Never an easy read, but a proficient point of departure to explore the richness of western philosophy

Kalle Jonasson
Halmstad University

How fares the sociology of sport? How can it continue to make sense to and of its object of study and knowledge? By introducing the philosopher Roy Bhaskar as a viable option for critical scholars of sport, Graham Scambler grapples with those questions in his A critical realist theory of sports.

Scambler has written a dense and comprehensive framework for reshaping, and/or supporting, the sociology of sport and its relevance in and for contemporary academia, as well as society.

Reshaping in the sense that sociology must not be compartmentalized, neither from other disciplines (such as psychology and biology) nor from society in general. As someone who has worked in and with different sport science departments, I can attest to the fact that we, scholars of sport, are not always equipped to fathom each other perspectives and to effectively bridge the gap between our disciplines, whether we talk of the short-term collegiality, in for instance, seminars, or of establishing lasting multi-disciplinary cooperations. No doubt students perceive such fractions, and thus segmentation might reproduce and endure.

Supporting, because much of the theories, methods, and queries already known to this profession resurface in this book from Routledge series of critical studies of sport. All of the chapters are laden with references to critical generalists (some of which actually ruminated on sports) such as Elias, Dunning, Bourdieu, Habermas, Weber, Marx, Ritzer, Giddens, and Weber, as well as to sport-research fixed stars, such as Guttmann and Giulianotti.

Here the Habermasian lifeworld (and its colonization by ever-spreading systems) and Bourdieuian habitus are mustered, and attuned, for the reader to be able to trace reality from the enunciations of single athletes.

The eclectic assembly of theorists could be a bit confusing, given that mentioned scholars don’t explicitly adhere to the school of critical realism. However, I understand this move as an act of care for the trade. To make more sense, those theories are not to be discarded but adjusted for sociology of sport to be revived. It is thus no small quest Scambler has embarked upon. To outline a grand narrative, looking to the whole of the field, is, to my mind, always to be commended. Even more so, since—according to Scambler (as well as Bhaskar)—the fracturing of society is detrimental to it.

Bhaskar formulated his theory during the 1970s and, from what I perceive, thus formed a framework with longevity, with possible applications in many fields of study. Philosophically, I sense, in some of his concepts, family semblances with philosophies from many parts of the field: Aristotle (Eudaimonia), Laruelle (Non-philosophy), and process thinkers, such as Whitehead (flows [not flow!]). Scambler is well read, which is why the book could serve as a proficient point of departure for doctoral students with a drive to explore the richness of western philosophy, while they, at the same time, could consolidate their general knowledge of theories of science. To leave just a little cliffhanger in this review, one surprising feat is the moral consequences of the theory, which at first might be perceived as a rather distanced and technical view of existence.

For it is a theory of science. It has a very special way of saying that there must be something outside of our human apparatuses of perception. Given that science shows something in its experiments, critical realism sees as its mission to model how such a reality must look for such results to emerge. This modeling turns out to be a central practice for the critical realist. Scambler begins by comparing such modeling with Weberian ideal types, which he then establishes as too lacking in dynamism.

What is interesting, for social science, is that the micro-level of collectives and individual persons are elevated as pivotal entry-points for understanding macro-processes. This might be a staple statement for much of sociology, but what Scambler, via Bhaskar, offers here is a detailed view of, and a way to follow, the steps between the planes of biological organism, psyche, culture, and society. Here the Habermasian lifeworld (and its colonization by ever-spreading systems) and Bourdieuian habitus are mustered, and attuned, for the reader to be able to trace reality from the enunciations of single athletes. Scambler’s solution is highly fascinating, albeit a tad opaque at times.

I have always had a problem with understanding critical realism, and that is also why I chose to review this book. I wanted to challenge myself. It must be admitted that I still find the tradition hard to penetrate and conceive of. Even though I understand more of it now, after Scambler’s introduction, this philosophy is shot through with an abstract lingo, that somehow seems to elude my cognitive grasp. That may reveal more about me, than about the stance. Speaking of students on the doctoral, and perhaps also master level, the time and still malleable mind of such learners would profit the most, I think, from this book. The table of research questions, from macro-, via meso-, to the micro-level, at the end of the book is quite impressive. Such a battery of queries might come in more than handy for many a doctoral program, student, and supervisor.

The examples of sports are many in the book, which of course follows from the all-encompassing endeavor of Scambler’s scope. Thus, we are presented to fitness, rugby, running, and e-sports, among many others. This variety contributes to proving the validity of the approach. Another interesting feat of this philosophically fortified sociology of sport is the fact, that Scambler really sets out to prove that sociology could really be for sport, and not only critically assess it. Many analyses offer ways of improving sports, with critical realism as its starting point. Not that Scambler misses out on the evaluation of sports from critical perspectives on how class, gender and race continue to be important for the understanding of the phenomenon.

Other than the density of the prose, one critique of the book I would like to raise, quite ironically, is that it relies too little on Bhaskar explicitly. Habitus, lifeworld, and other sociological concepts are far more utilized in the laying out of the argument than the concepts of critical realism. Certainly, this has to do with critical realism being a support of the sociology of sport, rather than a usurper of the terminology of that particular trade. Yet again, this probably says more about me as a critical scholar of sport applying philosophical alongside sociological concepts in my studies. Maybe this is a particular practice for flattened-out ontologies of post-thinking, which has been the main theoretical source in my research.

So, if you want an interesting challenge, intellectually, or if you are interested in complete framework of how the sociology of sport could continue to matter, this might be the book for you!

Copyright © Kalle Jonasson 2024