Copy the page URI to the clipboard
Pike, Jon and Cordell, Sean
(2019).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17511321.2018.1561747
Abstract
In this paper, we reply to Eric Moore’s argument that Lance Armstrong did not cheat, at least according to one, standard account of cheating. If that is the case, we argue, so much the worse for the standard account of cheating, since Armstrong was a cheat. We argue that the standard account of cheating fails on several counts: it specifies conditions that are not necessary for cheating: that cheating involves trying to secure an unfair advantage and that cheating depends on fair application of the rules. We dispute Moore’s claim that doping in the peloton was a convention that had normative force, and reject his anti-formalist analogy between doping in the peloton and bodily contact in basketball.
Viewing alternatives
Download history
Metrics
Public Attention
Altmetrics from AltmetricNumber of Citations
Citations from DimensionsItem Actions
Export
About
- Item ORO ID
- 58647
- Item Type
- Journal Item
- ISSN
- 1751-133X
- Keywords
- Doping; cheating; Lance Armstrong; Eric Moore; conventions
- Academic Unit or School
-
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) > Social Sciences and Global Studies > Philosophy
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) > Social Sciences and Global Studies
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) - Research Group
-
Global Challenges and Social Justice
Sport and Fitness - Copyright Holders
- © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
- Depositing User
- Jon Pike