Violence in Sports: A Moral Examination of Causes and Implications

This essay delves into the complex issue of violence in sports from a moral perspective, examining the justifications and ethical considerations surrounding aggressive acts on and off the field. It explores theories such as the 'Volenti non fit injuria' principle, which suggests that participants consent to the risks of injury, alongside contrasting moral rules that condemn actions causing harm or disability. The essay further investigates the influence of social learning, where individuals internalize and imitate behaviors observed in their environment, and the legitimization of aggression within competitive sports. Ultimately, it argues that violence in sports, particularly acts intended to harm others, should be considered immoral, highlighting the need for ethical awareness and responsible conduct in athletic contexts. Desklib offers a platform for students to access similar essays and study resources.

Running head: Violence in sports
Violence in Sports
-A moral perspective
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1Violence in sports
Violence in sports often refers to an unnecessary, violent and intentional acts aimed to
harm others, during a sports match, involving violent or illegal physical contact beyond the
acceptable levels during the match. The actions can be taken with the intent to injure or
disable another player or coach or threat to do the same. Such behavior can be explained by
two main theories; the first theory proposes that violence is an innate instinct of humans,
while another theory considers sports as ‘mock battles’ which brings out the violent and
aggressive nature among the competitors (Sønderlund et al., 2014; Taylor, 2014)
Various moral considerations can be applied in the understanding of violence in
sports. The phrase “Volenti non fit injuria” means no injury is done to one who
consents (Singh, 2015). In the aspect of sports, the provision of consent justifies
any injury incurred by the sportsperson or coach. This implies that when a person
gives his or her consent to participate in sports, especially ones in which there
aggression and physical contact is involved (such as football or hockey), it has to
be expected that the person can get injured as a result of aggression or violence
from others (Young, 2015).
However, the 10 moral rules proposed by Professor Gert in 1988 states that
one should abstain from activities such as 1. Killing, 2. Cause pain, 3. Disable
anyone, 4. Deprive anybody of their freedom, 5. Deprive anyone from seeking
their pleasure, 6. Deception, 7. Breaking promises, 8. Cheat anyone, 9. Breaking
the law, 10. Avoiding their duties. Thus on such contexts, aggression in sports can
lead to several moral codes to be broken, causing harm, injury or disability to
others. Also, aggression can cause pain, and since pain is the evidence of harm

2Violence in sports
caused due to aggression, it should be avoided. Such a moral code thus inhibits any
form of aggression within a sports arena (Gert, 1988; Triplett, 2017).
Different moral factors are also considered to affect violence in sports. In the process
of learning, humans develop skills of sociability and social behavior. This process of
socialization is an interactional system which an individual is not only self reflexive, placing
self in a social group and also understand the social definitions of behavior. This helps an
individual to interact in a group without creating any misrepresentations of him/her in front of
others. In other words, from the social group, one learns and understands behaviors that are
considered acceptable or moral and unacceptable or immoral (Stokes, 2015). Thus, if in a
social group, violence is a common place; the moral code of an individual from such a place
might not prevent the person from showing violence in sports or any other walk of life.
Through operant and classical learning processes and through imitation, aggression and
aggressive behavior can be learnt by a child (as well as beliefs, values, attitudes and norms on
aggression) from parents, peers, and teachers. This process can start at an early age and is
significantly influenced by observation. This has led to many authors to believe that viewing
aggressive content on television by children can increase the chances of violent behavior in
them (Spaaij, 2014). Similarly, viewing violent behavior acted out by parents or teachers can
also influence a child to be violent. Such a moral concern can by hypothesized for the East
Milbrook case.
Another moral issue that affects violence in sports is the legitimization of aggressive
behavior. Studies have shown that moral reasoning was inversely related to the probability of
legitimizing aggressive behavior. Other studies have shown that the competitive nature of
sportspeople can make them vulnerable to start legitimizing violence, especially for sports
involving high levels of physical contact. This shows that the players can be vulnerable to

3Violence in sports
exhibit aggressive behavior due to the nature of the sport which requires aggressive physical
contacts and high stress of competition. From this standpoint, it is understandable why the
player would act aggressively to the coach, however does not justify the action (Elendu and
Dennis, 2017; Matthews and Channon, 2016).
It can thus be summarized that violence in sports has many different implications, one
that it is the product of the social nurturing, and learning process, where a child learns and
imitates aggressive behavior observed among their parents, teachers or peers, and that in
sports, especially those involving physical contact violence can be a commonplace, as a result
of which the players can become prone to legitimize such actions. Also, it can be understood
that since violence is an act that is aimed to harm another individual, by inflicting pain or
injury or even disability to others, it should be considered immoral.

4Violence in sports
References:
Elendu, I. C., & Dennis, M. I. (2017). Over-emphasis on winning, host-to-win and winning-
at-all-cost syndrome in modern sports competitions: implications for unsportsmanship
behaviours of sports participants.
Gert, B. (1988). Morality: A new justification of the moral rules.
Matthews, C. R., & Channon, A. (2016). It's Only Sport”—The Symbolic Neutralization of
“Violence. Symbolic Interaction, 39(4), 557-576.
Singh, S. P. (2015). 008_Volenti Non Fit Injuria and Tortious Liability.
Sønderlund, A. L., O’Brien, K., Kremer, P., Rowland, B., De Groot, F., Staiger, P., ... &
Miller, P. G. (2014). The association between sports participation, alcohol use and
aggression and violence: A systematic review. Journal of science and medicine in
sport, 17(1), 2-7.
Spaaij, R. (2014). Sports crowd violence: An interdisciplinary synthesis. Aggression and
violent behavior, 19(2), 146-155.
Stokes, M. M. (2015). Blood sports: violence and the performance of masculinity in early
modern drama (Doctoral dissertation, Boston University).
Taylor, I. (2014). 0n the sports violence question: soccer hooliganism revisited. Sport,
Culture and Ideology (RLE Sports Studies), 152.
Triplett, T. (2017). Teaching Common Morality: Using Bernard Gert’s Account of the Moral
System in the Classroom. Teaching Ethics.
Young, K. (2015). Assessing the sociology of sport: On sports violence and ways of
seeing. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 50(4-5), 640-644.