Paradigms Shift in Sport Sciences: Body's focus

Authors: Michele V. Carbinatto, Wagner Wey Moreira, Myrian Nunomura; Mariana H. C. Tsukamoto, VilmaLeni Nista-Piccolo

Abstract:

Sports Sciences has been historically supported by the positivism idea of science, especially by the mechanistic/reductionist and becomes a field that views experimentation and measurement as the mayor research domains. The disposition to simplify nature and the world by parts has fragmented and reduced the idea of bodyathletes as machine. In this paper we intent to re-think this perception lined by Complexity Theory. We come with the idea of athletes as a reflexive and active being (corporeity-body). Therefore, the construction of a training that considers the cultural, biological, psychological elements regarding the experience of the human corporal movements in a circumspect and responsible way could bring better chances of accomplishment. In the end, we hope to help coaches understand the intrinsic complexity of the body they are training, how better deal with it, and, in the field of a deep globalization among the different types of knowledge, to respect and accepted the peculiarities of knowledge that comprise this area.

Keywords: Sport science, body, complexity theory, corporeity.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1331347

References:

[1] CHALMERS, A. What is science after all?
[O que é Ci├¬ncia Afinal?] S├úo Paulo: Brasiliense, 1993.
[2] FAHLBERG, L; FAHLBERG, L; GATES, W. Exercise and Existence: Exercise Behavior From an Existential-Phenomenological Perspective. The Sport Psychologist, 6, pp. 172-191, 1992.
[3] STELTER, R. The Transformation of Body Language into Language. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 31, n. 1, pp.63-77, 2000.
[4] LOLAND, S. Morality, Medicine, and Meaning: Toward an Integrated Justification of Physical Education. Quest, 58, pp. 60-70, 2006.
[5] TWIETMEYER, G. A Theology of Inferiority: Is Christianity the Source of Kinesiology-s Second-Class Status in the Academy? Quest, 60, pp. 452-466, 2008.
[6] JACKSON, R. Plato: A beginner-s guide. London, Hoder & Stroughton, 2001.
[7] COTTINGHAM, J; STOOTHOFF, R.; KENNY, A.; MURDOCH, D. The Philosophical Writings of Descartes. Cambridge University Press, 1988.
[8] CAPRA, F. The mutation point. O Ponto de Mutação.São Paulo: Cultrix, 1982.
[9] BOWES, I; JONES, R. Working at the Edge of Chaos: Understanding Coaching as a Complex, Interpersonal System. The Sport Psychologist, 20, 235-245, 2006.
[10] MORIN, E. The reconnection of skills: The Challenge of the XXI Century. A Religa├º├úo dos Saberes: O Desafio do Século XXI. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, 2001.
[11] MORIN, E. To leave the XXI Century.
[Para Sair do Século XXI]. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira, 1986.
[12] MORIN, E. (2000). The seven skills necessary to the education of future.
[Os Sete Saberes Necessários para a Educação do Futuro]. São Paulo: Cortez; Brasília, DF: UNESCO, pp.181, 2000.
[13] MORIN, E. (2001). The ÔÇÿwell-done- head: Rethinking Reform, Reform the thought.
[A Cabeça Bem-feita: Repensar a Reforma, Reformar o Pensamento]. Rio de Janeiro: Bertrand Brasil, p.40, 2001.
[14] DAPRANO, C; BRUNENING, J., PASTORE, D; GREENWELL, T.; DIXON, M; KO, Y; JORDAN, J.;LILIENTHAL, S.; TURNER, B. Collaboration in Sport Research: A Case from the Field. Quest, 57, 2005, p. 300-314.
[15] ENDERSBY, J.W. .Collaborative research in the social sciences: Multiple Authorship and publication credit, 77, 1996, p. 375-392, 1996
[16] KNOPPERS, A. Productivity and collaborative patterns of physical educators. Research Quaterly for Exercise and Sport, 60, 159-164, 1989.