leadership. The authentic question here
addressed by athletics comes from uncertainty about who should lead. And the role athletics plays
in answering that question is not simply the testing of hypotheses, but the testing and selection of
souls that can withstand the rigors of mathematical and philosophical education aimed at
an understanding of the Good. Plato also expects athletic soul training to turn
Sport, Philosophy, and the Quest for Knowledge 47
individuals’ interests away from personal pleasure and material wealth in favor of public service.
Indeed the guardians and philosopher kings will not have personal property or individual
families.
The aretē sought in Plato’s Republic is described as the healthful and harmo nious
organization of the intellectual, spirited, and appetitive parts of the soul. Plato seems to think
athletics can achieve this because they require the intellect to apprehend the rules of the game
and then to recruit the spirit and appetite to its cause. In another dialogue, Phaedrus, this
virtuous harmony is illustrated by the athletic metaphor of a two-horse chariot in which the
intellect drives a noble and spirited horse alongside the strong but less obedient appetitive horse.
Since ath letic success depends on the taming of selfish appetites and the directing of honor or
spirit toward the noble ends apprehended by the intellect, sport could train the soul for higher
education and ultimately public service. Significantly, Plato doesn’t neglect any element of the
soul in his account. Appetite and spirit are needed to climb the arduous path from the cave of
appearance to the divine light of truth— and they prepare for this expedition through athletic
competition.
Athletics in the Republic are neither playful nor autotelic. Plato uses them explicitly to train
souls and select a social elite who will go on to distinguish themselves in academics and,

11. 8
ultimately, public service. Candidates are to be kept “under observation from childhood,” and
subjected to “labors (ponous), pains, and contests (agōnas)” so that they may be tested “more
thoroughly than gold is tested by fire” (413cd). Our modern ideas that sports are a means of
recreation, entertainment, or personal and institutional income are all negated in Republic by the
abandonment of appetitive desires (which include wealth as well as physical pleasure). Modern
scholastic sports, by contrast, are generally pursued for profit and at the expense of academics
and public service. Whereas the primacy of wealth is unquestioned today, in Plato’s Republic the
most prestigious careers are based on public service and require the abandonment of personal
ambitions and often one’s family and property. As seriously as sports are taken in
educational institutions today, I suspect Plato would lament that we don’t take them
seriously enough to put them explicitly and intentionally in the service of our most impor tant
social functions.
Conclusion
Some say that we should look to Rome rather than Greece to see our own athletic values reflected
in antiquity. There, they say, sports were primarily entertainment enjoyed by masses of inactive
spectators and exploited by politicians who sought public favor. But even the bloody spectacle of
gladiator fights preserved the truth
seeking and educational functions that connect sport and philosophy. While the Emperor saluted
the Roman spectators, who were seated in tiers according to social class, the contest itself
challenged that hierarchy. It gave the lowly “social ly-dead” gladiator the opportunity to prove
his social worth by prevailing in a publicly observed and strictly regulated test of relevant
virtues. The condemned gladiator who received the wooden sword of freedom from the emperor
as the community shouted its approval stands as an enduring symbol of sport’s ancestral ties to
philosophy.
48 Reid
Today, as philosophers of sport seek to critically examine and improve ath letic competition
in our world, they should remember to recognize the ancient resemblance between sport and
philosophical inquiry. This connection recalls the important social and educational functions of
ancient Greek athletics and it chal lenges us to preserve the integrity of sport as a knowledge-
seeking practice capa ble of serving noble human ends. We should appreciate sport’s capacity
for social subversion as well as its potential for individual education. This requires the humility
to ask authentic questions about hierarchy and authority and the courage to let the contest
answer them impartially without manipulation from worldly interests and hierarchies. Finally,
we need to preserve the public’s confidence in the results—enforcing the rules of the contest no
less rigorously than a scientific study. After all sport, philosophy, and science all share
knowledge-seeking char acteristics. Sport philosophers may preserve the social and educational
value of athletics if we view sport not just as a form of play, but also as a form of knowl edge
seeking—one still capable of serving social and educational goals, as it did in Ancient Greece.
Notes
1. Huizinga’s conception of play turns out to be so broad that I think he can plausibly
include Greek agōn within it. What we need to avoid is a narrower conception of play that

12. 9
ultimately denies or ignores sport’s potential (in the ancient or modern world) as an important
educational and political tool.
2. Donald Kyle (8: p. 37) describes these earliest contests as “fields of play on which status was
defined and social orders were (re)constituted.” He notes, however, that competition was rarely
open and equal. Superhuman emperors and Egyptian pharaohs could not risk losing.
3. Sport,’ by contrast, is a modern term that derives from the Anglo-French desporter,
which means to divert or amuse. This etymological heritage helps to explain the focus on play in
the philosophy of sport literature. In Homo Ludens, Johan Huizinga claims that play is older
than culture itself (5: p. 1). By focusing on Greek athletics, I am not denying this claim, but
rather looking to the intentionally cultural practice of sport.
4. This is how Aristotle (1: 982b12–21) distinguishes the first Ionian philosophers from
the myth-tellers that came before them. He says they believed they were ignorant and pursued
phi losophy to escape that ignorance; preferring reason and evidence to the traditional faith
and storytelling.
5. This is based on a passage in Philostratos (Gym. 5). For the latest on the scholarly debate over
the passage, ser Valavanis (12: pp. 141–5).
6. In fact the Ionian intellectual revolution was based upon political, social, and
religious changes described by Kirk, Raven and Schofield as a transition “away from the closed
tradi tional society (which in its archetypal form is an oral society in which the telling of tales is
an important instrument of stability and analysis) and toward an open society in which the
values of the past become relatively unimportant and radically fresh opinions can be formed
both of the community itself and of its expanding environment” (7: p. 74). More specifically in
Ionia this included material wealth and the opportunity for contact with other cultures such as
Sardis and Egypt (7: p. 75).
7. Heraclitus was famous for saying that you can’t step in the same river twice. On the reli
ability of reason, see (3: p. 27).
Sport, Philosophy, and the Quest for Knowledge 49
8. The Milesians sought a single substance underlying all things. The Greek term kosmos, means
not only universe but order. The general idea of Pythagoreanism was to impose order
on disorder. Numerical philosophy emphasized proportion and a common standard by which
all things could be measured/ordered. See (3: p. 106).
9. Says Kyle (8: pp. 56, 68) of the Homeric era: “Contests were a mechanism of status
definition. . . . [In the Odyssey] sport clarifies status relationships (and here ethnicities as
well) and furthers the hero’s reintegration and return to society.
10. This is implied in the common roots of the words agōn (contest) and ‘agora’ (market
place).
11. In addition, in writing aporetic dialogues, mightn’t Plato be attempting to produce the
same effect among his readers? It makes particular sense that Plato should have portrayed
Socrates defeating rival educators in Athens. After all, Plato had his Academy to promote.
12. Since friends are by definition those who seek the benefit or improvement of their
friends, the competitor’s challenge is a form of friendship. See Hyland (1978).

13. 10
13. This is suggested when Theaetetus is asked to “show himself” for Socrates’
examination (Theaetetus 145b). Socrates then scolds Theodorus for refusing to enter the
conversation, asking him whether it would be right, were he visiting a Spartan wrestling-school,
“to sit and watch other men exercising naked—some of them not much to look at—and refuse to
strip yourself alongside of them, and take your turn of letting people see what you look like?”
(162b).
References
1. Aristotle. “Metaphysics.” In The Complete Works of Aristotle, 2 vols, J. Barnes (Ed.). New
Jersey: Princeton U.P., 1984.
2. Laertius, Diogenes. Lives of Eminent Philosophers, vol. I, translated by R.D.
Hicks. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1972.
3. Hermann, Arnold. To Think Like God. Las Vegas, NV: Paramenides Publishing, 2004.
4. Homer. The Iliad. Trans. Robert Fagles. New York: Penguin, 1990. 5. Huizinga, J. Homo
Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Boston: Beacon Press, 1955.
6. Hyland, Drew A. “Competition and Friendship.” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport V (1978):
27-37.
7. Kirk, Raven, Schofield, G.S., Raven, J.E., and Schofield, M. The Presocratic Philoso phers.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.
8. Kyle, Donald G. Sport and Spectacle in the Ancient World. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2007.
9. Little, W., Fowler, H., and Coulson, J. The Oxford Universal Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford
U.P., 1955.
10. Pindar. Olympian Odes, Pythian Odes. Trans. William H. Race. Cambridge, MA: Har vard
University Press, 1997.
11. Plato. Complete Works. Ed. John M. Cooper. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997. 12. Valavanis,
Panos. “Thoughts on the Historical Origins of the Olympic Games and the Cult of Pelops in
Olympia.” Nikephoros, 19, 2006, 137–152.

14. 11
BAB 2
REVIEW JURNAL
Judul Sport, Philosophy, and the Quest for Knowledge
Pengarang Heather L. Reid
Nama Jurnal Journal of the Philosophy of Sport
Volume, Issue,
Tahun, Halaman
Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 2009, 36, 40-49
© 2009 Human Kinetics, Inc
Tujuan Penelitian Mendekripsikan bahwa olahraga merupakan bentuk permainan yang
mencakup filsafat dan demokrasi serta untuk memberikan wawasan
Metode Penelitian Metode penelitian kausal komparatif
Prosedur Dengan menetapkan metode seleksi yang rasional, tidak memihak, dan
diamati secara publik, baik atletik maupun penyelidikan filosofis
berhasil menumbangkan kekuasaan dan otoritas duniawi, dengan
demikian mendorong kesepakatan di antara komunitas yang beragam
tanpa menekan itik individu. Kemudian olahraga dan filosofi
disesuaikan dengan fungsi pendidikan untuk mengembangkan
kebajikan individu (aretē) atau, dalam bahasa modern, karakter moral.
Saat kita terus mengejar tujuan sosial dan pendidikan melalui olahraga,
penting untuk memahami bagaimana fungsi-fungsi ini terkait di zaman
kuno dengan karakteristik filosofis olahraga.
Hasil dan
Pembahasan
1. Konsepsi permainan Huizinga ternyata begitu luas sehingga saya
pikir dia secara masuk akal dapat memasukkan bahasa Yunani agōn di
dalamnya. Yang perlu kita hindari adalah konsep permainan yang lebih
sempit yang pada akhirnya menyangkal atau mengabaikan potensi
olahraga (di dunia kuno atau modern) sebagai alat pendidikan dan
politik yang penting.
2. Donald Kyle (8: p. 37) menggambarkan kontes paling awal ini
sebagai "bidang permainan di mana status ditentukan dan tatanan sosial
dibentuk (kembali)." Dia mencatat, bagaimanapun, bahwa persaingan
jarang terbuka dan setara. Kaisar manusia super dan firaun Mesir tidak
bisa mengambil risiko kehilangan.
3. Olahraga, 'sebaliknya, adalah istilah modern yang berasal dariAnglo-
Prancis keturunan, yang berarti mengalihkan atau menghibur. Warisan
etimologis ini membantu menjelaskan fokus pada permainan dalam
filosofi literatur olahraga. Dalam Homo Ludens, Johan Huizinga
mengklaim bahwa permainan lebih tua dari budaya itu sendiri (5: p. 1).
Dengan berfokus pada atletik Yunani, saya tidak menyangkal klaim ini,
melainkan melihat pada praktik budaya olahraga yang disengaja.
4. Inilah cara Aristoteles (1: 982b12–21) membedakan filsuf Ionia
pertama dari pencerita mitos yang datang sebelum mereka. Dia
mengatakan mereka percaya bahwa mereka bodoh dan mengejar phi
losophy untuk melarikan diri dari ketidaktahuan itu; lebih memilih
alasan dan bukti daripada kepercayaan tradisional dan penceritaan.

15. 12
5. Ini didasarkan pada sebuah bagian di Philostratos (Gym. 5). Untuk
yang terbaru tentang debat ilmiah atas bagian tersebut, ser Valavanis
(12: hlm. 141–5).
6. Faktanya, revolusi intelektual Ionia didasarkan pada perubahan
politik, sosial, dan agama yang dijelaskan oleh Kirk, Raven dan
Schofield sebagai transisi “menjauh dari masyarakat tradisional
tertutup (yang dalam bentuk pola dasar adalah masyarakat lisan di
mana penceritaan dongeng adalah instrumen penting untuk stabilitas
dan analisis) dan menuju masyarakat terbuka di mana nilai-nilai masa
lalu menjadi relatif tidak penting dan opini-opini segar yang radikal
dapat dibentuk baik dari komunitas itu sendiri maupun tentang
lingkungannya yang berkembang ”(7: p. 74 ). Lebih khusus lagi di
Ionia ini termasuk kekayaan materi dan kesempatan untuk
berhubungan dengan budaya lain seperti Sardis dan Mesir (7: hal 75).
7. Heraclitus terkenal karena mengatakan bahwa Anda tidak dapat
menginjak sungai yang sama dua kali. Tentang reliabilitas alasan, lihat
(3: hlm. 27).
Kesimpulan Saat ini, sebagai filsuf olahraga berusaha untuk memeriksa secara kritis
dan meningkatkan persaingan atletik di dunia kita, mereka harus ingat
untuk mengenali kemiripan kuno antara olahraga dan penyelidikan
filosofis. Hubungan ini mengingatkan fungsi sosial dan pendidikan
yang penting dari atletik Yunani kuno dan itu menantang kita untuk
menjaga integritas olahraga sebagai praktik pencarian pengetahuan
yang mampu melayani tujuan kemanusiaan yang mulia. Kita harus
menghargai kapasitas olahraga untuk subversi sosial serta potensinya
untuk pendidikan individu. Ini membutuhkan kerendahan hati untuk
mengajukan pertanyaan otentik tentang hierarki dan otoritas dan
keberanian untuk membiarkan kontes menjawabnya secara tidak
memihak tanpa manipulasi dari kepentingan dan hierarki duniawi.
Terakhir, kita perlu menjaga kepercayaan publik terhadap hasil —
menegakkan aturan kontes tidak kurang dari studi ilmiah.
Bagaimanapun juga olahraga, filosofi, dan sains semuanya berbagi
karakteristik pencarian pengetahuan. Para filsuf olahraga dapat
mempertahankan nilai sosial dan pendidikan atletik jika kita
memandang olahraga tidak hanya sebagai bentuk permainan, tetapi
juga sebagai bentuk pencarian pengetahuan — yang masih mampu
melayani tujuan sosial dan pendidikan, seperti yang terjadi di Yunani
Kuno.
Keunggulan Alat yang digunakan dalam penelitian berupa puisi ini mudah
digunakan oleh subjek penelitian
Kekurangan Menggunakan durasi waktu yang terlalu lama
Memerlukan banyak analisis

16. 13
BAB 3
KESIMPULAN DAN SARAN
3.1 Kesimpulan
Jurnal diatas membahas serta mendekripsikan bahwa olahraga merupakan bentuk
permainan yang mencakup filsafat dan demokrasi serta untuk memberikan wawasan
3.2 Saran
Sebagai penulis saya menyadari bahwa masih banyakkekurangan di dalammakalah ini.
Untuk kedepannya penulis akan menjelaskan secara detail dari sumber yang lebih
banyak.

17. 14
DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Reid, H. L. (2009). Sport, Philosophy, and the Quest for Knowledge. Journal of the Philosophy
of Sport, 40-49.