SOME SELECTED HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECTS OF THE PRINCIPLES OF KALOKAGATHIA AND ARETĒ IN
THE MIRROR OF MODERN SPORTS
•Introduction
•Within the literature published after 2000, we can find a lot of critical studies concerning the
contemporary situation of the Olympic Games. Both summer and winter Olympics still present very
prestigious events. They also present a kind of challenge for some big cities to become candidates
for hosting the Olympics (Kubo, 2014; Rose & Spiegel, 2011). On the other hand, a great range of
aspects (or better, pros and cons) is considered these days more carefully and more critically than
fifteen (or twenty) years ago. During the process of deciding whether to become candidates, the
economic aspects play the most important role (Austermann & Wassong, 2014; Madden, 2002). However,
not just economic profit has to be considered; there are many other approaches and viewpoints –
environmental (Konstantaki, 2018), political (Heine, 2018; Reid, 2012), social (Tomlinson, 2014),
and cultural (McNamee, 2006; Parry, 2006).
•
•Diversity of approaches and plurality of discourses concerning the Olympics are caused, or at
least strengthened, by some postmodern philosophical and ideological streams in which the “world of
sport” presents a bit controversial topic. There is something like a gap formed by the rapid
development of modern professional sports during the second half of the 20th century and deepened
at the beginning of the 21st century. The point of this gap consists of goals and establishing of
modern professional sports in comparison to the principles of the ancient Olympic Games.
•

•Within the next part of our paper, we would like to argue that for some authors, the principles of
Olympism are strongly related to the ancient original Olympic roots. However, this approach can be
very illusory (at least in some aspects which we would like to describe later), and it could
present (in some cases) rather a false marketing strategy than a frank effort for recovering the
Olympic ideals.
•
•Undoubtedly, many authors really try to take the crisis of the Olympic movement as a chance to
remind the original principles and to resuscitate the intrinsic values which ancient sports events
would provide. In our opinion, this approach can be praiseworthy, but there is a serious question
whether it is possible to apply the old ideas on the new, rapidly changed situation. We are aware
of a complex character of this issue, and that is why we know that the answer cannot be yes or no.
However, some “recovering” ideas should be discussed and examined. It should present a task for
historians, as well as for philosophers. The abstract character of philosophy could become a kind
of danger. The ontological and ethical positions are very important, but they should be considered
in the context of historical development.
•
•

Some ideas about Olympism reflecting the selected philosophical positions
•As we mentioned earlier, some authors can understand the situation around the Olympics as a
challenge for some improvements. Bayle (2016) notices the social responsibility, and at this point,
we can agree that in the social field the Olympic Games can bring something like a “new hope” how
to deal with the social inequality. The other phenomenon which is more or less political and which
is very closely tied to the ancient Olympic heritage and which can present a good chance for the
future is “ekecheria” (a sacred peace obeyed during the events). Of course, the political situation
is completely different in the modern world than in the ancient time, but some international
conflicts can be solved, or the situation can be partly improved thanks to the Olympic Movement
even in the modern times (Del Tedesco Guioti, Cardoso Simões, & de Toledo, 2016).
•If we use the words Olympism and philosophy altogether, Pierre de Coubertin is probably the first
person who comes to mind (at least in the context of modern Olympism). He was the one who presented
the idea of “the philosophy of Olympism”.
•

•The contradiction between two renowned Coubertin´s mottos presents a significant dilemma which
became a topic of many sophisticated considerations. The first idea says: “The important thing in
the Olympic Games is not to win, but to take part.” The other statement became the official Olympic
motto after 1924 (the Olympic Games in Paris), and it sounds: “Citius, Altius, Fortius” (Faster,
Higher, Stronger).
•To keep both the ideas at the same time can be a bit strange because they seem to be in a logical
contradiction, but it is not impossible. If we understand the first one thus like we want to do our
best, but we prefer making a good effort to winning at any cost, we can imagine that we have no
problem with our effort of being faster and stronger. In our opinion, the incompatibility of both
ideas cannot be insurmountable if we remember the ancient principles of kalokagathia and aretē, as
we explain later.
•However, this compatibility could work quite well in the “world of amateur athletes”. In our
previous works, we paid some attention to the selected differences between amateurs and
professionals (Hurych, 2019). We do not want to repeat these ideas here in detail. However, the
main idea is that the questions like “who is better: amateurs or professionals?” does not make
sense without establishing the criteria of evaluation. If we establish measurable performance as
the criterion, the professionals (in the majority of cases) will be better.
•On the other hand, there are still a lot of reasons why to admire amateur athletes and even some
reasons why to prefer amateurs to professionals. These approaches were very usual in history. At
the beginnings of the modern Olympics, they were even dominant. Now professional athletes rule over
the world of sport. We can meet some critical studies about failing od amateur concept of the
sportsperson and about its consequences (Stone, 2019).
•However, what is our conclusion? We argue that professional sports must logically fail in some
aspects. Minimally in those which are connected with the principles of aretē and
kalokagathia.
•

Two pillars of the Olympism?
•There is a very limited space here to describe aretē and kalokagathia in detail. In the context of
kinanthropology we can mention some works by Martínková (2010), or Šíp (2008).  In the ancient
conception, kalokagathia presented the harmony of beauty and good. Within the sport settings, we
can meet this phenomenon more often in its narrow understanding presented by harmony (later
interpreted as a kind of balance) between physical and mental performance. This conception is
strongly reductive, but it can work (at least somehow) in the case of the amateur sport. Here the
•For professional sportspersons, it could present a good inspiration but just related to their
personal choice. The general establishing in modern professional sport aims against versatility and
leads towards the top and very specific performance which is awarded (in the case of professional
athletes it is paid).
•

Two pillars of the Olympism?
•Concerning aretē two related terms are often mentioned – excellence and virtue. This
terminological issue is remarkable itself because modern sports (perhaps more clearly than some
other fields of human activities) in a very interesting way display that compatibility of
excellence and virtue brings a lot of contradictions.
•Reminding the ancient concept of four cardinal virtues proposed by Plato (and then developed by
Aristotle) we can mention prudence, courage, temperance, and justice. If we admit that modern
sports provide a lot of opportunities to develop courage (not just in the physical understanding)
and that there is a good space for justice (obeying rules etc.), we should think over prudence and
temperance.

Two pillars of the Olympism?
•Prudence is by some authors (Cicero, Aristotle) understood as a kind of wisdom. However, wisdom
presents a very “floating” phenomenon because it is very difficult to define it and it is
impossible to measure it. The world of modern sports is very closely connected with the
objectivization trends and with the effort to measure performance.
•Concerning temperance, we can remind Aristotle and his concept in which temperance presents a mean
with regard to pleasure (Niemec, 2013). Aristotle did not propose to stay in the middle, but he
recommended to avoid the extreme positions and remember to come back towards the middle. Modern
sports present very extreme load and require extrema effort which must necessarily lead to
antagonistic positions to temperance principles.
•Undoubtedly, excellence can present a kind of virtue. However, the question here is whether the
excellence which is related to professional sports (it means effort for top measured performance at
any cost) presents a kind of virtue. The problem is more complex and more difficult than the scope
of this paper carries but at least two cardinal virtues – prudence and temperance – are very
disputable in the world of modern sports.

No simple solutions
•There are many publications devoted to the problem mentioned above. Bayle (2016) reminds the core
values and see the effort for athletic excellence as a challenge for modern Olympics. Martínková
(2012) proposes two chances for modern Olympics based on Coubertin´s visions and examined through
the philosophical concepts od Patočka and Heidegger – fair and temple. Brown (2012) reminds Michel
Foucault’s ideas in the context of Coubertin´s Olympic philosophy.
•
•We can meet interconnecting Friedrich Nietzsche´s philosophical conception (“Superman”, “the will
to power”) and Olympic ideas (Cléret & McNamee, 2012). Moral judgement and its backgrounds in the
reflection of the Olympic principles are examined by Culbertson (2012) in a very interesting way.
Da Costa (2006) notices that the philosophical controversies over the problems of Olympism bring
new and new pages of the “never-ending story”.
•

No simple solutions
•The necessity of reimagining and redefining some ideals of Olympism because of serious trouble is
described in the works of Llewellyn (2011), Loland (2012), McNamee & Parry (2012), Rohde (2018).
•Of course, there is still a great heritage coming from the ancient Olympic tradition (Reid, 2017).
The education, which includes the Olympic ideals presents a great opportunity for presenting their
core values (Teetzel, 2012). Even in the world of modern sports, there is some space for coaches to
develop the Olympic ideas (Torres, 2012).
•Some intrinsic values are included in sports essentially, and concerning this point, Olympism can
present one of the leading possibilities for the next development, as McFee (2012) notices. The
interconnected power of the Olympic Movement all over the world is still indisputable. It results,
as Reid (2010) mentions, from a good and understandable concept for many nations and countries (in
the context of the eastern philosophies, as well as the western way of life).
•

Conclusions
•
• The aim of this short paper is quite modest. We argue that the concept of Olympism contains many
very useful and valuable ideas. There are a lot of positive things which Olympism can offer even
these days when the elite sport is mainly made up of professionals.
•On the other hand, we guess that we should notice some problems which are (in our opinion) caused
by pretending that sports have the same face as in the Coubertin´s times.
•No matter how this position could provide some marketing profits, we argue that now (in 2019) it
is the proper time to admit that the principles of aretē and kalokagathia can hardly find a place
in the real settings of the Olympic Games. We tried to mention at least some arguments why these
two principles become more and more incompatible with establishing of modern sports.
•Of course, this paper does not provide space enough to examine the problem more in detail. That is
why we understand it as an impulse for the next discussions.
•

•References
•
• Austermann, R., & Wassong, S. (2014). Two sides of a coin: the economic and media challenges for
the Olympic Movement. Journal of Qualitative Research in Sports Studies, 8(1), 1–16. Retrieved from
http://www.bcur.org/journals/index.php/JQRSS/article/view/77.
•Bayle, E. (2016). Olympic social responsibility: a challenge for the future. Sport in Society,
19(6), 752–766. https://doi.org/10.1080/17430437.2015.1108646.
•Bertling, C., & Wassong, S. (2016). Striving for Athletic Excellence: A Core Value and Challenge
for the Profile of the Ancient and Modern Olympic Games. The International Journal of the History
of Sport, 33(4), 434–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523367.2016.1143461.
•Brown, S. (2012). De Coubertin’s Olympism and the Laugh of Michel Foucault: Crisis Discourse and
the Olympic Games. Quest, 64(3), 150–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2012.693750.
•Cléret, L., & McNamee, M. (2012). Olympism, The Values Of Sport, and the will to Power: De
Coubertin And Nietzsche Meet Eugenio Monti. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 6(2), 183–194.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2012.668142.
•Culbertson, L. (2012). Pandora Logic: Rules, Moral Judgement and the Fundamental Principles of
Olympism. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 6(2), 195–210.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2012.666991.
•DaCosta, L. (2006). A Never-Ending Story: The Philosophical Controversy Over Olympism. Journal of
the Philosophy of Sport, 33(2), 157–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2006.9714699.
•Del Tedesco Guioti, T., Cardoso Simões, M., & de Toledo, E. (2016). Independent Olympic Athletes
and the Legitimacy of the International Olympic Committee in Resolving International Conflicts. The
International Journal of the History of Sport, 33(12), 1304–1320.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09523367.2017.1294581.
•Heine, M. (2018). Olympic Commodification and Civic Spaces at the 2010 Winter Olympic Games: A
Political Topology of Contestation. The International Journal of the History of Sport, 35(9),
898–910. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523367.2018.1551208.
•Hurych, E. (2019). Duchovní rozměr pohybu v sekularizující se společnosti [The Spiritual Dimension
of Human Movement in the Secularizing Society]. Brno: Masaryk University.
•International Olympic Committee. (2018). Olympic Marketing Fact File (2018 ed.). Lausanne,
Switzerland: IOC. Retrieved from http://www.olympic.org/documents/ioc-marketing-and-broadcasting.
• Konstantaki, M. (2018). Environmental Sustainability of Olympic Games: A Narrative Review of
Events, Initiatives, Impact and Hidden Aspects. Journal On Tourism & Sustainability, 1(2), 48-66.
Retrieved from http://ontourism.online/index.php/jots/article/view/28.
•Llewellyn, M. P. (2011). ‘Olympic Games Doomed’. The International Journal of the History of
Sport, 28(5), 773–795. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523367.2011.554185.
•Loland, S. (2012). A Well Balanced Life Based on ‘The Joy of Effort’: Olympic Hype or a Meaningful
Ideal? Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 6(2), 155–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2012.666990.
•Martínková, I. (2012). Fair or Temple: Two Possibilities for Olympic Sport. Sport, Ethics and
Philosophy, 6(2), 166–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2012.669396.
•Martínková, I. (2010). Three Interpretations of Kalokagathia. In P. Mauritsch (Ed.). Körper im
Kopf: Antike Diskurse zum Körper. Graz: Leykam.
•McFee, G. (2012). Olympism and Sport’s Intrinsic Value. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 6(2),
211–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2012.666994.
•McNamee, M. (2006). Olympism, Eurocentricity, and Transcultural Virtues. Journal of the Philosophy
of Sport, 33(2), 174–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2006.9714700.
•McNamee, M., & Parry, J. (2012). Olympic Ethics and Philosophy: Old Wine in New Bottles. Sport,
Ethics and Philosophy, 6(2), 103–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2012.676826.
•Niemiec, R. M. (2013). VIA character strengths: Research and practice (The first 10 years). In H.
H. Knoop & A. Delle Fave (Eds.). Well-being and cultures: Perspectives on positive psychology (pp.
11-30). New York: Springer.
•Parry, J. (2006). Sport and Olympism: Universals and Multiculturalism. Journal of the Philosophy
of Sport, 33(2), 188–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2006.9714701.
•Reid, H. L. (2010). Athletic Virtue: Between East and West. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 4(1),
16–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511320903496501.
•Reid, H. L. (2012). The Political Heritage of the Olympic Games: Relevance, Risks, and Possible
Rewards. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 6(2), 108–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2012.666989.
•Reid, H. L. (2017). Why Olympia matters for modern sport. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport,
44(2), 159–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2017.1327323.
•Rohde, E. (2018). Olympic Games and values in disruption: The fundamental renewal of Coubertinian
renewal seems necessary. Diagoras: International Academic Journal on Olympic Studies; Vol 2 (2018).
‚Retrieved from http://www.diagorasjournal.com/index.php/diagoras/article/view/41.
•Rose, A. K. & Spiegel, M. M. (2011). The Olympic Effect. The Economic Journal, 121(553), 652-677.
https://ssrn.com/abstract=1857331.
•Stone, D. (2019). Deconstructing the gentleman amateur. Cultural and Social History, 1–22.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14780038.2019.1614284.
•Šíp, R. (Ed.). (2008). Kalokagathia: ideál, nebo flatus vocis? [Kalokagathia - Ideal or flatus
vocis?]. Brno: Masaryk University and Paido,
•Teetzel, S. J. (2012). Optimizing Olympic education: a comprehensive approach to understanding and
teaching the philosophy of Olympism. Educational Review, 64(3), 317–332.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2012.688729.
•Tomlinson, A. (2014). Olympic legacies: recurrent rhetoric and harsh realities. Contemporary
Social Science, 9(2), 137–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2014.912792.
•Torres, C. R. (2012). Expatriate Coaching, Olympism and the Olympic Games. Sport, Ethics and
Philosophy, 6(2), 289–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2012.667827.
•