Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 15 (2):266-284 (2020)

Authors
Michael Hemmingsen
University of Guam
Abstract
I argue that in purely professional games of pure chance, such as slot machines, roulette, baccarat or pachinko, any instance of cheating that successfully deceives the judge can be ‘part of the game’. I examine, and reject, various proposals for the ‘ethos’ that determines how we ought to interpret the formal rules of games of pure chance, such as being a test of skill, a matter of entertainment, a display of aesthetic beauty, an opportunity for hedonistic pleasure, and a fraternal activity. Ultimately, I argue that ‘winning the benefit’ is the only ethos that can apply in purely professional games of pure chance, and that if we interpret the formal rules according to this ethos, cheating that is undertaken with respect for the judge’s authority, but that attempts to cause the judge of the game to ‘voluntarily’ relinquish the benefit of the game by deceiving them into thinking that the formal rules of the game have been followed, is impermissible but acceptable cheating, and is therefore within, rather than outside, the game. Here, I define ‘games of pure chance’ as games in which chance is the only determinant of winning.
Keywords gambling, ethos
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/17511321.2020.1734067
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Are Rules All an Umpire Has to Work With?J. S. Russell - 1999 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 26 (1):27-49.
The Ethos of Games.Fred D'Agostino - 1981 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 8 (1):7-18.
Intentional Rules Violations—One More Time.Warren P. Fraleigh - 2003 - Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 30 (2):166-176.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Semantic Games with Chance Moves.Arcady Blinov - 1994 - Synthese 99 (3):311 - 327.
Pre-Game Cheating and Playing the Game.Alex Wolf-Root - 2018 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 13 (3-4):334-347.
Gurevich-Harrington's Games Defined by Finite Automata.Alexander Yakhnis & Vladimir Yakhnis - 1993 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 62 (3):265-294.
Skyrms on the Possibility of Universal Deception.Don Fallis - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (2):375-397.
Cheaters Never Prosper, Sometimes.H. Lorne Carmichael - 1995 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 18 (3):549-550.
Kinds of Chance in Games and Sports.Filip Kobiela - 2014 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 8 (1):65-76.
Realizability for Peano Arithmetic with Winning Conditions in HON Games.Valentin Blot - 2017 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 168 (2):254-277.
Games with 1-Backtracking.Stefano Berardi, Thierry Coquand & Susumu Hayashi - 2010 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 161 (10):1254-1269.
Infinite Games Played on Finite Graphs.Robert McNaughton - 1993 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 65 (2):149-184.
Deception in Sender–Receiver Games.Manolo Martínez - 2015 - Erkenntnis 80 (1):215-227.
Message Exchange Games in Strategic Contexts.Nicholas Asher, Soumya Paul & Antoine Venant - 2017 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 46 (4):355-404.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-02-26

Total views
80 ( #146,682 of 2,520,806 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
26 ( #33,857 of 2,520,806 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes