Original scientific paper

https://doi.org/10.21464/fi46102

Formalism Reloaded

Miroslav Imbrišević ; Open University, Engleska

Abstract

The paper critically re-examines formalism in the philosophy of sport, a theory that has long been subjected to attacks and often portrayed as a caricature – as mere and blind rule-following. The author defends formalism against common criticisms, particularly those advanced by Fred D'Agostino, by demonstrating that formalism possesses the normative resources to address complex issues such as sportsmanship, strategic fouling, and the ethos of games. The central thesis is that formalism should not be understood as an empirical description of sport, but primarily as a normative ideal guided by the principle of fairness. The author introduces the notion of meta-rules or transcendental rules (akin to Kelsen’s Grundnorm) that underlie games and from which all other rules can be derived. By discussing the logical incompatibility thesis, strategic fouling, and conventions, the author shows that formalism is not Platonism but Aristotelianism: when rules fail to secure fairness, the principle of equity (epieikeia) is applied. The paper concludes that formalism can address the challenges of hard cases and sportsmanship, and that it is guided not by blind rule-following but by the idea of a fair contest. The paper thus advocates a reloaded – refreshed and renewed – understanding of formalism that transcends standard criticisms.

Keywords

formalism; philosophy of sport; fairness; meta-rules; strategic fouling; ethos of games; logical incompatibility; sportsmanship; Aristotelianism; normative ideal

Hrčak ID:

351139

URI

https://hrcak.srce.hr/351139

Publication date:

20.9.2026.

Article data in other languages: croatian

Visits: 0 *