Philosophy of Sport) in Slavonic

This article was downloaded by: [George Mason University]
On: 25 December 2014, At: 15:56

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of the Philosophy of Sport

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjps20
Philosophical Kinanthropology
(Philosophy of Physical Culture,
Philosophy of Sport) in Slavonic
Countries: The Culture, the Writers,
and the Current Directions
Ivo Jirásek & Peter M. Hopsicker
Published online: 19 Jan 2012.
To cite this article: Ivo Jirásek & Peter M. Hopsicker (2010) Philosophical Kinanthropology
(Philosophy of Physical Culture, Philosophy of Sport) in Slavonic Countries: The Culture, the
Writers, and the Current Directions, Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 37:2, 253-270, DOI:
10.1080/00948705.2010.9714780
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2010.9714780
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms
& Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/
terms-and-conditions
Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 2010, 37, 253-270
© 2010 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Philosophical Kinanthropology
(Philosophy of Physical Culture,
Philosophy of Sport) in Slavonic Countries:
The Culture, the Writers, and
Downloaded by [George Mason University] at 15:56 25 December 2014
the Current Directions

Ivo Jirásek and Peter M. Hopsicker
Until recently, English-speaking scholars have had few outlets to review the philoso-
phy of sport literature generated in Slavonic countries. Existing English texts of this
nature consist primarily of review essays providing little historical and cultural con-
text from which to understand the development of specific tendencies in lines of
inquiry from this part of the world (23,24,27). This article attempts to fill this gap in
understanding by 1) briefly describing the cultural history of the Slavonic region, and,
within this context, 2) identifying key sport philosophers and their current trends of
philosophic thought in sporting practices. It is hoped that this project will better
inform scholars of the philosophy of sport research being done in Slavonic nations,
will advance new scholarship in the English-speaking world, and will encourage
more international collaboration within the discipline of philosophical kinanthropol-
ogy.
A Brief History of the Slavonic Domain

Located in central and eastern Europe, the Slavonic people currently represent
one-third of the European population. Distinguishable by their historic use of Sla-
vonic languages, modern Slavonic countries include Poland, Czech Republic,
Slovak Republic, Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Bosnia-Herze-
govina, Montenegro, Ukraine, Russia, and Belorussia.1
By the 10th century, Slavs were recognized as occupying the region between
the Baltic and Aegean seas and between the Elbe (currently located in the Czech
Republic and Germany) and Dnieper rivers (currently located in Russia, Belorus-
sia and Ukraine). While recent Slavonic history indicates a trend toward multiple
independent countries, an ideological movement toward pan-Slavism as a reac-
tion to pan-Germanism was considered in the 19th century—the idea of unifying
Slavonic languages and literature, specifically those Slavonic nations of the
The authors are with <ivo.jirasek@upol.cz> Palacký University of Olomouc, Olomouc, Poland, and
<pmh12@psu.edu> the Dept. of Kinesiology, Pennsylvania State University, Altoona, PA.
253
254 Jirásek and Hopsicker
former Habsburg Monarchy—as an effort for cultural and civilizational consis-

tency (25,67).2
The ideal of pan-Slavism disappeared by World War I when this region
cleaved into multiple independent nations.3 Before World War I, Slavs lived in
three main states: Russia, which incorporated parts of Poland, Ukraine and Belo-
russia; Austria-Hungary, comprising Czechs (Bohemia), Slovaks and southern
Slavs; and the Ottoman Empire, including Bulgaria. Between the World Wars,
more Slavonic countries recognized their independence: USSR (which included
Russia, Ukraine and Belorussia), Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and Bul-
garia. Further changes to the region occurred at the end of 1980s with the collapse
of the socialist system. Over the next decades, Ukraine and Belorussia became
independent states, and Czechoslovakia separated into the Czech and Slovak
Republics. Yugoslavia disintegrated into Slovenia, Croatia, Macedonia, Bosnia-
Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro, and Kosovo recognized its independence in
2008.
These separatistic tendencies of small Slavonic countries arise from their cul-
tural and social differencies. For example, the Slovenes are small nations located
in central Europe where non-Slavonic ethnicities dominate and linguistically
belong to South-East Europe. Serbs see themselves as victims of wars (e.g., the
1999 NATO bombings), and Bulgarians do not consider Macedonian as an inde-
pendent nation with a specific language, but as western Bulgaria with a different
dialect (one nation, two states). Russia, with its size, history of colonialism and
political power-struggles, also garners a deep “Russian soul” (as described by
prominent Russian authors Dostojevskij, Tolstoj and others) based in self-sacri-
fice and varied human and natural resources. In addition, there is no dominating
religion among the Slavs. Poland is strictly Catholic, Russia and Bulgaria are
orthodox, and a majority of the Czech Republic is without religious preference.
Slavonic Languages
Over time, the division of the Slavs into separate nations resulted in nuances in
Slavonic language dialects. The Slavonic language can be traced to a common
primeval language in the 4th and 3rd millennium BC and to Indo-Europeans arriv-
ing from Asia in the 3rd and 2nd millennium BC. This “proto-Slavonic,” primarily
an oral language, evolved into the “old-Slavonic,” lingua slavica, of the 6th—9th
centuries AD and became a written form in the 10th century. Divided into three
main groups (west, south and eastern Slavonic), modern Slavonic languages con-
tain elements of other languages specifically connected to its rich history. Sla-
vonic languages rank closely to the Romance languages (Spanish, French, Italian)
and the Teutonic languages (west: English, German, Dutch; Nordic: Norwegian,
Swedish, Danish, or Icelandic) in terms of usage. Estimates indicate that more
than 300 million people currently speak some form of Slavonic (69).4
Modern Slavonic languages are similar in both word-stock and grammar.
However, some use Roman characters (with different versions of some letters and
diacritical marks), and others use a few variants of the Cyrillic alphabet. Scholars
interested in studying Slavonic texts in their original languages should be familiar
with both types of writing.5 Not every Slav can understand every Slavic language,
but knowing more than one dialect greatly increases the probability of under-
Philosophical Kinanthropology in Slavonic Countries 255
standing others (e.g., Czech as a mother language and Russian as a second lan-
guage increases the likelihood of understanding Polish).
Traditions of Inquiry in Sport and Physical

Education in Slavonic Countries
The development of physical culture in Slavic nations was shaped from a variety
of sources. Recapitulating all the personalities from all the nations who influenced
sport and physical education in Slavonic countries is not possible here. However,
three Slavic scholars are recognized as being highly influential: John Amos Come-
nius (Czech philosopher and bishop), Petr Francevich Lesgaft (Russian), and
Miroslav Tyrš (Czech). John Amos Comenius (1592–1670) believed that physical
health—developed through physical exercises, walking and games—was a neces-
sary condition of a complete education. In his book, “Laws of a Well-Ordered
School,” originally published in Latin as “Leges scholae bene ordinatae,” Come-
nius outlined the principles of physical education—many of which are still in use
today. Although he did not use the term “physical education” specifically, and his
texts were about education in general (e.g., “Didactica Magna,” “Orbis Pictus,”
and others), he is cited as the first educator to integrate physical education into the
pedagogical process (72).
Two centuries later, Petr Francevich Lesgaft (1837–1909) used physical and
social sciences to investigate the nature of physical education. He concluded that
the educational component of physical education was separate from the physical
and health benefits of exercise programs. Physical exercise has hygienic and
health objectives, but the focus of physical education, Lesgaft believed, should be
its pedagogical and educational value. While he deemed competitive sports par-
ticipation as an inferior mode of physical education, he did believe that physical
education should be included in the same pedagogical category as other scientific
subjects (71).
In the 1860s, Miroslav Tyrš (1832–1884) created the Czech gymnastics
system of physical training known as Sokol or “Falcon.” Promoted through gym-
nastic festivals, the Sokol system championed physical training as not only a
means to physical development, but also as a pathway to political and national
freedom.6 Tyrš’s 1870 text, “Náš úkol, směr a cíl (Our Target, Direction and Goal),”
included the Falcon movement as integral to nationalism, progress, democracy,
and international solidarity (81). The Falcon movement eventually extended into
other Slavonic countries, such as Slovenia, Poland, Serbia, and Russia, but also
took some root in Great Britain, France, Germany and the U.S.
Perhaps the biggest influence on sport and physical education in Slavonic
countries in the second half of the 20th century has not been any one scholar, but
rather the socialist conception of “physculture” originating in the former Soviet
Union.7 The USSR’s ideological and political influence on sport and physical edu-
cation and control over state activities through a centralized administration
resulted in a systematic approach to movement activities. Soviet influence on
sport and physical education also impacted the nature and methodologies of
Slavic philosophy of sport at that time. This influence is exemplified by the situa-
tion in the Czech Republic.
The Czech Republic’s history with the socialist era can be seen in its art
(Socialist Realism), architecture (blocks of flats and concrete buildings), political
systems of law, and psyche of the people. Without question, this history also influ-
enced the country’s approach to philosophy. From the 1940s to the end of the
1980s, Marxism dominated as the only acceptable political model. While the con-
tents of philosophy classes taught in schools and universities were largely con-
trolled by the state, “homemade” seminars and lectures existed in underground or
unofficial educational movements often stressing political activism.
Socialism also directly influenced the nature of kinesiology. At times, there was
no philosophy of sport in the Czech Republic. Instead, a “theory of physical culture”
elaborated under a Marxist point of view prevailed. All sport organizations were
centralistically directed under state control. Human movement was understood as an

instrument for ideological indoctrination. For example “Spartakiads,” mass physical
exercise events involving hundreds of thousands of participants and spectators, were
used as support for the socialist regime. It is because of this socialist history that
social and political topics are not commonly discussed in Slavic philosophy of sport
writings. In the Czech Republic, there exists a lack of nonideological, interpretative
understanding, and insight into terms such as social justice, the equality of opportu-
nity and so on—ideas often considered neutral and less emotive in different parts of
the world.
In spite of these political restrictions, other philosophical modes of inquiry
developed—most notably phenomenology. The local popularity of phenomenology
arose from the influence of the Czech philosopher, Jan Patoˇc ka, who studied under
Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger, and held a life-long friendship with German
philosopher Eugen Fink. Patoˇc ka’s philosophy markedly influenced the Czech
intellectual and political dissent in the 1960s-1980s. He frequently lectured at
“homemade” seminars in the 1970s and was one of the first three signatories of the
informal civic initiative, Charter 77, together with Václav Havel and Jiˇr í Hájek.8
Patoč ka understood human life as three modes of movement: 1) movement of
acceptance, anchorage or reception (instinctive and affective movement; orienta-
tion on pleasure); 2) movement of defense, work and fight (self-preservation, pro-
duction and personal interest); and 3) movement of breakthrough or truth (tran-
scendence or “living in the truth”). His work thus included movement in a
dimension of holistic existence (which includes sport movement)—a conception
that has been very inspirational to modern-day Slavic philosophers of sport (e.g.,
2,4,30,61). While analytic philosophy understands movement in categories like
speed, distance, aesthetic qualities and so on, Patočka’s phenomenological under-
standing expands the possibilities of philosophy into holistic existential dimen-
sions. Movement is not only the movement of bodies, but also the movement of
personalities. Such an antidualistic and existential interpretation of movement is
quite common in many Slavonic writings (as the next part of this paper will illus-
trate), but is rarely found in the English-speaking world.
Prominent Philosophers of
Sport in Slavonic Countries
It is the region’s early physical educators, its political history, its cultural tradi-
tions and the works of national thinkers that have shaped the main interests of
Czech philosophers of sport as well as the other Slavic scholars in the discipline.
Current lines of inquiry focus on topics such as the body, movement (namely its
existential dimension), games and play, and phenomenology—specifically the
phenomenon of time, experience, terminology, and systemic approaches toward
movement (e.g., 2,18,33,61). What follows is a brief overview of prominent Slavic
contributors to the discipline of philosophic kinanthropology as well as their
research agendas. It is divided by country and is not intended to be an inclusive
list. However, it should provide a good starting point for future research and col-
laborative efforts.
Czech Republic
Miroslav Tyrš, with his development of the Falcon movement in 1862, is considered
the first philosopher of sport in the Czech Republic. Influenced by Hellenic culture,
Tyrš studied art history, aesthetics and philosophy. He regarded physical exercise as
a means for achieving national goals, the establishment of democracy, and catalyst
to Slavonic cooperation and mutuality. While an opponent of competitive sport, Tyrš
championed harmony and kalokagathia (Platonic teaching based on a philosophy of
corporeal, moral and spiritual whole), aesthetics and ethics in physical activity
(82).9
Jiř í Černý, a Czech philosopher interested in German classic idealism, herme-
neutics, phenomenology and Marxism, studied games and play in the 1960s (6),
but it was not until after the political changes of the 1980s that sport philosophy
grew substantially in the Czech Republic. Miroslav Rýdl from Charles University
in Prague (73) was instrumental in this growth. His original texts focused on
games and play as well as movement and corporality, but his main contribution to
sport philosophy may have been that of translator. Skilled in English and German
literature, Rýdl translated and critiqued an abundance of philosophic texts from
both of these languages.
Three additional scholars reside at Charles University in Prague: Anna
Hogenová, Miloš Bednář, and Irena Martínková. Hogenová concentrates on cor-
poreality, Olympism and existential phenomenology. With no strict systematic
approach to these themes, readers unfamiliar with philosophy could view her texts
as inaccessible. However, her intellectual originality stems from her education.
Her vocabulary often uses foreign terms (particularly German and Greek) as well
as cues from various mythological traditions. Her essays are inspired by the phe-
nomenological and hermeneutic paradigms of philosophers such as Heidegger,
Patoč ka, Gadamer, Husserl, Merleau-Ponty and others. Through the associations
and comparisons of these philosophers, Hogenová endeavors to verbalize that
which resists articulation—specifically wholeness, meaning, and substance in
direct connection with topics as achievement, Olympism, corporeality, and sport
(14,15).
Informed by his interest in the spirituality of sport, Bednář considers tempo-
rality and biodrom when he introduces “kinanthroposophy” to the sport philoso-
phy community.10 Bednář seeks the founding tenets and deeper meanings of philo-
sophical kinanthropology. His analysis suggests the possibility of the discipline
“kinanthroposophy”—knowledge founded not only on information, but also on
transcendence, values, conscience and meaning of life. In other words, human
beings and human movement contain existential modes and, therefore, it is pos-
sible to expand human potential into spiritual areas. Bednář is also known for his
different analyses of human movement such as homo movens, homo viator and
homo spiritualis (4).
Martínková ponders problems of harmony and kalokagathia through Hei-
degger’s conception of dasein—the linking of thought and movement. As a regu-
lar participant in international philosophy of sport conferences and a member of
the executive committee of the European Association for the Philosophy of Sport,
Martínková is well known among the international kinesiology community of
experts (60–62).
Two other Czech scholars hail from from Palacký University in Olomouc:
Bohuslav Hodaň and Ivo Jirásek. Hodaň is primarily interested in the problems of
physical culture—its subsystems and social relations—in both the individual and
social aspects of the kinanthropology and Falcon movement phenomena. His texts
are not exclusively philosophical and include sociological, cultural, historical and
political dimensions. Hodaň ’s ideas are very structural characterized by the syn-
thesis of individual notions, concepts, and terms into a general worldview. Spe-
cifically, he writes about the history of philosophical thinking in physical culture
in the Czech Republic, the terminological contradictions among sport, physical
culture, and movement culture, the anthropological base for bodily movement,
and physical culture as a part of civic society. Hodaň’s main focus is the inclusion
of physical exercises as part of physical culture, which he believes is a subsystem
of culture as such with its own sociocultural system that includes physical exer-
cises and activities, equipment, institutions and organizations, knowledge, organi-
zational and judicial provision, propagation and so on. Although at times deemed
reductive, inconclusive and difficult to follow, Hodaň has contributed greatly to
the understanding of physical culture by his concept of sociocultural kinanthro-
pology (12,13).
Jirásek views movement culture as a specific social system of concrete move-
ment categories divided by the activity’s meaning (sport, movement education,
movement therapy, movement recreation, movement art). From this perspective,
Jirásek promotes the term “philosophical kinanthropology”—the investigation of
what it means to be a human being through the phenomena of human movement
(especially in its cultivation)—as a better label for the discipline. Contrary to other
names (philosophy of sport, philosophy of physical culture, philosophy of Olymp-
ism, philokinesics, kinephilosophy and so on), philosophical kinanthropology is
based on subject matter and accuracy in the meaning of words. Philosophical
kinanthropology (from old Greek words “kinesis” movement, “anthropos” human
being, “logos” word, law, figuratively discipline or science) seems like a more
accurate name for human movement investigation and its philosophical description
(28). Jirásek delimits anthropology and kinantrhopology and their philosophical
explication. He then examines the importance of culture, body and movement in
the phenomenon of movement culture and other specific topics such as leisure,
nature, experiential education, victory and loss, fair play and others (28,30).
Poland
Philosophy of sport in Poland can be traced back to the turn of the 20th century
when Mariusz Zaruski wrote about the philosophical and spiritual nature of climb-
ing and sailing. However, Marx and the Catholic Church are considered the primar-
ily influences on modern Polish reflections of physical education and other forms of
human movement. Polish scholars worked within a Marxist framework similar to
the scholars in the Czech Republic. Consequently, it was not until the late 1960s
when Andrzej Wohl, the first president of the International Sociological Associa-
tion in 1964–1971, was recognized as the first Polish scholar to describe physical
culture (and culture in general) from a historical and dialectical materialism point
of view (85). In addition to this political influence, Poland has been and continues
to be overwhelmingly Catholic–even during socialist times. The electing of Karol
Wojtyla to serve as Supreme Pontiff (1978) and the first non-Italian Pope since
16th Century amplified this Christian influence into the 1980s. Further, Pope John
Paul II is highly recognized by modern philosophers as inspiration for anthropo-

logical investigation, including philosophy of sport. Zbigniew Dziubiń ski, for
example, works in sport sociology with direct connections to the philosophy of
religion and Catholic anthropology (10,11).
Zbigniew Krawczyk, from the Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego (Univer-
sity of Physical Education) in Warsaw and a scholar from sociological traditions
who championed “philosophy and sociology of physical culture,” primarily devel-
oped philosophy of sport as a specific discipline in Poland. His conception of the
discipline includes ontological, anthropological, methodological and axiological
dimensions. His interests focus on tourism, sailing and mountaineering (50–52).
Jerzy Kosiewicz, Krawczyk’s former student and now professor at the Uni-
versity of Physical Education in Warsaw, focuses on philosophical and method-
ological topics of physical culture—specifically anthropological themes of body
and corporeality in Christian thinking. The author uses a dynamic theory of human
beings that is composed from three ontical levels: social (relational), mental
(ideal) and physical (material—bodily) (39,40,52). Most recently, Kosiewicz
writes about the ontological and epistemological nature of leisure, the philosophy
of physical recreation, boxing as a manifestation of movement toward absolute
abstraction, and aggression in sports (47).
Two additional scholars from AWF Krakow contribute to the literature. Maria
Zowislo (86) uses a combination of philosophical paradigms, mythology and reli-
gion in her inquiries. This methodology targets seven basic topics: the playground
of the world, culture and education, exercises, nature and culture, play and game,
ethos and mythos, and corporeality. The mythological, metaphorical and symboli-
cal character of language as applied to sport is connected with all these topics
from ancient Greek to modern philosophical thought.
Józef Lipiec’s line of inquiry focuses on Olympism and kalokagathia in sport
and physical culture (56,58). Using these paradigms, Lipiec explores two concep-
tions of achievement: rivalization and perfectionism. Lipiec understands rivaliza-
tion to be the mortification of a weaker person—the answering of the question,
“Which one is better?” From this perspective, sporting contests are not encounters
with limitations, but “fights” between human beings. Sportspersons do not wish to
overcome certain boundaries, but instead need to evaluate himself/herself by over-
coming living human beings—the rival. Perfectionism, on the other hand, does
not need a rival. The competitor only wishes to overcome him/herself, to become
better, or to reach the absolute boundaries of human possibilities. Perfectionism
answers the question, “Who is the best?” Simply, perfection is a competition with
a value; rivalization is a competition with an individual who is to be abased by

defeat (57).
Finally, Wojciech J. Cynarski from the University of Rzeszow has published
over 300 works on the humanistic ethos and humanistic values of martial arts (7).
In an era of brutalization and commercialization, Cynarski attempts to establish a
theoretically holistic (but interdisciplinary) construction on the humanistic and
cultural aspects of sport. He utilizes philosophical sources found in Far Eastern
discourses as well as sociology of religion, cultural anthropology, and theories of
physical culture. Cynarski seeks to bridge the gap between technical observation
(the art of the fight) and traditions of chivalry as a method of personal, holistic
development.
Slovak Republic
Josef Oborný from Komenský University in Bratislava is the leading sport phi-
losopher in the Slovak Republic. Found in the department of “sport humanistics,”
Oborný examines topics such as sport ethics and moral conflicts, fair play, and
philosophical aspects of sport and war as well as the social aspects of spectator-
ship and competitiveness (65). His recent work utilizes philosophy of sport theo-
ries to examine the social consequences of negative behaviors in sport and to cri-
tique an instrumentalistic approach to the body. Oborný criticizes the
commercialization of sport that has resulted in a culture of achievement at the
expense of morality.
Slovenia
Philosophy of sport was firmly established in Ljubljana in 2003. Lev Kreft from
University of Ljubljana is the primary scholar of the region with his work focus-
ing on the aesthetics and philosophy of sport. His topics are well known in the
international community. Theses include the parallels between martyrdom and
extreme sport (53), institutionalized sport and aesthetics (54), and the ethical
dimensions of drug testing and individual human rights (55).
Serbia
As a discipline, philosophy of sport from this country is mostly unknown in other
parts of the world. However, writings from this region do provide some treatment
of the philosophy of physical culture and could be inpiring for others. For exam-
ple, Matić & Bokan’s (University of Belgrade) general theory of physical culture
(63) includes sections dedicated to the philosophy of physical culture and is
divided into three parts: ontology, epistemology and axiology. Radoš from the
University of Novi Sad also produced a brief sketch of the philosophy of sport
(70) highlighting the progress of individual areas of inquiry such as ontology,
axiology, ethics, eudemonia, aesthetics, education and sport, and spirituality and
sport.
The most recognized Serbian work is Ljubodrag Simonović ’s book (written
in English), Philosophy of Olympism (76), although it has been deemed highly
controversial by a variety of scholars.11 A former member of the Yugoslav national
basketball team and a doctor of philosophy, Simonović interprets Olympism as an

ideological instrument for integrating people into capitalism much like the con-
version to religion. He describes modern Olympism as one from the most aggres-
sive totalitarian ideologies of 20th Century. His arguments include the dehuman-
ization, brutalization and politization of Olympic sport. “Olympism, as the
political theory of sport,” Simonović claims, “is not just a form of creating a civi-
lization without culture, but the ideology of death” (76: p. 20). His study is histori-
cal and many claims are more ideological than philosophical resulting in clean-
cut and often provocative formulations. Few writings, if any, exist in support of
Simonović ’s claims including his delineation of Coubertin’s doctrine of sport as
“misogynist primitive sexism,” as racism of racial superiority, and as a myth of
pacifism overshadowing a militaristic ceremony. In the end, his book is critical of

not only Olympism but also of competitive sport in general.
Russia
Few Russian works that specifically focus on the philosophy of sport exist in the
current literature. Only short essays in the Russian journal, Teorija i praktika
fizicheskoj kultury (Theory and Praxis of Physical Culture) and some web pages
were identified. Akchurin’s (Bachkirskij State University in Ufa) study of corpo-
reality explores the “external” and “internal” in human personality and perceives
corporeality as the foundation for self-expression. Akchurin believes that physical
culture is interconnected with what it means to be completely human—including
the emotional and spiritual levels of being (1). Byzov’s (Siberian State Techno-
logical University in Krasnojarsk) study examines the history of sport and its
affect on health (5). The editorial board of this Russian journal ultimately created
a round table discussion on the philosophy and sociology of sport in the 21st cen-
tury with special attention to this topic. Russian scholars V. I. Stoljarov and L. P.
Matvejev, both from the Russian State Academy of Sport in Moscow, participated,
among others, in this discussion.12
Recent Lines of Inquiry in Philosophy of

Sport in Slavonic Countries
What follows is an examination of the philosophy of sport scholarship recently
engaged by Slavonic scholars. It is divided by theme, and, like the above list of
scholars, it is not intended to be exhaustive. Major trends include 1) Phenomenol-
ogy of Existence and Body; 2) the Nature and Naming of the Discipline; 3) Analy-
ses of Physical Culture and its Various Phenomena; 4) Ethics and Aesthetics of
Sport; 5) Olympism; 6) Ancient Sport; 7) Recreation and Tourism; and 8) Sport
and Spirituality.
Issue 1: Phenomenology of Existence and Body

An increasing number of phenomenological inquiries into human movement are
noticeable in both Slavic journal articles and conference presentations. The spe-
cial issue of the journal Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis Gymnica
(Acta Gymnica Palacký University Olomouc) is a good example. Four authors

have substantially contributed to this category. Bednář (2) argues for the widening
of the common perception of movement. He builds upon Heidegger and Patočka’s
paradigm of human movement in three dimensions: self-anchoring, self-prolon-
gation and self-achievement. Within this framework, he designs a hypothetical
“topography” of dynamic human existence (horizon, zenith, and nadir) and
applies it to the sporting context. Martínková also develops Patočka’s idea of three
movements of human existence and the use of the aristotelic terms dynamis and
hypokeimenon (61). In contrast to Bednář , Martínková interprets the three move-
ments of human existence as acceptance, defense, and truth. The relation of every-
day movement (including sport movement) and movement of human existence is
likewise visible in this contribution.

Hogenová (18) identifies the phenomenological anchorage of movement and
time. Using Husserl (time as crimping from retentions and protentions) and using
German and ancient Greek terminology, she demonstrates the intricacy of think-
ing, movement, and temporal phenomena. The author has also published two
articles describing sport in terms of agon, hieros and gamos (20), and festivity in
terms of its sacred origin (22). Hogenová also published four books on phenom-
enology in recent years (16,17,19,21). She uses the same methodological approach
in all four but each text has a unique theme including pedagogy, competitive sport,
and some classical philosophical topics, like “piety of thinking” or “care of soul.”
These texts include “free adrift thinking” which is geared toward specialists rather
than students. She utilizes many phenomenologically and hermeneutically ori-
ented thinkers such as Husserl, Heidegger, Fink, Gadamer, Merleau-Ponty, and
Patočka. They are difficult texts to understand but her work does contribute a great
deal of original thinking to the literature. Her ideas reject a Cartesian approach
and her antipathy to quantification of scientific knowledge is strictly evident. She
challenges the understanding that only the sciences can discover the horizons of
wholeness (contrary to philosophy which has the groundwork for it in a Heideg-
gerian accentation of being). Few similarities between her work and English phi-
losophy of sport publications exist.
Jirásek also contributes to this inquiry when he examines the methodological
potential of phenomenology for analysis of human experience. Phenomenology
(more precisely fundamental ontology) can analyze some sporting activities (e.g.,
parachuting, climbing, BASE jumping and so on) as part of authentic or nonau-
thentic existence through the review of a “horizon of temporality”—different per-
ceptions of time in different sporting situations that contribute to the meaning of
our lives. Subsequently, his works focus on authentic existence in adventure or
high-risk sporting environments (33,34).
Issue 2: The Nature and Name of the Discipline

Opinions on the nature of the discipline are varied—from recognizing philosophy
of sport as an independent academic branch to recognizing it only as philosophi-
cal thinking about sport (43,45). To address this question, some scholars have
turned to changing the discipline’s name. To them, “philosophy of sport” seems
inadequate from a contextual point of view. Slavic scholars have argued for sev-
eral alternatives including “philosophy of physical culture” (12,39,40,51,63),
“philosophy of Olympism” (15,56,76), “philosophical kinanthropology” (philo-

sophical anthropology specific to human movement) (30,35), and “kinanthropos-
ophia” (all aspects of human movement, including the spiritual) (4). Historical
insights into Slavonic scholars’ perspectives on philosophy of physical culture
from both national and international points of view were also recently published
(32,44).
Issue 3: Analysis of Physical Culture and

its Various Phenomena
The search for meaning in human activities is discussed by Jirásek (29,31) in his
examination of movement culture—a subculture that is researched by philosophi-

cal kinanthropology. Jirásek examines several areas of movement activities and
differentiates each by their meaning and personal value. His conclusions suggest
how the meaning of life is perceived differently through these various forms of
movement.
Treatment of specific sports and ideas was also present in the literature. Sahaj
(74) and Smolík (79) have both written books that address the historical, cultural
and philosophical aspects of football (soccer) fans and football (soccer) hooli-
gans. Šíp (80) edits a collection of seven articles that target the ancient Greek ideal
kalokagathia (pedagogical idea about harmony between body and soul, beauty
and goodness) through several different approaches. Hurych reflects upon compe-
tition in its two possible manifestations: self-competition and internal competition
(26). Martínková (62) then wonders if competition has an adverse relationship
with health, wholeness and balance. Themes of nakedness and nudity in the sport-
ing environment were also examined resulting in different interpretations from
naturalness to pornography (37).
Issue 4: Ethics and Aesthetics of Sport

Ethics and fair play in sport permeate cultures and, not surprisingly, Slavic publi-
cations on this topic also exist. While Bednář (3) explores
. the values,
. metavalues
and motivations in sporting activities generally, Z ukowska and Z ukowski (91)
discuss the notions of fair play, values, ethics and ideals in Polish institutions.
Cynarski and Litwiniuk (8), drawing comparisons to Roman gladiators, examine
aggression and violence in mass culture and sport. Finally, Zowislo (87,89) uti-
lizes the ideas of Wolfgang Welsch as a justification of sport as a kind of art. This
author concludes that sport is not only an aesthetic but also an ethical
phenomenon.
Research ethics as applied to the ethics of kinanthropology, the ethics of sci-
ence, and the science of human movement is a theme broached by Jirásek &
Frömel (38). The authors argue that using ideas without appropriate referencing
poses both ethical and judicial problems. The authors appeal to an increased atten-
tion to ethical sensibility through the adoption of ethical research paradigms.
Issue 5: Olympism
Lipiec (58) explores the values and meanings of sport and culture through the lens
of Olympism. His inquiry includes the anthropology of sport; Olympic education
through word, symbol and act; sport and money; sport racism; ethics of trainers;
ball phenomenon; phenomenology of soccer; and winter sports. Zuchora (90)
examines a similar topic by connecting Olympism to values, humanism, educa-
tion, and ethics. While Kosiewicz (46) draws connections between sport and reli-
gion to conclude that the Olympic games are no more than sport, Pawlucki (66)
arrives at different conclusions and sees Olympic sport as a symbolic response to
the literal evil of war. Savić (75) discusses the Olympic games in terms of social
context—ideologies from different people, religions, traditions, and languages—
in one cultural event. This is a similar topic to Simonović and Simonović ’s (78)
book that provides a critical theory of capitalism using specific interpretations of
phenomenon from the philosophy of sport discipline. Simonović’s other book (77)
focuses on a topic rarely published: a description of Olympism from a socialist

position highlighting such topics as politics (colonialism and fascism), manipula-
tion, violence, and destruction.
Issue 6: Ancient Sport

Pisk (68) utilizes ancient Greek thought when philosophically considering the
body and human movement. He looks for answers to the question, “What is good
sport?” Agon and paideia are the basic structural elements to Pisk’s answer, and
he concludes that the physical dimensions of space and time do not determine the
value of good sport. Zowislo (88) offers “therapy” for contemporary sport through
the ancient Greek ideals of Olympism. She compares Platonic and Aristotelian
philosophical concepts of the great-spirited man. Finally, Mosz (64) examines
Greek sculptures and vase paintings to construct images of corporeality and trends
in the perception of the ideal sporting body.
Issue 7: Recreation and Tourism

Kosiewicz collections (41,42) are examinations of the phenomenon of recreation
and tourism. Focusing on recreational movement activities, his works examine the
leisure and systemic aspects of tourism, relationships between tourism and the
urban environment, the tourist services in Poland, and tourism for children and
youth. His works also includes European perspectives on sport for all, its possi-
bilities and barriers, and its relationship to tourism and recreation. Cynarski (9)
uses the example of martial arts to develop a humanistic theory of physical culture
and tourism and recreation as a cultural dialogue. Lipiec (59) offers axiological
reflections over motives and meanings of wandering and tourism with concentra-
tion on aesthetic values and beauty.
Issue 8: Sport and Spirituality

Jirásek (36) uses the metaphor of a labyrinth to describe a pilgrimage as an adven-
ture of physical spirituality. Kosiewicz (47) argues against a spiritual mission of
sport by discussing the tendency to attach potential religious values to these con-
temporary practices. In contrast, Dziubinski (11) seeks a connection between the
Catholic Church and physical culture. It is this interest in the spiritual dimension
of movement activities that leads Bednář (4) to argue for changing the name of the
discipline to kinanthroposophia.
Conclusion:
Future Directions in Slavic Sport Philosophy
In the end, topics and methods for philosophy of sport research in Slavonic coun-
tries are not unique to other parts of the world. Similar themes exist but so do
methodological tendencies toward phenomenology rather than analytic philoso-
phy. The future of philosophy of sport in Slavonic countries depends on its ability
to fully integrate into the discipline’s mainstream of discourse. Having Slavonic
works published in English is crucial to such development. Some scholars are
attempting to publish such translations. Attendance and presentations at interna-
tional conferences and memberships in international and European associations

by Slavonic scholars is further positive proof of this effort. However, many sport
philosophers continue to publish only in their own langugage or a second non-
English language such as Russian, French or German. While good scholarship
should be encouraged regardless of language, this communication gap limits com-
prehension and collaborative efforts with the majority of experts in philosophy of
sport. It is hoped that this article provides an initial step in minimizing this limita-
tion through a broader appreciation for Slavonic philosophy of sport scholarship.
Notes
1. Settled in Neolithic times, the name, “Slavs,” is historically traced to the 6th century AD
when they occupied almost half of Europe. Slavs are part of an Indo-European agrarian tribe
whose spirituality closely bound them to nature. Their cult invocated natural gods and demons
with dedicated purposes. For example, Svarog was the god of heaven and light; Svarožic-
Dažbog, the god of sun and fire; Perun, the god of storm and thunder; and Veles or Volos, the
god of fortune and prosperity (83).
2. The Habsurg Monarchy (1278–1780) and then the successor House of Habsburg-Lorraine
(1780–1918) would today include Austria, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hun-
gary, Italy, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovania, Spain, and Ukraine.
3. From medieval to modern times, there have been many changes in the political and juridi-
cal arrangement of central Europe, but for the purpose of this paper, it is necessary to only briefly
recapitulate the changes in 20th century.
4. West-Slavonic languages include Polish, Czech, Slovak, Wends, Kashube, and Pomera-
nian—an extinct language. South-Slavonic languages include Bulgarian, Croat, Serbian, Slo-
vene, Macedonian, Bosnian, Montenegrian and Old-Slavonic—the liturgical language of
Byzantine ceremony. East-Slavonic languages include Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian, and
Ruthenian.
5. Although morphology, syntax and wordage are quite similar, there are some differences.
For example, the word “to run” can be found as “běžet” (Czech), “bežat” (Slovak), “biec” (Polish),
“běžeć” (Wends), “бежать” (Russian), “бігти” (Ukrainian), “бегаць” (Belorussian), “бягам”
(Bulgarian), “бега” (Macedonian), “бежати” (Serbian), “bježati” (Croat), and “bežati” (Slo-
vene) (84: p. 14).
6. The Czech nation was part of Austria-Hungary state at that time.
7. Short for the Russian word, “phizicheskaja kultura,” (physical culture).
8. Charter 77 criticized the Czechoslovak government for failing to implement human rights
provisions in many of its legislations.
9. Tyrš’s papers are not available in English. However, Nolte, C. E. The Sokol in the Czech
Lands to 1914: Training for the Nation. New York: Palgrave, 2002 is a useful source. Materi-
als may also be found in the Archive of the Tyrš Museum of Physical Education and Sport in
Prague.
10. Biodrom from the Greek words “bios” meaning “life” and “dromos” meaning “run.” This
neologism is called “biodromal” in psychology and refers to a whole life project.
11. Simonović is from Belgrade, but this book—as well as his other books—were self-pub-
lished by the author. He appears to be an independent scholar who does not work at any univer-
sity.
12. For details, see http://lib.sportedu.ru/Press/tpfk/2000N6/p46-55.htm.
Acknowledgment
This study has been supported by a research grant from the Ministry of Education, Youth
and Sports of the Czech Republic (No. MSMT 6198959221) “Physical Activity and
Inactivity of the Inhabitants of the Czech Republic in the Context of Behavioral Changes.”
References
1. Akchurin, B.G. “Telesnost’ kak projavlenie čelovječeskogo potenciala i kak
valeologičeskaja cennosť.” [Corporeality as demonstration of human potential and as
valeological value]. Teorija i praktika fizicheskoj kultury 2005(6), 2005, 50-52.
2. Bednář, M. “Movements of Human Existence as a Possible Background for the
Study of a Sporting Life.” Acta Universitatis Palackianane Olomucensis Gymnica,
36(2), 2006, 11–16.
3. Bednář, M. “Hodnoty a jejich role motivačního zdroje i cíle sportovních aktivit.”
[Values and their role of motivational resource and goal of sport activities]. Tělesná
kultura, 30(1), 2007, 24-42.
4. Bednář, M. Pohyb člověka na biodromu: cesta životem z pohledu (nejen) kinantrop-
ologie. Praha: Karolinum, 2009, [Movement of human being at biodrom: the way in
life from point of view (not only) kinanthropology].
5. Byzov, A.P. “Vzaimosvjazi nastojaščeho vremeni s formirovaniem zdorovja i
uvlečenijami sportom.” [Mutually relations of present with formation of health and
sport interest]. Teorija i praktika fizicheskoj kultury 2005/6, 53-56.
6. Černý, J. Fotbal je hra: pokus o fenomenologii hry. [Football is game: the attempt at
phenomenology of game]. Praha: Československý spisovatel, 1968.
7. Cynarski, W.J. Teoria i praktyka dalekowschodnich sztuk walki w perspektywie
europejskiej. Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, 2004, [Theory
and practices of Far Eastern martial arts in Europe perspective].
8. Cynarski, W. J., & Litwiniuk, A. “Kultura przemocy na przykladzie boksu.” [Culture
of violence at example of boxing]. IDŌ – Movement for Culture 7, 2007, 84-95.
9. Cynarski, W.J. Spotkania, konflikty, dialogi: analýza wybranych obszarów kultury
fizycznej i turystyki kulturowej. [Meeting, conflicts, dialogs: analysis of chosen
domains of physical culture and culture tourism]. Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwer-
sytetu Rzeszowskiego, 2008.
10. Dziubiński, Z. Wy jesteście moja jedyna nadzieja. Warszawa: Salezjańska Orga-
nizacja Sportowa Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, 2005, [You are my only hope].
11. Dziubiński, Z. “Religia i kościól rzymskokatolicki a kultura fizyczna.” [Religon,
Roman Catholic Church and physical culture]. Studia humanistyczne, 9, 2009,
97-113.
12. Hodaň, B. Tělesná kultura – sociokulturní fenomén: východiska a vztahy. Olomouc:

Univerzita Palackého, 2000, [Physical culture – sociocultural phenomenon: starting
points and relations].
13. Hodaň, B. K problému filozofické kinantropologie. Olomouc: Univerzita Palackého,
2009, [To problem of philosophical kinanthropology].
14. Hogenová, A. Etika a sport. Praha: Univerzita Karlova, 1996, [Ethics and sport].
15. Hogenová, A. Areté: základ olympijské filosofie. Praha: Karolinum, 2000, [Areté: the
basic of olympic philosophy].
16. Hogenová, A. K problematice poznání [To problems of cognition]. Praha: Univerzita
Karlova – Pedagogická fakulta, 2005a.
17. Hogenová, A. K filosofii výkonu. Praha: Eurolex Bohemia, 2005b, [To philosophy of
peformance].
18. Hogenová, A. “Movement and Time.” Acta Universitatis Palackianane Olomucensis
Gymnica, 36(2), 2006, 47–52.
19. Hogenová, A. Tázání je zbožností myšlení. Praha: Eurolex, 2007a, [Questioning is
piety of thinking].
20. Hogenová, A. “Sport jako fenomén.” [Sport as phenomenon]. Studia sportiva 1(1),
2007b, 40-45.
21. Hogenová, A. Jak pečujeme o svou duši. Praha: Karolinum, 2008a, [How we care for
our soul].
22. Hogenová, A. “Sportovní slavnosti.” [Sport festivities]. Tělesná kultura 31(1), 2008b,
57-67.
23. Hopsicker, P., and Jirásek, I. “Selected philosophy of sport/movement culture texts
in English and Slavonic (2007-2008).” International Journal of Physical Education,
44(4), 2008, 162–176.
24. Hopsicker, P., and Jirásek, I. “Selected philosophy of sport/movement culture texts
in English and Slavonic (2005-2006).” International Journal of Physical Education,
43(4), 2006, 140–155.
25. Hrodek, D. et al. Slovanství ve středoevropském prostoru: iluze, deziluze a realita.
[Slavonic in central-European space: illusion, disillusion and reality]. Praha: Libri a
Střed, 2004.
26. Hurych, E. “Self-competition versus internal competition.” Physical culture and
sport: studies and research, 47, 2009, 111-116.
27. Jirásek, I. “Review of essays about philosophical analyses of sport (physical culture)
in central Europe.” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 30(2), 2003a, 177–181.
28. Jirásek, I. “Philosophy of sport, or philosophy of physical culture? An experience
from the Czech Republic: philosophical kinanthropology.” Sport Education and Soci-
ety, 8(1), 2003b, 105–117.
29. Jirásek, I. “Návrh na konverzi: od tělesné kultury k pohybové kultuře (a výchově).”
[Proposal for reconversion: from physical culture to movement culture (and educa-
tion)]. Tělesná kultura, 29(2), 2004, 15-31.
30. Jirásek, I. Filosofická kinantropologie: setkání filosofie, těla a pohybu. Olomouc: Uni-
verzita Palackého, 2005, [Philosophical kinanthropology: the meeting point of phi-
losophy, body and movement].
31. Jirásek, I. “The Space for Looking for the Meaning of Movement Activities and
Meaning of Human Way of Being: Movement Culture.” Acta Universitatis Palacki-
anane Olomucensis Gymnica, 36(2), 2006, 95–99.
32. Jirásek, I. “Filosofie pohybových aktivit na východ od nás.” [Philosophy of movement
activities at east from us]. Tělesná kultura 30(1), 2007a, 43-54.
33. Jirásek, I. “Extreme sports and the ontology of experience.” In Philosophy, Risk and
Adventure Sports, M. McNamee (Ed.). London, New York: Routledge, 2007b, pp.
138–148.
34. Jirásek, I. “An experience and Heideggers’s analysis of authentic existence.” In H.

Sheridan, L. A. Howe, & K. Thompson (Eds.), Sporting reflections: some philosophi-
cal perspectives (Sport, culture & society, Vol. 8). Oxford: Meyer & Meyer Sport
(UK) Ltd, 2007c, pp. 154-170.
35. Jirásek, I. “Nomen – omen: kinanthropology vs. kinesiology.” Studia humanistyczne,
8, 2008, 59-71.
36. Jirásek, I. “The Labyrinth, Not a Barrier but Instead a Call to Wandering.” IDŌ –
Movement for Culture, 8, 2008b, 11-16.
37. Jirásek, I. “Nahota v kontextu pohybové kultury.” [Nakedness in context of movement
culture]. Tělesná kultura, 32(2), 2009, 7-19.
38. Jirásek, I., & Frömel, K. “Nedodržování publikační etiky jako výraz “intelektuální
lenosti“” [Break of publish ethics as aspect of “intellectual idleness“]. Česká kinantro-
pologie, 9(2), 2005, 43-48.

39. Kosiewicz, J. Kultura fizyczna i sport w perspktywie filozofii. Warszawa: Akademia
Wychowania Fizycznego Jozefa Pilsudskiego, 2000, [Physical culture and sport in
perspective of philosophy].
40. Kosiewicz, J. Filozoficzne aspekty kultury fizycznej i sportu. Warszawa: BK Wydawnic-
two i Ksiegarnie, 2004, [Philosophical aspects of physical culture and sport].
41. Kosiewicz, J. (Ed.). Environmental differentiations of tourism. Legionowo: Economi-
cal and Technical College, 2006a.
42. Kosiewicz, J. (Ed.). Movement recreation for all. Legionowo: Economical and Tech-
nical College, 2006b.
43. Kosiewicz, J. “Philosophy of Sport or Philosophical Reflection on Sport.” Acta Uni-
versitatis Palackianane Olomucensis Gymnica, 36(2), 2006c, 53–58.
44. Kosiewicz, J. “Filozofia kultury fizycznej w Polsce.” [Philosophy of physical culture
in Poland]. IDŌ – Movement for Culture 7, 2007, 11-37.
45. Kosiewicz, J. “Filozofia sportu w perspektywie instytucjonalnej, merytoricznej i met-
odologicznej.” [The philosophy of sport in institutional, substantial and methodologi-
cal perspective]. Studia humanistyczne, 8, 2008a, 87-129.
46. Kosiewicz, J. “Czy igrzyska olimpijskie sa czyms wiecej niz sportem?” [Are the
Olympic games something more than sport?]. IDŌ – Movement for Culture 8, 2008b,
187-195.
47. Kosiewicz, J. Sport and philosophy: from methodology to ethics. Warsaw: Wydawnic-
two BK, 2009a.
48. Kosiewicz, J. “Prolegomena do rozwazań o sporcie zachodnim i spirytualizmie.”
[Prolegomena to a discussion about western sport and spirituality]. Studia humanisty-
czne, 9, 2009b, 7-21.
49. Kössl, J., Štumbauer, J., and Waic, M. Vybrané kapitoly z dějin tělesné kultury. Praha:
Karolinum, 1998, [The Chosen Chapters from the History of Physical Culture].
50. Krawczyk, Z. (Ed.). Filozofia i socjologia kultury fizycznej. Warszawa: Państwowe
Wydawnictvo Naukowe, 1974, [Philosophy and sociology of physical culture].
51. Krawczyk, Z. Studia z filozofii i socjologii kultury fizycznej. [Study from philosophy
and sociology of physical culture]. Warszawa: Sport i turystyka, 1978.
52. Krawczyk, Z., and Kosiewicz, J. (Eds.). Filozofia kultury fizycznej: koncepcje i prob-
lemy. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo AWF, 1990, [Philosophy of physical culture: concep-
tions and problems].
53. Kreft, L. “Martyrdom as extreme sport.” In Philosophy of sport and other essays (Pro-
ceedings book), D. Macura and M. Hosta (Eds.). Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana,
2003, pp. 75–81.
54. Kreft, L. “Martin in the field.” Sport, Ethics and Philosophy, 2(1), 2008, 71–83.
55. Kreft, L. “The elite athlete – in a state of exception?” Sport, Ethics and Philosophy,
3(1), 2009, 3–18.
56. Lipiec, J. Kalokagatia: szkice z filozofii sportu. Warszawa, Kraków: Pańswowe

Wydawnictvo Naukowe, 1988, [Kalokagathia: draft from philosophy of sport].
57. Lipiec, J. Filozofia olimpizmu. Warszawa: Sprint, 1999, [Philosophy of olympism].
58. Lipiec, J. Pozegnanie z Olympia. [Benediction from Olympia]. Krakow: Fall, 2007.
59. Lipiec, J. “Poszukiwanie piekna: u zródel aktywności turystycznej.” [Searching for
beauty: at the roots of a tourist activity]. Studia humanistyczne, 8, 2008, 131-149.
60. Martínková, I. “Kalokagathia – harmonie duše a těla, nebo harmonie člověka?” [Kalo-
kagathia – harmony of body and soul, or harmony of human being?]. Česká kinantro-
pologie, 7(1), 2003, 75-81.
61. Martínková, I. “Jan Patočka’s Three Movements of Human Life with respect to Physi-
cal Education and Sport Practice.” Acta Universitatis Palackianane Olomucensis
Gymnica, 36(2), 2006, 59–66.

62. Martínková, I. “Sport Competition and Health: A Healthy Relationship?” Studies in
Physical Culture and Tourism, 15(1), 2008, 19–25.
63. Matić, M., and Bokan, B. Opšta teorija fizičke kulture. [General theory of physical
culture]. Beograd: Fakultet sporta i fizičkog vaspitanja, 2005.
64. Mosz, J. Ancient patterns of the sporting body. Physical culture and sport: studies and
research, 47, 2009, 137-143.
65. Oborný, J. Filozofické a etické pohlady do športovej humanistiky. [Philosophical and
ethical view into sport humanistics]. Bratislava: Slovenská vedecká spoločnosť pre
telesnú výchovu a šport, 2001.
66. Pawlucki, A. “Why the Olympic modernism is more than sport?” Physical culture and
sport: studies and research, 47, 2009, 117-124.
67. Pešková, M. (Ed.). Slovanské národy dnes. Plzeň: Aleš Čeněk, 2006, [Slavonic
Nations Today].
68. Pisk, J. “What is Good Sport: Plato’s View.” Acta Universitatis Palackianane Olomu-
censis Gymnica, 36(2), 2006, 67–72.
69. Pospíšil, I. Slované a Evropa na počátku 21. století. [The Slavs end Europe on the
Beginning of 21st Century]. Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 2007.
70. Radoš, J. Filozofija sporta. [Philosophy of sport]. Sombor: Univerzitet v Novom
Sadu, 2005.
71. Reitmayer, L. Přehled vývoje tělesné výchovy ve světě. [Compendium of physical edu-
cation in the world development]. Praha: Státní pedagogické nakladatelství, 1984.
72. Reitmayer, L. Přehled vývoje tělesné výchovy na území ČSSR. [Compendium of physi-
cal education in the CSSR area development]. Praha: Státní pedagogické nakladatel-
ství, 1978.
73. Rýdl, M. Kapitoly z filozofie tělesné kultury. Praha: Univerzita Karlova, 1993, [Chap-
ters from philosophy of physical culture].
74. Sahaj, T. Fani futbolowi: historyczno-spoleczne studium zjawiska kibicowania.
Poznań: Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego, 2007, [Football fans: historical-social
study of cheer appearance].
75. Savić, Z. “The Olympic Games as a Cultural Event.” Acta Universitatis Palackianane
Olomucensis Gymnica, 37(3), 2007, 7–13.
76. Simonović, Lj. Philosophy of Olympism. Belgrade: Lj. Simonović, 2004.
77. Simonović, Lj. Olimpijska podvala. Beograd: Lj. Simonović, 2007, [Olympic cheat].
78. Simonović, D., and Simonović, Lj. A New World is Possible. Beograd: Lj. Simonović,
2007.
79. Smolík, J. Fotbalové chuligánství: historie, teorie a politizace fenoménu. [Football
hooliganism: history, theory and politization of phenomenon]. Karlovy Vary: Zdeněk
Plachý, 2008.
80. Šíp, R. (Ed.). (2008). Kalokagathia: ideál, nebo flatus vocis? [Kalokagathia: ideal or
flatus vocis?]. Brno: Masarykova univerzita a Paido.
81. Tyrš, M. Náš úkol, směr a cíl. [Our target, direction and goal]. Praha: Nakladatelství
Československé obce sokolské, 1947.
82. Tyrš, M. Hod olympický. [Olympic feast]. Praha: Olympia, 1968.
83. Váňa, Z. Svět slovanských bohů a démonů. Praha: Panorama, 1990, [The World of
Slavonic Gods and Demons].
84. Večerka, R. Staroslověnština v kontextu slovanských jazyků. [Old-Slavonic in the
Context of Slavonic Languages]. Olomouc – Praha: Univerzita Palackého a Naklada-
telství Euroslavica, 2006.
85. Wohl, A. “Kultura fizyczna i jej specyfika.” In Filozofia i socjologia kultury fizyc-
znej, Z. Krawczyk (Ed.). Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawenictvo Naukowe, 1974, pp.
219–221. [Philosophy and sociology of physical culture].
86. Zowislo, M. Filozofia i sport: horizonty dialogu. [Philosophy and sport: horizons
of dialogue]. Kraków: Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego im. Bronislawa Czecha,
2001.
87. Zowislo, M. “Sport jako sztuka wokól postmodernistycznej estetyzacji sportu.” [Sport
as art over postmodern estetization of sport]. Edukacja filozoficzna, 44, 2007, 27-39.
88. Zowislo, M. “Wielkość i miara sportu: inspiracje antyczne.” [Greatness and measure
of sport: antique inspirations]. Studia humanistyczne, 8, 2008, 151-165.
89. Zowislo, M. “On virtue in the context of sport.” Physical culture and sport: studies
and research, 47, 2009, 89-94.
90. Zuchora, K. “Sport i olimpizm w przestrzeni wartości dawnych i współczesnych.”
[Sport and olympism in space of past and contemporary values]. Wychowanie fizyczne
i sport, 51(3), 2007, 149-156.
91. Żukowska, Z., Żukowski, R. “Rozwój idei fair play – osiągnięcia i perspektywy.”
[Development of fair play idea – obtainment and perspectives]. Wychowanie fizyczne
i sport, 51(3), 2007, 157-163.

Philosophy of Sport) in Slavonic

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Philosophy of Sport) in Slavonic

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Philosophy of Sport) in Slavonic

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [George Mason University]

On: 25 December 2014, At: 15:56

Journal of the Philosophy of Sport

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2010.9714780

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

the Current Directions

A Brief History of the Slavonic Domain

former Habsburg Monarchy—as an effort for cultural and civilizational consis-

Traditions of Inquiry in Sport and Physical

centralistically directed under state control. Human movement was understood as an

Paul II is highly recognized by modern philosophers as inspiration for anthropo-

a value; rivalization is a competition with an individual who is to be abased by

basketball team and a doctor of philosophy, Simonović interprets Olympism as an

pacifism overshadowing a militaristic ceremony. In the end, his book is critical of

Recent Lines of Inquiry in Philosophy of

Issue 1: Phenomenology of Existence and Body

(Acta Gymnica Palacký University Olomouc) is a good example. Four authors

likewise visible in this contribution.

Issue 2: The Nature and Name of the Discipline

“philosophy of Olympism” (15,56,76), “philosophical kinanthropology” (philo-

Issue 3: Analysis of Physical Culture and

examination of movement culture—a subculture that is researched by philosophi-

Issue 4: Ethics and Aesthetics of Sport

focuses on a topic rarely published: a description of Olympism from a socialist

Issue 6: Ancient Sport

Issue 7: Recreation and Tourism

Issue 8: Sport and Spirituality

tional conferences and memberships in international and European associations

12. Hodaň, B. Tělesná kultura – sociokulturní fenomén: východiska a vztahy. Olomouc:

34. Jirásek, I. “An experience and Heideggers’s analysis of authentic existence.” In H.

pologie, 9(2), 2005, 43-48.

56. Lipiec, J. Kalokagatia: szkice z filozofii sportu. Warszawa, Kraków: Pańswowe

Gymnica, 36(2), 2006, 59–66.

You might also like