Works by Nicholas Dixon
39 found
Order:
1 filter applied
DisambiguationsDisambiguations:
| Nicholas Dixon [43] | Nicholas John Dixon [1] |
- (2 other versions)On Winning and Athletic Superiority.Nicholas Dixon -1999 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 26 (1):10-26.
- Canadian Figure Skaters, French Judges, and Realism in Sport.Nicholas Dixon -2003 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 30 (2):103-116.
- Boxing, Paternalism, and Legal Moralism.Nicholas Dixon -2001 -Social Theory and Practice 27 (2):323-344.324 "we should impose a single legal restriction that would effectively eliminate boxing's main medical risk: a complete ban on blows to the head" against Mill's harm principle, is not possible to justify paternalism requires other paternalistic arguments 325 "the entire paternalism v. respect for autonomy debate as it applied to boxing is cast in nonconsequentialist terms" do we have any reason to suppose that boxers' decisions to enter the profession are lacking in autonomy? many fail the first hurdle: "having (...) adequate information" - unlikely to know the medical facts 326 liberal view would state we need better education, not paternalism stronger paternalism = "an autonomous decision must flow from the agent's own values, without undue pressure from other people or external circumstances." otherwise is coercive and precludes autonomous action "since boxers often come from severely disadvantaged backgrounds and may see boxing as their only means of escaping from dangerous, povery-stricken neighborhoods, their decision to become boxers may reflect their desperation, rather than an authentic desire that flows from their own considered values". (shrink)
- (2 other versions)The ethics of supporting sports teams.Nicholas Dixon -2001 -Journal of Applied Philosophy 18 (2):149–158.
- On Sportsmanship and “Running Up the Score”.Nicholas Dixon -1992 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 19 (1):1-13.
- In Praise of Partisanship.Nicholas Dixon -2016 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 43 (2):233-249.J.S. Russell, Stephen Mumford, and Randolph Feezell have criticized my view that zealous partisans of a particular team are superior to purists, who derive an esthetic pleasure from good play by any team. All three philosophers extol the virtues of purism and Russell defends a pluralistic view that rejects the very idea of an ideal type of fan. In response, I renounce the claim that partisans are superior to purists and instead propose a more modest defense of partisanship. Moderate partisan (...) fans, who constrain their support by moral and esthetic criteria, exhibit admirable concern for their team’s wellbeing, have unique opportunities to display moral virtue, and are necessary for the welfare of competitive sport. Partisans’ choice of team is influenced by arbitrary factors but arbitrariness is built into the very nature of sport and applies equally to purists’ admiration of athletic excellence. It diminishes neither the value of athletic excellence nor the value of partisans’ devotion to their team. (shrink)
- The Friendship Model of Filial Obligations.Nicholas Dixon -1995 -Journal of Applied Philosophy 12 (1):77-87.ABSTRACT This paper [1] is a defence of a modified version of Jane English's model of filial obligations based on adult children's friendship with their parents. Unlike the more traditional view that filial obligations are a repayment for parental sacrifices, the friendship model puts filial duties in the appealing context of voluntary, loving relationships. Contrary to English's original statement of this view, which is open to the charge of tolerating filial ingratitude, the friendship model can generate obligations to help our (...) parents even if we are no longer friendly with them. Joseph Kupfer has pointed out several ways in which parent‐child relationships differ from peer friendships; but his arguments do not preclude our enjoying a type of friendship with our parents. In response to Christina Hoff Sommers, who objects that feelings of friendship toward our parents are too flimsy a ground for filial duties, the friendship model can provide a plausible, robust account of filial obligations. As for adult children who have never formed friendships with their loving, caring parents, and refuse to give them much‐needed assistance, they can be criticised by moral considerations independent of but compatible with the friendship model. (shrink)
- Trash talking, respect for opponents and good competition.Nicholas Dixon -2007 -Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 1 (1):96 – 106.
- Internalism and external moral evaluation of violent sport.Nicholas Dixon -2016 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 43 (1):101-113.
- Rorty, Performance-Enhancing Drugs, and Change in Sport.Nicholas Dixon -2001 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 28 (1):78-88.
- Handguns, Philosophers, and the Right to Self-Defense.Nicholas Dixon -2011 -International Journal of Applied Philosophy 25 (2):151-170.Within the last decade or so several philosophers have argued against handgun prohibition on the ground that it violates the right to self-defense. However, even these philosophers grant that the right to own handguns is not absolute and could be overridden if doing so would bring about an enormous social good. Analysis of intra-United States empirical data cited by gun rights advocates indicates that guns do not make us safer, while international data lends powerful support to the thesis that guns (...) do indeed increase homicide. If handguns do not make us safer, then appealing to the right to self-defense as an objection to prohibition is moot. Prohibition neither violates the right to self-defense nor sacrifices anyone’s interests for the common good, since it makes each person less likely to be murderedthan the current permissive handgun laws. Moreover, we also must take into account the right to life of victims of handgun crimes made possible by liberal handgun laws. Consequently, invoking the right to self-defense does not provide any sound reason against handgun prohibition over and above familiar utilitarian objections, which are themselves refuted by the empirical evidence. (shrink)
- A Critique of Violent Retaliation in Sport.Nicholas Dixon -2010 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 37 (1):1-10.
- The Intrinsic Wrongness of Trash Talking and How It Diminishes the Practice of Sport: Reply to Kershnar.Nicholas Dixon -2018 -Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 12 (2):211-225.
- Trash Talking as Irrelevant to Athletic Excellence: Response to Summers.Nicholas Dixon -2008 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 35 (1):90-96.
- Sport, Parental Autonomy, and Children’s Right to an Open Future.Nicholas Dixon -2007 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 34 (2):147-159.
- Why Losing by a Wide Margin is Not in Itself a Disgrace: Response to Hardman, Fox, McLaughlin and Zimmerman.Nicholas Dixon -1998 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 25 (1):61-70.
- The Inevitability of Disappointment: Reply to Feezell.Nicholas Dixon -2000 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 27 (1):93-99.
- Romantic love, appraisal, and commitment.Nicholas Dixon -2007 -Philosophical Forum 38 (4):373–386.
- The Proper Place for External Motivations for Sport and Why They Need Not Subvert Its Internal Goods.Nicholas Dixon -2018 -Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 12 (4):361-374.
- Sport, meritocracy, and praise.Nicholas Dixon -2021 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 48 (2):275-292.ABSTRACT Meritocracy, in which success depends on ability and effort, is a desirable goal for sport, even if sport does not achieve this goal perfectly. However, even in a meritocracy whether athletes deserve praise is questionable, given that a determinant of success, genetic endowments, is beyond their control. From a hard determinist perspective, even the elements of athletes’ actions that appear to be within their control—their diligence in developing their skill and strategy and their good sportsmanship—are themselves a function of (...) other environmental and genetic factors for which they deserve no credit. However, a more plausible approach is the compatibilist view that enables us to combine moral evaluation of athletes’ actions with recognizing the causal influences on human behavior. In contrast with manipulation, which really does negate control over our actions, causation that operates via our rational agency is benign and perfectly consistent with our deserving praise for our achievements. (shrink)No categories
- Handguns, Violent Crime, and Self-Defense.Nicholas Dixon -1999 -International Journal of Applied Philosophy 13 (2):239-260.By far the most plausible explanation of data on violent crime in the United States is that its high handgun ownership rate is a major causal factor. The only realistic way to significantly reduce violent crime in this country is an outright ban on private ownership of handguns. While such a ban would undeniably restrict one particular freedom, it would violate no rights. In particular, the unquestioned right to self-defense does not entail a right to own handguns, because the evidence (...) indicates that the widespread belief in handguns’ defensive efficacy is mistaken, especially when we confine our attention to defensive handgun use that is actually morally permissible. A handgun ban will never eradicate the weapons from this country, but it can substantially reduce the ownership rate and, as a result, substantially reduce violent crime. Although political realities may make a handgun ban unattainable in the United States at present, the very act of advancing cogent arguments for the most defensible position will make the goal of handgun prohibition more and more achievable. (shrink)
- Performance-enhancing drugs, paternalism, meritocracy, and harm to sport.Nicholas Dixon -2008 -Journal of Social Philosophy 39 (2):246–268.
- Modesty, snobbery, and pride.Nicholas Dixon -2005 -Journal of Value Inquiry 39 (3-4):415-429.
- A Utilitarian Argument for Vegetarianism.Nicholas Dixon -1995 -Between the Species 11 (1):1.
- Light Trucks, Road Safety and the Environment.Nicholas Dixon -2002 -Philosophy in the Contemporary World 9 (2):59-67.Driving light trucks creates the risk of significant harm to other people. Compared to regular cars, light trucks endanger the occupants of other vehicles more and have a markedly more negative impact on the environment. Consequently, many people who currently drive light trucks ought to switch to smaller vehicles.
- On the Difference between Physician‐Assisted Suicide and Active Euthanasia.Nicholas Dixon -1998 -Hastings Center Report 28 (5):25-29.Those who defend physician‐assisted suicide often seek to distinguish it from active euthanasia, but in fact, the two acts face the same objections. Both can lead to abuse, both implicate the physician in the death of a patient, and both violate whatever objections there are to killing. Their moral similarity derives from the similar roles of the physician.
- The Morality of Intimate Faculty-Student Relationships.Nicholas Dixon -1996 -The Monist 79 (4):519-535.In what circumstances, if any, are intimate relationships between faculty members and students at the same academic institution morally permissible? Relationships can be sexual without the involvement of any intimate romantic feelings, or romantic without any sexual intimacy. By "intimate relationships" I mean those involving either kind of intimacy. Since adult humans should normally be allowed to choose with whom they have intimate relationships, the burden of proof is on the person who would restrict faculty-student relationships to show why they (...) are morally wrong. Although none of my main arguments depend on the gender of the faculty member and student, we need to bear in mind that the vast majority of such relationships occur between male faculty and female students. Gender inequalities in our society are likely to exacerbate the concerns that I discuss in section 2a about female students' ability to give fully voluntary consent to intimate relationships with male professors, and these inequalities also create the danger, which I discuss in section 3, that such relationships may perpetuate negative stereotypes about women. (shrink)
- The Morality of Anti-Abortion Civil Disobedience.Nicholas Dixon -1997 -Public Affairs Quarterly 11 (1):21-38.
- Alcohol and Rape.Nicholas Dixon -2001 -Public Affairs Quarterly 15 (4):341-54.A man who has sex with a woman who has passed out after consuming vast amounts of alcohol is undeniably guilty of rape. Equally, a man who has sex with a woman who is slightly tipsy after consuming a small amount of alcohol, but who later regrets their lovemaking, is innocent of this crime. This paper is devoted to examining sexual encounters, in which the woman's judgment is significantly impaired by alcohol, that fall in between these two extremes. She slurs (...) her words, is unsteady on her feet, and the next day remembers little about the night before. Does such "impaired sex" constitute rape? An approach that stresses women's responsibility for their own actions would deny that any sexual offense has occurred, since the woman who later regrets their night together has failed to make clear her wishes about sex. In contrast, Lois Pineau's "communicative sexuality" model puts the burden on men to ensure that their partners really do consent to sex. This second model gives us good reason to believe that men are morally obligated to refrain from impaired sex, since they lack evidence that their partners' acquiescence to sex is autonomous. However, we would do better to deal with impaired sex by means of moral disapproval and educational measures rather than by legal sanctions. (shrink)
- Abortion, moral neutrality, and feminism.Nicholas Dixon -1995 -Philosophical Forum 26 (4):315-330.Export citation
Bookmark - History of Modern Philosophy as an Issues-Based Introductory Course.Nicholas Dixon -1990 -Teaching Philosophy 13 (3):253-263.My paper describes a method of teaching history of modern philosophy in a way which is accessible to students with no background in philosophy. The main innovation of the course is that the readings are organized around three themes: (1) theory of knowledge; (2) philosophy of religion; (3) the free will problem. This provides continuity between the readings, a feature often missing in historical courses. Moreover, seeing how different philosophical methods--rationalism (Descartes), empiricism (Hume), pragmatism (James), and twentieth century analytic philosophy (...) (Russell)--approach the same issues deepens students' understanding of these methods. (shrink)
- "Introduction to" The Philosophy of Love and Sex".Nicholas Dixon -2001 -Essays in Philosophy 2 (2):32-36.Love and sex provide a fertile ground for philosophical inquiry, both conceptual analysis of the nature of love and sex and discussion of the many ethical issues that they raise. Moral issues arising from love include the permissibility of romantically loving more than one person at the same time and the moral value of romantic love and friendship. Moral issues arising from sex vary from the most fundamental question—the one addressed by Alan Soble in his paper in this issue—of whether (...) sex can be reconciled with respect for persons, to questions about the permissibility of sex in particular circumstances. Much current work in philosophy of love and sex concerns precisely such issues in applied ethics, for instance the topics addressed by the authors of four more papers in this collection—homosexuality, prostitution, relationships that cross power lines in academia, and the wrongness of rape and other sexual misdeeds. Other ethical issues about sex include the morality of casual sex, adultery and open marriage, sadomasochism, and pornography. (shrink)
- "Reply: Feminism and Utilitarian Arguments for Vegetarianism: A Note on Alex Wellington's" Feminist Positions on Vegetarianism".Nicholas Dixon -1995 -Between the Species 11 (3):6.
- The adversary method in law and philosophy.Nicholas Dixon -1999 -Philosophical Forum 30 (1):13–29.
- Why Mainstream Conservatives Should Support Government-Mandated Universal Health Care.Nicholas Dixon -2009 -International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (1):1-15.Menzel and Light have argued that the conservative principle of self-sufficiency gives good reasons to strive for universal health coverage. This paper gives further reasons for connecting universal health care with self-sufficiency and continues Menzel’s and Light’s project in four more ways. First, a more extended analysis of a conservative conception of government shows how a general opposition to welfare programs is consistent with guaranteeing universal basic health care. Second, common fears about the abuse of health care when universal access (...) is guaranteed are unfounded. Third, worldwide experience shows that the most effective way to bring high quality health care to a population is through a government mandate, not the free market. Fourth, while socioeconomic status is an important determinant of health independent of the accessibility of health care itself, this does not undermine the case for universal health care based on a minimal, conservative conception of equality of opportunity. (shrink)
- Associate Editor and Book Review Editor.Cesar R. Torres,Jan Boxill,W. Miller Brown,Michael Burke,Nicholas Dixon,Randolf Feezell,Leslie Francis,Jeffrey Fry,Paul L. Gaffney &Mark Holowchak -2012 -Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 39 (2).Export citation Bookmark
- The Closing of the American Mind. [REVIEW]Nicholas Dixon -1987 -Teaching Philosophy 10 (4):348-350.
- Dialogues Concerning the Foundations of Ethics. [REVIEW]Nicholas Dixon -1994 -Teaching Philosophy 17 (3):277-279.
- Vice and Virtue in Everday Life. [REVIEW]Nicholas Dixon -1990 -Teaching Philosophy 13 (1):47-52.
Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?
Create an account to enable off-campus access through your institution's proxy server or OpenAthens.
Monitor this page
Be alerted of all new items appearing on this page. Choose how you want to monitor it:
 Email |  RSS feed |
Editorial team
General Editors:
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Area Editors:
David Bourget
Gwen Bradford
Berit Brogaard
Margaret Cameron
David Chalmers
James Chase
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Esa Diaz-Leon
Barry Hallen
Hans Halvorson
Jonathan Ichikawa
Monte Johnson
Michelle Kosch
Øystein Linnebo
Paul Livingston
Brandon Look
Manolo Martínez
Matthew McGrath
Michiru Nagatsu
Susana Nuccetelli
Giuseppe Primiero
Jack Alan Reynolds
Darrell P. Rowbottom
Aleksandra Samonek
Constantine Sandis
Howard Sankey
Jonathan Schaffer
Thomas Senor
Daniel Star
Jussi Suikkanen
Aness Kim Webster
Other editors
Contact us
Learn more about PhilPapers
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Area Editors:
David Bourget
Gwen Bradford
Berit Brogaard
Margaret Cameron
David Chalmers
James Chase
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Esa Diaz-Leon
Barry Hallen
Hans Halvorson
Jonathan Ichikawa
Monte Johnson
Michelle Kosch
Øystein Linnebo
Paul Livingston
Brandon Look
Manolo Martínez
Matthew McGrath
Michiru Nagatsu
Susana Nuccetelli
Giuseppe Primiero
Jack Alan Reynolds
Darrell P. Rowbottom
Aleksandra Samonek
Constantine Sandis
Howard Sankey
Jonathan Schaffer
Thomas Senor
Daniel Star
Jussi Suikkanen
Aness Kim Webster
Other editors
Contact us
Learn more about PhilPapers
Home |New books and articles |Bibliographies |Philosophy journals |About PhilPapers |API |Contact us |Code of conduct
PhilPapers logo byAndrea Andrews andMeghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see ourterms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications).Use of this site is subject toterms & conditions.
All rights reserved byThe PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-54b44b69b7-bbztg uwo