Sportökonomie und Sportmanagement zwischen Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Sportwissenschaft?

Discussions about the relationship of sports science to each of its disciplines can be traced back to the years of establishment of sports science. For the comparably young discipline of sports economics these considerations are currently still lacking. Historically, besides applying economic approaches to sports one can also identify non-economic traditions of dealing with economic phenomena in sports. Within both lines of tradition different terms for the phenomena to be examined are used. Reflecting the development of these two lines of tradition of sports economics with respect to the established philosophical positions of Popper’s falsificationism, to Kuhn’s paradigmatic development as a consequence of normal science and scientific revolution, as well as to Lakatos’ methodology of scientific research programs, a number of implications arise for the development status of sports economics as an economic discipline both for its position in relation to sports science and economic science and regarding developments of further theories.     

eSport und der blinde Fleck: Ein Diskussionsbeitrag vor dem Hintergrund von Manfred Franz’ und Detlef Köpkes <Emphasis Type="Italic">Neuen Denkwegen im Sport </Emphasis>(2017)

The ongoing e-sports debate exemplifies an urgent problem regarding the scientific denial of a valid definiton of sport. Focusing on current contributions to the e-sports discussion and a publication by Manfred Franz and Detlef Köpke (“Neue Denkwege im Sport”), the given paper emphasizes the need for a basic discussion about the definition of sport itself.     

The “Hand of God”'s: Essays in the Philosophy of Sport By Claudio M. Tamburrini. Published 2000 by Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis,Box 222, SE-405 30, Sweden (167 pp.)

This paper contains a consideration of the notion of genius and its significance to the discussion of the aesthetics of sport. We argue that genius can make a positive aesthetic contribution in both art and sport, just as some have argued that the moral content of a work of art can affect its aesthetic value. A genius is an exceptional innovator of successful strategies, where such originality adds aesthetic value. We argue that an original painting can have greater aesthetic value than an exact replica, merely because it is the original. By parity of reasoning, a successful innovation in sport has additional aesthetic value just because it is a new creation. The genius is one who can provide this extra aesthetic pleasure and on that basis is rightly valued. The genius need not be conscious of how they achieve such innovations and thus find their own genius to be something they cannot explain but only demonstrate. In sport, innovations that offer new ways of playing or solving problems can produce competitive success which demands instant recognition and rewards.