Michael W. Austin

_FATHERHOOD PHILOSOPHY FOR EVERYONE_ _FATHERHOOD PHILOSOPHY FOR EVERYONE_ It has been said that being a father is what finally gives a man his meaning in life. And a father’s role has never been so involved – or expectations so high. There’s a lot for dads to discover, and as Socrates demonstrated, learning really begins when we as fathers realize how little we know. But, no fear, help is at hand as _Fatherhood – Philosophy for Everyone_ offers wisdom and practical advice drawn from the annals of philosophy, exploring paternal concerns such as: Fatherhood and the meaning of life The impact of change in men who become fathers How to raise well-adjusted children and have a more fulfilling and enjoyable experience of fatherhood Do real fathers bake cookies? Both thought-provoking and practical, _Fatherhood – Philosophy for Everyone_ provides a valuable starting and ending point for reflecting on this crucial role.

Alvin Plantinga, in Warranted Christian Belief, offers a model for the rationality of a particular version of Christian theistic belief. After briefly summarizing Plantinga’s model, I argue that there are significant moral difficulties present within it. The Christian believer who gives assent to Plantinga’s model is vulnerable tocharges of irrationality and/or immorality when one considers the role and effects of original sin in the model. Similar difficulties arise when one considers a problem posed by religious pluralism for the model. I consider some possible responses to these difficulties, and conclude that these issues merit more attention than they are given in Warranted Christian Belief.

In recent decades, many philosophers have considered the strengths and weaknesses of a virtue-centered approach to moral theory. Much less attention has been given to how such an approach bears on issues in applied ethics. The essays in this volume apply a virtue-centered perspective to a variety of contemporary moral issues, and in so doing offer a fresh and illuminating perspective. Some of the essays focus on a particular virtue and its application to one or more realms of applied ethics, such as temperance and sex or humility and environmental ethics. Other chapters focus on an issue in applied ethics and bring several virtues into a discussion of that issue or realm of life, such as sport, education, and business. Finally, several of the chapters engage relevant psychological research as well as current neuroscience, which enhances the strength of the philosophical arguments.

Winning isn't everything. It's the only thing. Vince Lombardi The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered, but to have fought well. The Olympic Creed These two statements reflect two very different approaches to sport. The Lombardi quote reflects the view that we should take a win-at-all-costs approach. By contrast, the Olympic Creed includes the idea that there is something more important in sport than victory. Perhaps the Olympic Creed is correct, and Lombardi mistaken. Perhaps the value of winning is found primarily in its potential to foster both athletic and moral excellence, while the overvaluing of victory for its own sake suffers from several deficiencies as an approach to sport.

A unique anthology of essays exploring the philosophical wisdom runners contemplate when out for a run. It features writings from some of America’s leading philosophers, including Martha Nussbaum, Charles Taliaferro, and J.P. Moreland. A first-of-its-kind collection of essays exploring those gems of philosophical wisdom runners contemplate when out for a run Topics considered include running and the philosophy of friendship; the freedom of the long distance runner; running as aesthetic experience, and “Could a Zombie Run a Marathon?” Contributing essayists include philosophers with athletic experience at the collegiate level, philosophers whose pasttime is running, and one philosopher who began running to test the ideas in his essay.

I define humility as a virtue that includes both proper self-assessment and a self-lowering other-centeredness. I then argue that humility, so understood, is a virtue in the context of sport, for several reasons. Humility is a component of sportspersonship, deters egoism in sport, fuels athletic aspiration and risk-taking, fosters athletic forms of self-knowledge, decreases the likelihood of an athlete seeking to strongly humiliate her opponents or be weakly humiliated by them, and can motivate an athlete to achieve greater levels of excellence in her sport. In the context of team sports, humility can contribute to an athlete being a better teammate, foster unity amidst diversity within a team, and contribute to the overall moral and athletic excellence of a team. I also argue that an individual who is truly the world's greatest athlete can know and communicate this truth, while remaining humble.

In this philosophical note I first offer a brief sketch of a Christian conception of humility. Next, I consider two criticisms of the claim that humility is a virtue, one from David Hume and a second from contemporary philosopher Tara Smith. What follows in this note is not a comprehensive defense of the claim that humility is a virtue. However, if humility is not a virtue, it will be for reasons other than those proffered by Hume and Smith, as their criticisms fail on philosophical and empirical grounds.

The most popular sport in the United States, football is an American institution. It dominates television ratings, it is a major source of revenue on college campuses, and its crowning event, the Super Bowl, now is celebrated as a veritable national holiday. Football and Philosophy: Going Deep investigates many of the issues surrounding the nation's biggest sport. From a review of the flaws of the Bowl Championship Series, to a study of the violence inherent in the game, to an examination of Vince Lombardi's views on winning, the essays in this collection tackle the moral and philosophical principles behind gridiron competition. The result is an insightful, humorous, and entirely original book that will engage all fans of the game.

Sport builds character. If this is true, why is there a consistent stream of news detailing the bad behavior of athletes? We are bombarded with accounts of elite athletes using banned performance-enhancing substances, putting individual glory ahead of the excellence of the team, engaging in disrespectful and even violent behavior towards opponents, and seeking victory above all else. We are also given a steady diet of more salacious stories that include various embarrassing, immoral, and illegal behaviors in the private lives of elite athletes. Elite sport is not alone in this; youth sport has its own set of moral problems. Parents assault officials, undermine coaches, encourage a win-at-all costs mentality, and in many cases ruin sport for their children.

I argue for a moderate view of the justification and the extent of the moral rights of parents that avoids the extremes of both children’s liberationism and parental absolutism. I claim that parents have rights qua parents, and that these prima facie rights are grounded in certain fundamental interests that both parents and children possess, namely, psychological well-being, intimate relationships, and the freedom to pursue that which brings satisfaction and meaning to life. I also examine several issues related to public policy and the moral dimensions of the family—child abuse, children divorcing their parents, and the religious upbringing of children—and consider what implications the argument has for these issues. I conclude that the argument’s implications with respect to these issues further increases its plausibility.