Philosophical and sociological basics of physical culture and sport education process

Фотографии: 

Dr. Hab., PhD, Associate Professor A.A. Peredelskiy
Russian State University of Physical Culture, Sports, Youth and Tourism (GTSOLIFK), Moscow

 

Keywords: philosophical and sociological basics, integrative physical culture and sport education system.

Background. The question of whether or not there is a need for due philosophical and sociological basics of integrative special physical culture and sport education system being developed is still disputable and need to be supported by a sound line of arguments.

Objective of the study was to demonstrate the need for due philosophical and sociological basics of integrative special physical culture and sport education system being developed.

Study results and discussion. We would design the line of arguments based on the following provisions:

– History of the national physical culture and sport science;

– Pedagogical science design and management;

– Analysis of relationship of modern philosophy and sociology;

– Physical culture and sport philosophy: history and mission; and

– Physical culture and sport sociology: history and mission.

  • Cognitive structures promoted as general theories of physical culture, education, culture, sport and their history – were designed in their fundamentals in the period of mid-1920ies to late 1970ies [7].

The above cognitive structures altogether may be viewed as a sort of national physical culture and sport paradigm – albeit still loose, inconsistent and contradictory to a degree, particularly if studies of the first leading researchers (P.F. Lesgaft, V.V. Gorinevskiy, N.A. Bernstein and M.F. Ivanitskiy) are compared with the findings of the prominent integrators and systematicians of the XX century (P.A. Rudik, A.D. Novikov, L.P. Matveyev) [2].

Even with due regard to the long-term problem discussion that has been partially successful in triggering a variety of evolutionary (and revolutionary in some cases) changes in the hierarchy, senses and content of the above general theoretical systems – there are still the following reasons to insist on timely, necessary and reasonable revisions.

First, at least 50 years passed since the most system and relatively complete general physical culture and sport theory by L.P. Matveyev was offered and accepted [4]. The sport science with its notions and basic concepts and sport system as a socio-ontological construct could not but have changed for such a long period of time.

Second, the social demand for physical culture and sport research has changed for this period both in its design and content, with the modern sport theories increasingly expected to provide grounds for more special, commercial and professional sport disciplines whilst the other social institutions and components of the physical culture sector have been largely pushed aside.

Third, the very logics of advancement of the sport science requires it to make a transition from the empirical, inductive and descriptive approaches to the more mature hypothetic and deductive level.

  • The present scientific and educational knowledge system may be described as the multilayer structure built up by the following horizontal strata:

– Global and national history of education;

– Didactics i.e. the educational methodology;

– General, special, fundamental and applied educational theories; and

– Educational practices and technologies.

In context of the above system design, it would be pertinent to state that the universal education is the paradigm of many educational paths, with each guidance/ going (derived from the Greek “gog” – step) strategy designed depending on who, where, why and what for is guided and assisted.

Therefore, the universal education may be considered a myth or at least lean, emasculated meta-form. A real educational system always has a specific historical context, senses and content that require the relevant specific forms of cultural, education and learning processes being designed to purposefully shape and build up the required values, knowledge and competences in every individual [3].

This is the reason why an integrative applied physical culture and sport education is to be (and really is) designed so as to master and employ the most efficient biological, biochemical, physiological, morphological, physical, psychological, neuro-phychological, sociological and philosophical methods and tools with the relevant game-related, training, competitive and other physical practices.

  • Presently the relationship of modern philosophy and sociology remains quite intricate albeit the integrative processes appear to be on the rise as demonstrated, for instance, by the growing role of and interest in the marginal, borderline “socio-philosophical and philo-sociological” disciplines [5, 6].

Leaving aside the above and other intricate stratagems of the philosophical and sociological theoreticians, we believe it may be pertinent to make an emphasis on the following three points:

– Subject to philosophy are the universal aspects of being and cognition, i.e. the universal and utmost grounds, universal subjective-objective relationships, universal laws of nature, society, thinking process; with the relevant logical and didactic theories/ concepts and evidence used for the philosophical analyses;

– Subject to sociology are the facts of social existence and consciousness i.e. the social logics manifesting themselves in activities of the social agents (including individuals, social groups, organisations, institutions), with the relevant research, theoretical and empirical methods, procedures and practices being referred to as the sociological and typical for some of the six stages of a specific sociological survey (SSS) design and performance process;

– Sociological science itself with its practical methods, toolkits and mechanisms may be in fact viewed as the product of philosophical (more exactly, positivistic) project of “ideal” science that should be able to identify, describe, explain and forecast a variety of social processes and regularities.

Therefore, philosophical methodology refers to very general basics while the sociological methodology refers to the research process design and management mechanisms including the ones related to the integrative applied education.

  • Traditions of the philosophical reflexions in the national physical culture and sport sector are about 100 years old.

This time period appears to be quite sufficient for the philosophical theory of both the sport science and the physical culture and sport process being totally built up, all the more that there have been multiple attempts to do that [1]. But what still hampers these attempts?

It may be stated with confidence that most of the relevant philosophical studies are rather driven by self-reflexions with their applied philosophizing traditions than focused on the most general operational regularities of the physical culture and sport processes and sport science. Moreover, even the above applied philosophizing studies are designed on the existential, pragmatic, post-neo-modernistic bases that are very loosely connected with substantial scientific philosophy, history and philosophy of science and still cater at the same time for the relevant mythological, religious, commonplace and artistic world outlooks [8, 10].

  • The modern physical culture and sport sociology is also proud of its solid traditions that allowed it to be highly ranked among the modern academic disciplines albeit it (with the relevant applied social educational disciplines integrated with the national sociology) is still very far from the mainstream global sociological science. All these disciplines may be more or less characterised by the commonly known statement of Claus Heinemann on the largely insufficient empirical groundings of many fundamental concepts and provisions readily accepted by the local research communities as at least highly probable if not perfectly trustworthy [9].

Conclusion. The study offers a variety of reasons demonstrating the need for modern philosophical and sociological basics of the integrative special physical culture and sport education process being developed. The relevant system initiatives should be intended to change the present situation in the national special physical culture and sport science and, as verified by the analysis, build up (under whatever title) an integrative applied physical culture and sport education system and process as a relatively independent and highly important cognitive domain..

Integrative applied education may be defined and explained by the following. Integration may be referred to both as a process and outcome of the initiatives. It should be mentioned that the developers of combined marginal theories normally call them integrative considering the integrated cognitive product as an accomplishment to be proud of and final outcome.

In view of the above specifics of the applied education and the values-driven cultural process, it would be beneficial, in our opinion, to call it integrative/ integrating rather than integrated education to emphasize the evolutionary aspect of the applied education, i.e. considering it as the ongoing process with the integrative aspect viewed as pivotal in the educational domain and designed to address purely educational challenges.

References

  1. Vizitey N., Manolaki V. Ideya olimpizma i sport (Filosofsko-kulturologicheskiy analiz problemy) [The idea of ​​Olympism and sport (Philosophical and cultural analysis of the problem)]. Kishinev: s.n., 2015, 264 p.
  2. Stolbov V.V. Istoriya Rossiyskoy gosudarstvennoy akademii fizicheskoy kultury [The history of Russian State Academy of Physical Culture]. Moscow: Fizkultura i Sport publ., 2003, 240 p.
  3. Kraevskiy V.V. Nauki ob obrazovanii i nauka ob obrazovanii (metodologicheskie problemy sovremennoy pedagogiki) [Education sciences and science of education (methodological issues of modern pedagogics)]. Voprosy filosofii, 2007, no. 3, pp. 77-82.
  4. Matveyev L.P. Obshchaya teoriya sporta i ee prikladnyie aspektyi. 4-e izd., ispr. i dop. [General theory of sport and its applied aspects. 4th ed., rev., sup.]. St. Petersburg: Lan publ., 2005, 384 p.
  5. Orekhov A.M. O sootnoshenii sotsialnogo i gumanitarnogo znaniya: razlichie ili edinstvo [Relationship of social and humanitarian knowledge: difference or unity]. Lichnost. Kultura. Obshchestvo, 2015, vol. XVII, no. 3-4. no. 87-88, pp. 66-73.
  6. Orekhov A.M. Sotsialnaya filosofiya: Predmet, strukturnye profili i vyzovy na rubezhe XXI veka [Social Philosophy: Subject, structural profiles and challenges at the turn of the 21st century]. Moscow: LIBROKOM publ., 2011, 272 p.
  7. Peredel'skiy A.A. K voprosu ob institutsializatsii nauchno-pedagogicheskikh shkol v sfere fizicheskoy kultury i sporta [Research education schools in physical culture and sport sector: aspects of institutionalization]. Teoriya i praktika fiz. kultury, 2016, no. 8, pp. 94–96.
  8. Peredelskiy A.A. Filosofiya sporta. Metanauchnye osnovaniya sportivnogo protsessa [Sport philosophy. Metascientific grounds of athletic process]. Moscow: MAGISTR-PRESS publ., 2011, 480 p.
  9. Peredelskiy A.A. Fizicheskaya kultura i sport v otrazhenii filosofskikh i sotsiologicheskikh nauk. Sotsiologiya sporta. Uchebnik [Physical culture and sport in philosophy and sociology. Sports sociology. Textbook]. Moscow: Sport publ., 2016, 416 p.
  10. Peredelskiy A.A. Dvulikiy Yanus. Sport kak sotsialny fenomen: sushchnost i antologicheskie osnovaniya [Two-faced Janus. Sport as a social phenomenon: essence and anthological grounds]. Moscow: Sport publ., 2016, 312 p.

Corresponding author: alisa.gorba4eva@yandex.ru            

 

Abstract      

The study was designed to apply formal-logics-based direct arguments to demonstrate the need for modern philosophical and sociological grounds of the integrative special physical culture and sport education system being developed. Analysis under the study spells out a number of reasons for the increasing priority needed to be given today to the philosophical and sociological grounds of the integrative special physical culture and sport education system development initiatives. The initiatives are intended to change the present situation in the national special physical culture and sport science and, as verified by the analysis, build up (under whatever title) an integrative applied physical culture and sport education system and process as a relatively independent and highly important cognitive domain.

The integrative element may be considered both as a process and outcome of the initiatives. It should be mentioned that the developers of combined marginal theories normally call them integrated considering the integrated cognitive product both as an accomplishment to be proud of and final outcome.

However, in view of the above specifics of the applied education and the values-driven cultural process, it would be beneficial, in our opinion, to call it integrative/ integrating rather than integrated education to emphasize the evolutionary aspect of the applied education, i.e. considering it as the ongoing process with the integrative aspect viewed as pivotal in the educational domain and designed to address purely educational challenges.