ABSTRACT
In this chapter I extend the virtue-ethical discussion into a much talked of vice. In modern parlance it is typically, though with a certain loss of meaning, called arrogance. In the popular psychology of sports, some even go as far as to say it is a necessary condition of athletic success. In the Ancient Greek catalogue of virtues and vices it was known as hubris. In its moral gravitational field is its opposite, humility, and the emotion of humiliation, which is often spoken of in sports journalism. I argue that humiliation felt as a response to sporting defeat may indeed be rational. In distinguishing weak from strong humiliation I show that while the latter is reserved to those cases where one’s moral status as a person has been assaulted, the former may be experienced by sportspersons who fail to observe certain standards of character and conduct. To make this case I argue that it is necessary to locate the felt humiliation against the hierarchical nature of sports identities and practice communities where the notion of honour still resonates. This context makes the idea of a highly committed sportsperson’s humiliation more plausible than the idea that a heavy or unsuspected defeat necessarily occasions a mere blow to their self-esteem. I develop an account of humiliation in close relation to its conceptual cousins: shame, embarrassment, dignity and humility. I show how, paradigmatically, those who display the vice of hubris are predisposed to weak humiliation and illustrate such in a case study of the boxing contest between two of the greatest ever welterweight boxers, (Sugar) Ray Leonard and Roberto Duran.
