In today's sport: teaching noble values possible, or leaving young people to their fate. A critical reflection with the university lecturer in philosophy and media theory and publicist Ludwig Hasler.
Never preach values
What associations does the term "commitments" trigger in you? Ludwig Hasler: Contradictory ones. On the one hand, sport needs such normative agreements if it wants to save its old idealistic role of a "counter-world": in other words, health, fair play, fair performance instead of the "Darwinian" duel. On the other hand, real sport is moving away from this lovely ideal - somewhere between the eroticism of movement and the primitive desire to be stronger, between physical skill and the brutality of competition ...
This makes it all the more challenging to work on basic attitudes. How can children and young people be inspired? Children and young people are enthusiastic about many things as soon as they realize that it is in their interest. These attitudes and values must therefore bring them a benefit - or at least a good feeling. This is easiest to convey in team sports: Fairness, no rough fouls, one for all - that boosts team spirit. This in turn raises the self-esteem of each individual ("I am indispensable, recognized"). And with self-esteem comes sporting success. It is certainly a difficult task to gain this interest. It is most likely to succeed if values are plausibly conveyed as a life gain and stimulus for success. For God's sake, never preach values instead of success!
As long as sport does not become a circus, it lives from values.
Why are shared values necessary in sport? As long as sport is not to become a circus, it thrives on such attitudes. If sprinters inject themselves with anabolic steroids, they ruin the sport as well as their health. The comparability of performances is the be-all and end-all of modern sport. If it is no longer the best athlete who wins, but the one with the best pharmaceutical company, then the whole basis of sport collapses. It's about sport, not about being good or nice. We don't need to talk much about "ethics". The insight into "mutual egoism" is enough: If I play sport, I must want values such as not taking drugs, fairness, adherence to rules in the sense of equal opportunities.
Commitments should be determined jointly by everyone. What value do you place on agreements that are drawn up by a small, interested group for the whole team? The decisive factor is the composition of the group. If any well-intentioned proposals come from a club of the good or the weak, the others will just scoff. Then it is clear that the purpose of the commitment is to protect the weaker ones. That never works under earthly conditions.
In my previous job as editorial director, I always chose a few "leaders" and two "notorious ricochets". I then had this group draw up an editorial statute - an agreement without strict legal force, a kind of commitment. In most cases, the proposals were accepted without any problems. It is therefore crucial to involve the so-called "troublemakers" from the outset.
What suggestions would you give to voluntary sports leaders to help them adapt to the challenge of joint agreements? Nowadays, it is easy to exaggerate this common and grassroots democratic approach. It remains crucial that commitments are not imposed from outside. Nevertheless, young people want a "chief". A friend told me how, as a secondary school teacher, he took over a class that had previously forced two teachers to resign. He wrote to the class on the first day of school: "Bring your bike, running shoes and swimming trunks. We're doing a triathlon." When the time came, he greeted everyone individually, briefly outlined the day's schedule and led the way on his bike. The cheeky boys followed him - even all the following days at school. They had found their chief.
This example is intended to illustrate the following: Sustainable commitments never emerge from a leaderless bunch. First, the group must grow into an interest group - i.e. be led - and only then can young people become independent and develop initiatives that serve the group.
Is there a "learning path" for the joint development of attitudes and values? The best way to "learn" is through negative experiences. There is this nice bon mot from the anti-authoritarian times of 1968: In kindergarten, the little ones greeted their kindergarten teacher in the morning with the exasperated question: "Miss, do we have to play what we want again today?" The joke of the question makes it clear: always having to choose and decide for yourself is a strain, a torture, an excessive demand. A group must have experienced this excessive demand in the hullabaloo of values and attitudes - only then does it appreciate the benefits of commitment.
Commitments can complement, but not replace, rules, school regulations, learning contracts, etc. How do you see this complementary function? Both are rules. Some come "from above" - from school management or employers - commitments come "from below". With them, young people experience the feeling of setting their own rules for the first time. They experience it as a stimulus to invent their own collective behavior. At the same time, they also experience it as a burden to take responsibility for group life themselves.
In functional terms, I imagine the addition of rules and commitments to be like corporate identity in companies. Everyone plays football according to the rules dictated by FIFA. The juniors of FC Herisau, however, agree never to deliberately straddle an opponent in the shin. And this is not as a noble ethic of renunciation, but as a profile-raising commitment: "We don't need to sabre others ready for hospitalization, we win that way too. We are something special!"
If agreements are to have a lasting effect, they must be entered into voluntarily. But what should be done if commitments are not kept? You need rituals for such cases. The group - not the leader - must make it clear to the offending person that they have excluded themselves from the collective with their behavior. Depending on the severity of the offense, the group must decide on a punishment (suspension, hard labor as compensation). Of course, this only works if such punishments and penalties have been determined in advance, if they have been jointly approved at the same time as the commitment.
Source reference:
Contents: Jugend+Sport, mobile 1, Dec. 2004, COMMITMENTS
Author: Raqlph Hunziker
copyright: www.mobile-sport.ch
Picture: www.juropa.net
Content may be automatically translated. Help improve the quality of the translation with your editing!
