This is part of a new series of blog posts on philosophy for children - far and away the biggest no-brainer in history - and I can't think of a better time for kid-accessible applied philosophy at the present time than the case of the worst no-call of all-time. It has raised important ethical questions as to whether the Super Bowl is tainted.
In my earlier post I gave my reasons for regarding a Rams-[AFC Team] Super Bowl tainted due to the horrible officiating, and that the Rams in the name of honor and fair play should agree to a quick and easy do-over like the kids could figure out so easily in their street games. They even admitted to cheating, so why not own up to that in action? (Just resume it from where the game was assuming the play was called correctly, if the Saints score a touchdown they go the Super Bowl and if the Rams stop them they go. The poor referee [I know, I've been there, but come on, man, ffs] even gets to save face.)
I mean, let's say the NFL asked the kids - their most important fan base, currently and long term (this sport is like pro wrestling but not all scripted; I liked both as a kid but outgrew only one of the two...), what they think the fair thing would be to do. A do-over, right?
Should honor require the Rams to admit what getting away with a really significant cheat entails ethically, and to accept a do-over? What do principles of justice and virtue (honor being among them) require here? That would be a great exercise in getting the ball rolling in getting the kids to think philosophically. Yes? :)
Oh, and wouldn't that be a lot better for the ratings (you know, for the adults)? Not just the do-over, but the Super Bowl itself, which I and many others are planning as of now to avoid....
[In the posting queue: 'Ultimate Blogging tips: for Philosophers' ^_^ ]
