Argumentative analysis (Kids and sports)

As stated in the article “Kids and Sports” many people think that involving children in

competitive sports develops their character and teaches them about the concept of winning or

losing. However, the author argues that making children play competitive sport can lead to

opposite results and he thinks that parents should think more before they push their kids into

those sports. He thinks that these sports can put stress on the child’s body during development,

so if he felt any pain or had an injury, he can ignore it because he wants to win which can result

in livelong damaging effects. Also, he mentioned that Thomas Tutko said playing these sports

can be traumatic physically and psychologically on kids. Then he mentions Khon’s book, which

is based on hundreds of studies, and these studies say that competitions “undermines self-esteem,

poisons our relationships, and holds us back from doing our best.” Also, it makes the child feel

that he is useless if he lost a match which can affect his personality badly. Finally, he says that he

does not want children to ignore competitive sports, but at least they can delay it until the age of

15. The author here made a good argument he used expert’s opinion and studies to support his

claim, but he did not use any statistics and did not give enough examples, also he had some

logical fallacies.

The author’s claim was very obvious according to the evidence that he brought, he thinks

that playing competitive sports at an early age affects children badly. The author had two main

reasons for this claim. The first reason was that this action can harm children physically because

children will force themselves into making a huge effort just to win, this they can have an injury

that they will ignore to win, and this is the problem that can lead to lifelong harmful effects. This

reason was supported using the opinion of an expert “Thomas Tutko”, who is the author of

“Winning Is Everything and Other American Myths”, who supported the claim of the author by
saying that “playing competitive sports before that age is simply too “traumatic,” both physically

and psychologically”. And this is considered as strong evidence that can convince the reader.

The second reason was that competitions can harm children psychologically, as losing in a game

can make them doubt themselves and see that they are useless or have no talents. This reason

was supported by the book of “Alfie Kohn” which summarizes hundreds of studies about the

effects of competitions on children and it says that it “undermines self-esteem, poisons our

relationships, and holds us back from doing our best”. And this a strong evidence that supports

his argument. However, he only used those two types of evidence he did not give any examples,

personal experience, or statistics to support his reasons.

The author used some rhetorical appeals to try to convince the readers with his claim. He

used logos like in “Is he or she going to stop throwing that tough-to-hit curveball just because

there is a little pain involved?” as he is using the logic that children that if they need to win, they

will ignore the injuries which can harm them. He also used pathos like in “playing competitive

sports before that age is simply too “traumatic,” both physically and psychologically”, and

“make them feel unworthy when they lose, make them prone to being introverts and lose interest

in all social activities.” He used emotional words in those examples like traumatic and unworthy

to try and convince the readers using emotion. The most obvious rhetorical appeal that he used

strongly to support his claim was ethos as in “Thomas Tutko, author of the book Winning Is

Everything and Other American Myths, argues that kids should not be playing physically

demanding sports before the age of fourteen.”, and “Alfie Kohn emphasizes that the

psychological effects of competitive sports on those still too young to play them may be worse

than the physical injuries that can ensue.” He used those two expert’s opinions two support his

claim which added a lot of strength to his argument.

 Unfortunately, the writer had some logical fallacies. For example, he said, “All kids who

play competitive sports before the age of fourteen live with this trauma the remaining of their

lives.” This is a hasty generalization, and it has no evidence that all the kids have this trauma. He

also said, “the result can be lifelong damage to a shoulder or an arm”, which I think is a slippery

slope because he jumped from children having small injuries or stress to lifelong damaging

effects. Also, he said, “Competitive sports negatively affect kids’ self-esteem, make them feel

unworthy when they lose, make them prone to being introverts and lose interest in all social

activities.” I consider this a false dilemma because he divided the opinions into two parts. Either

they are playing competitive sports and have personality problems, or they do not play those

sports and have a good personality.

Finally, the author made a good argument and tried to support it with evidence like expert

opinion and research, but his argument lacked statistics, examples, and personal experience. He

had good reasons for his argument as the negative effect of competitive sports on children

physically and psychologically. He also used the three rhetorical appeals logos, pathos, and

ethos, but he used ethos more as he supported his two reasons with two expert’s opinions.

However, he had some fallacies in his arguments as a hasty generalization, slippery slope, and

false dilemma. Overall, I think the author’s argument is weak because it lacked many evidence

types, and it had some fallacies.

Mohamed Mostafa Noor Eldeen

202000285