The spectacle of modern sport displays all the latest commercial and technological innovations; yet age-old religious concerns still thrive at the stadium. Coaches lead pre-game and post-game prayers; athletes give God the credit for home runs and touchdowns; and fans wave signs with biblical quotations and allusions. Like no other nation on earth; Americans eagerly blend their religion and sports. Playing with God traces this dynamic relationship from the Puritan condemnation of games as sinful in the seventeenth century to the near deification of athletic contests in our own day. Early religious opposition to competitive sport focused on the immoderate enthusiasm of players and spectators; the betting on scores; and the preference for playing field over church on Sunday. Disapproval gradually gave way to acceptance when "wholesome recreation" for young men in crowded cities and soldiers in faraway fields became a national priority. Protestants led in the readjustment of attitudes toward sport; Catholics; Jews; Mormons; and Muslims followed. The Irish at Notre Dame; outstanding Jews in baseball; Black Muslims in the boxing ring; and born-again athletes at Liberty University represent the numerous negotiations and compromises producing the unique American mixture of religion and sport.
#821990 in Books Harvard University Press 2003-09-30Ingredients: Example IngredientsOriginal language:EnglishPDF # 1 8.00 x .63 x 5.56l; .60 #File Name: 0674012429240 pages
Review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. A Prerequisite For Competent Race Discussion.By VeritasLogosGlenn Loury has become something like an intellectual hero of mine. I have long wondered if I was the only black centrist-minded person out there who desired to know the truth about racism and the state of blacks in America; but would not fall for poor argument or a baseless narrative; however popular. In The Anatomy of Racial Inequality; I found the analytic reflection I had always dreamt of. Prof Loury argues elegantly for what he takes to be the central; recalcitrant problem for blacks in society: racial stigma (as opposed to racial discrimination). He makes an insightful and illuminating distinction between discrimination in contract: the formal; codified subjugation of blacks through law and public policy and discrimination in contact: the informal; voluntary choice of those in positions of power and influence to draw away from and disassociate with blacks on the basis of negative stigma; effectively locking them out of the means of prosperity available to whites. It's the latter insidious and permissible (however morally problematic) form of racism that hampers blacks currently; and Loury is not optimistic about its end. He also lays out the ethical argument for affirmative action-style policies (though not necessarily affirmative action proper) that may be race-blind; but not race-indifferent.Loury closes by imploring the reader to reflect upon how we quarantine the problems of those race-marked as black as problems inherent to them from "America"; yet widespread problems that affect whites are a matter of national crisis which must be met with compassion. He argues that in a just America we ask the question "What manner of people are WE who accept such degradation in our midst" as opposed to "What manner of people are THEY who languish in that way".Much of the muddled discussion that happens between Americans when conversing about race could be made clear if we all read this book; though I realize its dense prose and analytic rigor may be prohibitive for some. Still; for the serious seeker; it's an indispensable text.4 of 7 people found the following review helpful. Deeply DistrubingBy Dr. SteveThe classic collision of teleological (emphasizing the result) and deontological (empahsizing the procedure) philosophy applied to race relations in the United States. More than mere economic consquentialism; or sociological stucturalism; Loury rails against racial stigmatism; and posits powerfully in favor of "racial egalitarianism;" by use of moral suasion. Any right thinking; moral minded human being will be disturbed by his polemics; and cannot help but be swayed by his appeal. I will; however; leave it to you; the reader; to discover for yourself which side of the philosophical divide; mentioned above; Loury favors. Very highly recommended.5 of 6 people found the following review helpful. Thoughtful; persuasive; enjoyableBy Jeremy MichalekGlen is an accomplished economist; and you can tell in the style of his writing: He is organized and sets up axioms and bullet points to clarify his arguments. I had the opportunity to hear him speak in 2002; and he is quite persuasive. In this book; Loury makes a case against liberal individualism; the popular assumption that liberalized; free market; "race-blind" policies will naturally dissolve unjust inequalities over time. In this discussion; Loury avoids the topic of overt "racial discrimination"; which is easier to spot and has more obvious effects; and focuses instead on the strong; persistent; and self-replicating patterns caused by more subtle forces; which he terms "racial stigma". Stigma refers to bodily markings that are automatically cognitively perceived in all social interaction and which have strong social associations that affect perception and behavior of observers. This stigma; and the associations and stereotypes that are cognitively linked with it; acts to rationalize and sustain systematic racial inequality; perpetuating factors that drive formation of stigma. I believe that these arguments appear more compelling if the reader has previous knowledge of theories in cognitive psychology suggesting that mental associational categorization based on observed statistical tendencies applied to readily observable stimuli may form the basis of all thought and learning Glen's arguments are not airtight; and he relies primarily on philosophical thought experiments for illustration; however; his explorations are useful; and a perspective of racial inequality that did not consider and respond to these perspectives would be naive and incomplete.[...]
