My Argument Against The UFC
My argument against participating in (and by extension, consuming) the UFC is below.
Since this is a logically valid deductive argument, the central question isn't about its structure, but whether its premises are true. If they are, the conclusion necessarily follows.
If I'm mistaken (and I'm very open to being wrong) then either Premise 1, Premise 2, or both must be false.
Please don't counter with "what about football, bruh?" or any other version of the continuum fallacy. Instead, tell me which premise(s) you believe are false and why. I genuinely don't want to maintain the belief that participating in sports like UFC is wrong if it isn't.
Premise 1: The intentional infliction of physical harm upon another individual for the purpose of injury or detriment is justifiable only under extraordinary circumstances, such as self-preservation or the defense of others.
Premise 2: Participation in organized combat sports for the primary purposes of entertainment, competitive victory, or monetary reward does not qualify as an extraordinary circumstance that justifies the intentional infliction of physical harm for the purpose of injury or detriment.
Conclusion: Therefore, the intentional infliction of physical harm in organized combat sports for entertainment, competitive victory, or monetary reward is not justifiable.
It seems to me also that watching UFC for entertainment contributes to the vulgarization of the masses, much like historical practices such as cockfighting and bearbaiting. But I’ll save that argument for another post.
Okay dear friends, I need to take a break from reading your comments but will read them later. Thanks for the excellent back and forth. This is WAY better than arguing on Twitter.
The campus minister at my sons’ Catholic school, along with another parishioner who’s dad was the middle weight champion of the world back in the 1930s, just started a boxing program for the boys in the school. We always start with prayer and talk about discipline, then mostly shadowbox and work the bag but also do some controlled sparring with all the headgear and what not. It’s been good for the boys.
One of the tragedies of the post-modern world is the suppression of masculinity. Young boys need an outlet for their energy. It used to be two boys could get into a fight behind the school, maybe a bloody nose, but they’d be back to best of friends the next day. Not that fighting like that is the best way to resolve differences but it’s certainly better than shooting up a school. We’ve lost that ethos.
I agree that UFC does seem to be glorifying violence in some ways instead of just competition, but I also look at a lot of the people who are involved in it and they seem to be stand up men who are doing right by society. I think, like some things, there’s not a definitive right of wrong answer but one that requires discernment per circumstance, like drinking alcohol can be a sin for some and not for others, or a joke made appropriately in one context may be inappropriate in another.