So my main point here is that there is no good reason for this thinning out other than to see who is the best. In the arts or sciences, the best actually create things that improve society. Its generally seen as true that society benefits from improvements in culture and science and technology. With the focus on pro sports rather than recreation, society really gains nothing.
I mean imagine a perfectly healthy society. Would sports be about seeing who can be the elite with general societys participation merely passive. Or that sports being mainly for the every man and woman. That participation in sports through life, regardless of skill level is good throughout life and is what the purpose of sports should be.
You can say we could have both but I am not convicned. It seems you need to focus on one or the other. You can see this in sports that are not so focused on the pro level due to whatever reason. Something like BJJ is very much still recreation and its purpose is not about becoming world champ but improving yourself through training. But when it comes to wrestling that is an olympic sport, that is not the case. You dont see recreation wrestling gyms due to the focus being on the elites.
That is my main gripe. The purpose of sports in a way to benefit society is just made into a product people passively consume. That is obviously worse than active participation by general society.
Well it sounds like you have a world view of relativism. So I guess we cannot really get anywhere based on me seeing things differently. Art has certainly lost its meaning if anything can be art. Perhaps anything can be a sport too.
So where does that leave something like autosports? Racing is a combination of science, engineering, and athleticism (drivers have to be athletes to endure and have the reaction times they do).
Thatās a professional sport, but people watching it (especially kids) May get into science and engineering topics because of it and invent the next best thing for society. IndyCar played a big part in my desire to learn aerodynamics.
In my opinion art is the category that we can see things such as poets, novelists and composers fit into. If you think quarterbacks fit into that category, I would just be at a loss. Can you also see soldiers in that category? Its sort of like how I can understand what red is even though I would not be able to define it. Do you believe that there are things we can say that are not red even though I cannot define red?
Thatās because everything is relative. We change reality simply by percieving it.
This is demonstrated repeatedly in quantum physics.
What one views distorts the true nature of the thing being viewed.
The Buddhists call this same idea ādependent arisingā. Nothing happens just by itself. The very definition and weight one gives to pro sports depends on oneās specific experiences.
I remember when people said that about Lance Armstrong. Anyway, if we could imagine an ideal or at least realistic healthy society, would people really want their children to choose professional athletes as role models? Like plenty of athletes are probably really cool people, but it seems like the sign of an unhealthy society for basketball players to be seen as role models.
This is just so false. I never made the pros, but play in recreational leagues for soccer, softball, basketball, boxing, and other sports. Everyone who plays in these recreational leagues is also fans of the pro-version, and not a single person is bothered that our league games donāt get the attention that a Dodgers-Giants game gets. I just cannot at all understand your logic.
Track and field. I was a long distance runner. My school was not big so Its not like it was a big deal to do well in our division. But I am not going to post identifying information about myself just to convince others. Also, I was only the best my senior year. And I was only the best because I ran far more than anyone else to prepare for the season since I enjoyed running simply for itself.
He still persevered through a lot of turmoil to achieve what he did regardless of the blood doping allegations.
They stripped his title but didnāt give it to the next guy for that year because most of the cyclists at that level had been accused at one point or another of blood doping.
Why should role models be perfect and not make mistakes? Arenāt they human after all.
Show me a guy who has claimed to have made no mistakes and I will show you a liar. Itās just that role models get higher scrutiny and get put on an unnatural pedestal by many. Therefore, when they make a mistake the public yells āCrucify!ā
So because a few people still play in rec leagues, there is not a general weeding out throughout youth in sports and then in adulthood sports by general society is experienced passivley?
You dont think you would have an issue with a role model being someone who lied about how they achieved their athletic accomplishments? Im not saying I think poorly about Lance at all. But how many other athletes are out there deceiving the world? But dont you agree that having sportsmen as role models is a sign of an unhealthy society?
The point is that anyone has the option of continuing to play if they choose to. As children, weāre often introduced (or forced, from a childās perspective) to activities like sports, art, music lessons, horse riding, etc, etcā¦ Throughout oneās life, there are a myriad of options to continue in these pursuits if one chooses. You say a āfewā people play in rec leagues. Well, tons of people do and any that wishes to can. Even in these leagues, there are tiers to much oneās skillset and competitiveness.
Your argument is just silly and doesnāt at all align with reality.