ABSTRACT

This paper explores variance in how people morally disapprove wrongs related to doping. The variance may pertain to what type of moral disapproval a person uses or to what they disapprove of. Our exploration is both conceptual and empirical. Conceptually, we distinguish between four types of moral disapprovals that we call blame, judging blameworthy, condemnation and sadness. We elaborate these four moral phenomena through a conceptual scheme that we call the matrix of moral disapprovals. The matrix is the central conceptual innovation of our paper. It depicts how the four moral disapprovals relate to each other and characterises their typical instances. In the empirical part of the paper, we use the matrix of moral disapproval to examine how decision-makers in Finnish elite sport organisations talk about doping. The empirical examination is based on 31 interviews with decision-makers from Finnish elite sport organisations. Although we distinguish between the conceptual and empirical approaches in our paper, they are not fully separate, but support and inform each other.

摘要

本文探讨了人们在道德上如何反对与兴奋剂相关的错误的差异。差异可能与一个人使用哪种类型的道德不赞成或他们不赞成什么有关。我们的探索既是概念性的，也是经验性的。从概念上讲，我们区分了四种类型的道德不认同，我们称之为责备、判断应受谴责、谴责和悲伤。我们通过一个概念方案来阐述这四种道德现象，我们称之为道德不赞成矩阵。矩阵是我们论文的核心概念创新。它描述了四种道德上的反对如何相互关联并描述了它们的典型实例。在论文的实证部分，我们使用道德反对矩阵来研究芬兰精英体育组织的决策者如何谈论兴奋剂。实证检验基于对芬兰精英体育组织决策者的 31 次访谈。尽管我们在论文中区分了概念方法和经验方法，但它们并不是完全分开的，而是相互支持和告知的。