Is Sport Woo?

[Undesired Walrus]

The common statement put towards Dawkins is 'People need religion'. He dismisses is eloquently and in a convincing manner.

Put thinking of football, I found a very large spanner in the works.

Is sport not irrational? Does it not breed needless hostilities between one group of people and the other? Indeed, is it not utterly comparable with religion? With no football, we would have no British rioters at every world cup. Could there be anything more needless than these rioters? People have been killed for supporting the other side.

Children are not safe from being labled a 'QPR fan' or an 'Arsenal fan'. Their parents even buy them small club shirts and socks. Is this not wicked?

Hitchens comes on the BBC and says he wishes to ban football. It does nothing but breed hostility and irrational presumptions about your own team. The presenter replies that it gets a lot of children out of the house and does great good for the world. Hitchens replies that a short run around the block is good enough every morning. 'What possible good comes from it?' he asks. He goes on to ask if they can find one person who could not be as healthy and happy as someone who plays irrational sports. You cannot do it he says.

We are informed by the 'Boot Delusion' that football makes statements about the world that are simply not true. My team is better than yours, my team is the best. You stick to your team even though it is awful. It is not founded on evidence .

I'm playing an on-and-off devil's advocate here, but it is an interesting question I believe.

Surely, surely sport is irrational, but needed? As I like to watch it. Are we not being hypocrites?

[Fnord]

Now where have I read this before?

;)

[Gregory]

We are informed by the 'Boot Delusion' that football makes statements about the world that are simply not true. My team is better than yours, my team is the best. You stick to your team even though it is awful. It is not founded on evidence .

I think your analogy breaks down here. The false statements that religion makes are central to it. For example, you cannot be a Christian without believing the false statement, "There is a God."

On the other hand, it's perfectly possible to be a sports fan without believing any of those false statements; my dad, for example, watches soccer, football, basketball, and baseball, but he isn't the sort of sports fan who makes claims about what team is the "best"; he just likes watching people play ball.

Therefore, it is impossible to be a Christian without believing false things; but it is not impossible to be a sports fan without believing false things.

[Meadmaker]

Therefore, it is impossible to be a Christian without believing false things; but it is not impossible to be a sports fan without believing false things.

Playing Devil's advocate here, but what the sports fan believes is that it somehow matters to him what team wins. That isn't quite the same thing as believing in Jesus' miracles, but the OP point is still worthwhile. People identify with "their" teams, and that identification is surely irrational.*

I think it points out something important. We are irrational in some ways. Tribal identification isn't all that rational, but it is a real part of us. We can't just snap our fingers and do away with it, whether it expresses itself as being a sports fan, a patriot, or a religious zealot.



*It is especially irrational if you, like me, are a fan of the Chicago Cubs. I would like to point out that the Cubs have won the World Series every time it has been played in a year ending in '08. This is our year!

[A Christian Sceptic]

Are you wondering if a sport is irrational or some sports fans irrational?

Are all games irrational then? What about solitaire? chess? Xbox?

Or only games with opponents? Or only games with physical exertion and movement?

Please elaborate. Thanks.

[vexed]

Surely, surely sport is irrational, but needed? As I like to watch it. Are we not being hypocrites?

Who is this 'we' you are referring to?

I find watching sports to be completely pointless, hence I don't watch sports. So at the very least I'm not being a hypocrtie.

[Wowbagger]

Sportsmanship is not woo. Ideally, participation in sports should foster good, sportsmanship-like manners. Perhaps modern sports have strayed from that, a bit? If so, it is not sports that is the problem, merely the inefficencies of its current implementations.

Sports provide a relatively safer framework for dealing with our natural aggressive feelings. At least safer than all-out war, which might go on the rise if not for sports.

There certainly is some woo in sports. But, that does not mean all of sports is woo. There is also some woo in the field of medical treatment, after all.

There may even be some harm in the "my team is better than yours" mentality, if taken too seriously. But, that is also separate from the idea of sports, itself, being woo.

Just a couple of my cents on the topic.

[Darth Rotor]

The common statement put towards Dawkins is 'People need religion'. He dismisses is eloquently and in a convincing manner.

Put thinking of football, I found a very large spanner in the works.

Is sport not irrational? Does it not breed needless hostilities between one group of people and the other? Indeed, is it not utterly comparable with religion? With no football, we would have no British rioters at every world cup. Could there be anything more needless than these rioters? People have been killed for supporting the other side.

Children are not safe from being labled a 'QPR fan' or an 'Arsenal fan'. Their parents even buy them small club shirts and socks. Is this not wicked?

Hitchens comes on the BBC and says he wishes to ban football. It does nothing but breed hostility and irrational presumptions about your own team. The presenter replies that it gets a lot of children out of the house and does great good for the world. Hitchens replies that a short run around the block is good enough every morning. 'What possible good comes from it?' he asks. He goes on to ask if they can find one person who could not be as healthy and happy as someone who plays irrational sports. You cannot do it he says.

We are informed by the 'Boot Delusion' that football makes statements about the world that are simply not true. My team is better than yours, my team is the best. You stick to your team even though it is awful. It is not founded on evidence .

I'm playing an on-and-off devil's advocate here, but it is an interesting question I believe.

Surely, surely sport is irrational, but needed? As I like to watch it. Are we not being hypocrites?
No, not hypocrites, merely humans, who have a social need for tribal champions. Football clubs provide that. The dead bodies in the riots are collateral damage sustained, and accepted, as acceptable elements of that process and that need.

DR

[Undesired Walrus]

Sportsmanship is not woo. Ideally, participation in sports should foster good, sportsmanship-like manners.

As does religion would say many religous folks.

Perhaps modern sports have strayed from that, a bit? If so, it is not sports that is the problem, merely the inefficencies of its current implementations.

As does religion would say many religous folks.

Sports provide a relatively safer framework for dealing with our natural aggressive feelings.

Again, many would say the same for religion.

[Gregory]

Playing Devil's advocate here, but what the sports fan believes is that it somehow matters to him what team wins. That isn't quite the same thing as believing in Jesus' miracles, but the OP point is still worthwhile. People identify with "their" teams, and that identification is surely irrational

But what I'm saying is that that's not inevitable. When I watch tennis, for example, I rarely even know which player is which, never mind caring who wins Granting that sports can involve an irrational attachment to a team, it doesn't have to. Whereas it's hard to imagine a theistic religion that doesn't, simply by nature of being theistic, have to involve irrational elements. So they're not quite parallel.

[slingblade]

Okay, hold on a sec. Allow me to think aloud, as it were.

Does "sport" consist of or make false/misleading/unfalsifiable claims? (This being but one way we classify woo.)

Certain aspects of sport...yes. I had a rather eye-opening thought a couple of years back: my husband loves sports, or rather, loves watching them. Being from Georgia, he might have been thought a pretty strong fan of Georgia teams, such as the Braves, or the Falcons.

He was a Braves fan for many years, but when they kept getting in the playoffs over and over, only to lose through stupid mistakes, he dumped them and became a Colorado Rockies fan. They didn't quite measure up, either, though, so he pretty much stopped watching baseball. It wasn't as much fun to watch without a team to cheer on.

I've never known him to be a Falcons fan, but rather a pretty die-hard Broncos fan. Until the Plummer fiasco. Now he just follows the football season, rather than any particular team. I'm sure if the Broncos get a decent QB and start playing Elway-era winning football again, he'll come back.

It got me to thinking, though. I found it...odd that a person wouldn't root for their home team, as it were. Why wasn't he a Georgia sports fan, in spite of living in Colorado? Or why was he half-and-half; Georgia baseball, Colorado football?

But, what sense does it make to root for a team just because you share a city or state?
What if your home team tends to lose? What if it's so far from being the best at anything it does, that the usual derisive laugh isn't even necessary anymore, but just a given? Does that make your loyalty and team spirit irrational? Hence, wooish?

As to the belief one's team is the best: this could be substantiated, depending on what you mean by "best." To see the top team, we have only to look at its stats, and the stats of the other teams. Easy.

But those who root for the Phillies losing teams have little more than traditional loyalty to inform their support. ;)

My verdict: woo-ish in some aspects. Not necessarily woo.

[Complexity]

Sports do nothing for me. I've never watched them nor felt any urge to pick a side.

Sports is not woo, but it isn't interesting, either.

Many, if not most, fans are woo.

Athleticism is not woo, though many athletes are. Athleticism is sports without the garbage, without the teams, without the fans.

I can respect an athlete. I have no interest in 'sportsmen'. I feel pity for fans and am very glad I'm not one of them.

[Meadmaker]

He was a Braves fan for many years, but when they kept getting in the playoffs over and over, only to lose through stupid mistakes, he dumped them and became a Colorado Rockies fan.

Bah! He calls himself a fan? Go Cubs!

[ParanoidAndroid]

Sports are entertainment, exercise, and competition and nothing more.

Any deeply associated beliefs that occur in conjunction with the participants and supporters of sports are strictly a mania belonging to the people themselves. I say this with confidence as a recovering sports fan(atic).

[IMST]

Participating in sports helps with my health and social structure. Watching sports keeps me entertained without having to spend much money. On the whole it's good for me, but can certainly be abused. All of this could pertain to religion as well (except maybe the health bit, not too sure there), but none of it requires any woo on my part where religion would. I believe my university has the best football program in the US, and with a little spin the evidence bears that out. I do not believe the team I participate in is the best in my city as the evidence has been ample to show me. (2-9 so far this season. OUCH.)

[Dragoonster]

The whole notion of sports as irrational is bizarre. It can cause irrational behavior using it as the context, but as an entity it's about as irrational as walking or breathing. Sports is a mere physical process aimed at acheiving a desired outcome. I walk to get to the store. I kick the ball to get it in an area and win the game. Both perfectly rational.

Whether it causes good or bad or evil or utopia is completely meaningless, particularly because it could cause all of these, just depends on how people use it as justification for anything.

There are some weak similarities to religion, but the comparison isn't telling of anything. Religion has morals to encompass everyday life; sports have rules (ethics) only encompassing the sport itself. Any extrapolation is as ParanoidAndroid says, a commentary only on the fans. Not the sport, or sports in general.

There are a couple exceptions--the very morality of some sports such as horse racing and gladiatorial combat are questioned. But "normal" sports like football or bowling...quite a stretch to impart any inherent significance to them.

[Showmeproof]

Lucky for me, I do not watch conventional sports that involve teams. I myself being a competitive bodybuilder and powerlifter, only watch those two sports. I used to play team sports until I was about 17 or so. Eventually, I came to dislike sharing my victories with others. I didnt like the camaraderie, sportsmanship and celebrating a victory with others. I like the more solitary sports. And yes, I am 100% natural! :)

[lionking]

Where I come from, sport is not like religion. It's far more important.

The main problem with the sport-religion analogy is that a sports fanatic's team can lose, whereas a religion can never lose in the eyes of adherents.

[wollery]

In the OP you use the example of a QPR fan.

I'm a QPR fan, and I have no illusions about their abilities or chances of success. I don't claim they're the greatest football team, never have. Find me a QPR fan who honestly believes that they have a serious chance of winning the division, let alone the league or FA cup and you might, possibly, be able to make a case that that person is completely deluded.

Religious? No. It's a basic human tribal instinct. Most of us in the Western world no longer belong to small tribal groups, so we choose tribes to belong to, by supporting a particular sports team. And once we've selected our team we stick with it, through good or bad. It gives us a sense of belonging to something, a sense of continuity. We celebrate and commiserate with our fellow fans. We cheer on our team and taunt our opposing fans, whilst our champions do battle on the field.

Sport is completely irrational, but there's a good reason for it. I grew up in Brent in the 1980s. Those of you who lived in the UK in that period may remember it. The days of the Loony Left Borough councils. Brent was one of the looniest. High schools weren't allowed to have competitive sports matches against each other, because (apparently) it meant that one group of children would lose, and that would damage them mentally. Utter bollocks of course. People, children in particular, need to compete, they need to measure themselves against each other. In the absence of sports we would meet at lunchtime in the local park and kick seven shades of crap out of each other.

Sports allow us to codify the competition and remove the element of physical damage, and more importantly, they allow us to remove ourselves from the actual competition. By standing on the sidelines and cheering for our chosen side we feel we belong to them, that we are a part of that tribe, that somehow we are the ones competing. And whether they win or lose, that primal urge to compete is satisfied.

[lionking]

My daughter lived in Loftus Road just opposite the QPR ground for two years. When we visited her I naturally became a QPR fan. Go the Super Hoops.

[wollery]

My daughter lived in Loftus Road just opposite the QPR ground for two years. When we visited her I naturally became a QPR fan. Go the Super Hoops.The fact that you call them the Super Hoops shows that you aren't actually a fan. That was a nickname invented by the club hierarchy, and it never caught on.

Largely because it's a really crap nickname. :rolleyes:

[slingblade]

Bah! He calls himself a fan? Go Cubs!

We don't live in Chicago, though. :p

[lionking]

The fact that you call them the Super Hoops shows that you aren't actually a fan. That was a nickname invented by the club hierarchy, and it never caught on.

Largely because it's a really crap nickname. :rolleyes:
Sorry. I picked it up at The Green. Not a bad pub BTW.

[Undesired Walrus]

I went to my first QPR game when I was 11. I remember it well because the goalposts toppled over after a defender lept up and grabbed hold of the frame.

Funny stuff.

[Wowbagger]

Sportsmanship is not woo. Ideally, participation in sports should foster good, sportsmanship-like manners. As does religion would say many religous folks. The difference is the source of the good manners:
In sports, they develop from actual experience interacting with other players.

In religion, the leaders claim they come from a god or gods, but in reality, come from... experience accumulated in our evolutionary heritage, some of which was actually developed in early forms of sports.

Perhaps modern sports have strayed from that, a bit? If so, it is not sports that is the problem, merely the inefficencies of its current implementations. As does religion would say many religous folks. Religion will always be several degrees of separation from the reality they claim.

You don't need to have faith in the football, in order to use it, nor faith in your safety equipment in order for it to save you, nor (usually) even faith in your team. Sports only really relies on tangible things, and experience is gained through relationships with real people.
The same can clearly not be said of religion.

Sports provide a relatively safer framework for dealing with our natural aggressive feelings.
Again, many would say the same for religion. Competition is rare in the confines of churches, especially physical competition. Sports got religion waaaaaay beaten in dealing with aggressive feelings.

[Darat]

If I was a dictator I would ban all sports and all sportspeople and sportsfans would be sent to education centres. I would also make it illegal to indoctrinate children into being sportspeople or fans.

[ParanoidAndroid]

If I was a dictator I would ban all sports and all sportspeople and sportsfans would be sent to education centres. I would also make it illegal to indoctrinate children into being sportspeople or fans.


Assuming that this is not humor (which it may well be), what is your logic behind your statements?

[Ichneumonwasp]

I usually say "Woo" while watching sports, does that count? Of course, I often say many other things too........

[Darat]

Assuming that this is not humor (which it may well be), what is your logic behind your statements?

I don't like it and therefore it is a waste of resources.

I believe my solution is quite logical however if you can think of a better solution I am open to discussing it (I'm not irrational about this after all!) and will, if I ever find myself a dictator, consider implementing your better solution and perhaps even make you the last Minister of Sport so you can implement your solution.

[Ixion]

There may even be some harm in the "my team is better than yours" mentality, if taken too seriously.


And harm does come of it:
Yankees Fan Murders Red Sox Fan with Car (http://www.reuters.com/article/sportsNews/idUSN0550543120080505?feedType=RSS&feedName=sportsNews)

[martu]

Last season I sang this:

"...Southampton FC, we're by far the greatest team the world as ever seen"

more than once on the terraces without a trace if irony. I don't believe it but singing at football is fun, definitely more fun the 'football' I have to watch on the pitch.

I see my attachment to Saints as irrational, prejudiced (I don't go to p*rtsmouth for example) and not really serious.

[Vic Vega]

I don't like it and therefore it is a waste of resources.

Ahhh, because YOU don't like it. Then that makes perfect sense...

[looking for a barfing smile to add, but not finding one]

[Bikewer]

It's been observed by many anthropological-types that sports satisfy a number of human traits. When we speak of "big" stadium sports with large crowds, displays of loyalty items (hats, shirts, banners) , chants, songs, and whatever, it's pretty obviously satisfying our intrinsic need of ritual.
Indeed, more than a few observers have noticed the parallels between say, professional football and religion.
Secondly might be identity. In our primitive past, living in little hunter-gatherer bands, we didn't need such props. We just "were".
But now, diffuse in culture and language and ethnicity and whatever, getting together behind a sports team confers instant acceptance. "Oh, I see you're a Cubs fan!"

"I see, by your out-fit, that you...are a Cubs fan..." (forgive me...)

Not so much, I would think, with the smaller sports; the individual sports where it's more pure competition. In those cases, I think fans just get onto the thrill of competition. We watch Le Tour every year. We don't favor any team (and with all the switching of riders who could?) and we don't buy jerseys and memorabilia. Still, it's a great spectacle and (even with the drugs...) an incredible competition.

Now as to woo in sports...Athletes tend to be deeply superstitious, as anyone vaguely familiar with sports knows. Track athletes adopt "lucky" uniform bits. High jumpers have favored stride markers which must not only be placed just-so, but in the right order and alignment.... Despite the irrationality of doing so, all manner of athletes pray for victory, hoping God will be an (insert team name here) fan.
Belgian cyclists used to hang religious medals from their old "leather hairnet" helmets...

I think we're talking about two different sets of motivations as well. There's the athlete, and there's the fan/spectator. One could likely (and I'm sure many have) write books...

[ParanoidAndroid]

I don't like it and therefore it is a waste of resources.

I believe my solution is quite logical however if you can think of a better solution I am open to discussing it (I'm not irrational about this after all!) and will, if I ever find myself a dictator, consider implementing your better solution and perhaps even make you the last Minister of Sport so you can implement your solution.


I will put some thought into it. I rather like the title you've offered; I'll see what I can come up with.

:D

I would still like to hear the reasons that support your rational stance...

[FireGarden]

Hitchens comes on the BBC and says he wishes to ban football. It does nothing but breed hostility and irrational presumptions about your own team.

[...] We are informed by the 'Boot Delusion' that football makes statements about the world that are simply not true. My team is better than yours, my team is the best. You stick to your team even though it is awful. It is not founded on evidence .



I think the reason it is easier to accept sport is because most of have positive experiences with sport. So when a sports-driven riot happens, it's easy for us to draw upon our positive experiences of sport and say: "That was the fault of hooligans" rather than blaming sport.

I've been a member of this forum for a few years now, and I remember threads were members "come out" as atheists to their families -- these were tough decisions for them. I've not read the sports part of the forum, so I don't know if there's been a thread titled: "I've admitted to my dad that I support Liverpool". In my experience, sports rivalry is fun. But my experience of religious debate is the same.

[Dragoonster]

I think the reason it is easier to accept sport is because most of have positive experiences with sport. So when a sports-driven riot happens, it's easy for us to draw upon our positive experiences of sport and say: "That was the fault of hooligans" rather than blaming sport.

I'm having a bit of a hard time following some responses. "good" and "bad" results of a neutral entity only seem to have a bearing on whether the entity is rational or not if you have an already developed moral system, that was developed using only rationality, and is indisputable, and the only results of the entity are "bad". Is this supposed to be obvious for and I just missed it?

Why does the answer to "Is Sport Woo?" involve morality or sport's affect on society?

[James Fox]

I golf, watch golf and American Football on TV and root for my local team. It’s fun and an enjoyable past time and form of recreation and exercise. Jerks who obsess on a team and behave in a violent manner related to their team support have mental health problems. The assertion that because I enjoy sports as a viewer or participant is axiomatic that I believe in false things (like religion) or have similar issues as the violent sports jerk is an untenable and unsupportable view. As stated by others perhaps a more defined premise for your proposition is needed. I also find the analogous argument that the ideas surrounding sports are qualitatively similar to the non rational based tenants of a faith based religion is spurious and could be used for any and all types of corporate human endeavors including garbage collection and conga dancing.

Also any notion that the rational mind is something floating outside my brain, only capable of reason and sound judgment is biologically absurd.

[arthwollipot]

I have this theory that modern sport and sport fandom has its roots in the gladiatorial contests of ancient Rome. Is there any evidence to support this theory?

By which I mean, is there any evidence that a: gladiator fans were "fanatic" in a way that would be recognised as such today? and b: that there was no such fanaticism in pre-gladiator sporting competition (eg. ancient Olympics)?

[Dragoonster]

I have this theory that modern sport and sport fandom has its roots in the gladiatorial contests of ancient Rome. Is there any evidence to support this theory?

By which I mean, is there any evidence that a: gladiator fans were "fanatic" in a way that would be recognised as such today? and b: that there was no such fanaticism in pre-gladiator sporting competition (eg. ancient Olympics)?

a: maybe the thumbs-up/thumbs-down would indicate this, but basically no idea.

b: the eg suggests a linear progression to fanaticism? I'd think the Mayans and other societies would've developed formalized gaming and been either fanatic or "normal" just due to emergent cultural properties or the level of other strife in the societies necessitating an "outlet".

Also, any period of pause in gaming at the level of the gladiators would seem to bust this theory, if it's based on learned behavior rather than generic social tendencies.

Finally, ancient greek Olympians were pretty well venerated, at least after their deaths if not in life.

c: I think classical archaeology often overstates the significance of Greco-Roman traditions, so I have that grain of salt to contend with.

[bokonon]

Who is this 'we' you are referring to?

I find watching sports to be completely pointless, hence I don't watch sports.
Me too. Playing sports, fine (although about all I can manage any more is tennis). Watching somebody else play? I'd rather listen to a sermon.

ETA: The one exception I make is women's gymnastics, but I'm not really watching it for sport.

[Darth Rotor]

"I see, by your out-fit, that you...are a Cubs fan..." (forgive me...)
Try this for a slightly better fit:

"I see, by your outfit
that you are a Broncos (http://www.laredobroncos.com/)fan"
These words he did speak as I slowly walked by
"Put bottles of Shiner
All over my coffin
But first you must drink them
With a Taco pie."

Laredo Broncos, United League Baseball (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_League_Baseball).

DR

[Darth Rotor]

I have this theory that modern sport and sport fandom has its roots in the gladiatorial contests of ancient Rome. Is there any evidence to support this theory?

By which I mean, is there any evidence that a: gladiator fans were "fanatic" in a way that would be recognised as such today? and b: that there was no such fanaticism in pre-gladiator sporting competition (eg. ancient Olympics)?

It has been a few years, but sport as a form of ritual warfare, or at least the contest of champions, is a topic I've read about in more than one essay.

I'd not confine it to Romans, it's a fairly universal human habit, as is gambling, which is closely associated with sports.

DR

[Radrook]

Conversely:

All the false statements that atheists make are central to atheism. For example, you can't be an atheist without believing the false statement that, "There is abslutely no God."

On the other hand, it's perfectly possible to be a sports fan without believing any of the unsubstantiated false statements. I, for example, watch baseball but never think that the team appeared out out nowhere and organized itself. So it's really impossible to be an atheist without believing absurdities but it's not impossible to be a sports fan without without having to believe false things.

[Wowbagger]

All the false statements that atheists make are central to atheism.All of them?! If I was an atheist, and said "Grass is pink with purple polka-dots", would that automatically make it central to atheism?

For example, you can't be an atheist without believing the false statement that, "There is abslutely no God." None of the atheists I have ever met have ever said that. Most of them say "It is unlikely God exists", or sometimes "God could exist, but I live my life as if he doesn't".
It would be pretty stupid to declare it "absolutely". Not even Richard Dawkins nor Christopher Hitchens, etc., does that.

[Prometheus]

Conversely:

All the false statements that atheists make are central to atheism. For example, you can't be an atheist without believing the false statement that, "There is abslutely no God."



Patently false. I am an atheist, and I make no such statement. I do not believe that there is a god, simply because I've not seen any evidence that there is a god, nor have I ever seen a sound argument that there probably is one. Should such evidence appear, or someone provide such an argument, I would cheerfully cease to be an atheist.

[arthwollipot]

Conversely:

All the false statements that atheists make are central to atheism. For example, you can't be an atheist without believing the false statement that, "There is abslutely no God."

On the other hand, it's perfectly possible to be a sports fan without believing any of the unsubstantiated false statements. I, for example, watch baseball but never think that the team appeared out out nowhere and organized itself. So it's really impossible to be an atheist without believing absurdities but it's not impossible to be a sports fan without without having to believe false things.Radrook really loves his straw men, doesn't he?