Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
David Brooks in "The Jeremy Lin Problem," his column this past Friday--yes, I'm about 72 hours behind in my reading:
[Jeremy Lin is] a Harvard grad in the N.B.A., an Asian-American man in professional sports. But we shouldn’t neglect the biggest anomaly. He’s a religious person in professional sports.
The ethos of sports, David argues, is "in tension" with the ethos of religion.
The moral universe of modern sport is oriented around victory and supremacy. The sports hero tries to perform great deeds in order to win glory and fame. It doesn’t really matter whether he has good intentions. His job is to beat his opponents and avoid the oblivion that goes with defeat....
Ascent in the sports universe is a straight shot. You set your goal, and you climb toward greatness. But ascent in the religious universe often proceeds by a series of inversions: You have to be willing to lose yourself in order to find yourself; to gain everything you have to be willing to give up everything; the last shall be first; it’s not about you.
For many religious teachers, humility is the primary virtue. You achieve loftiness of spirit by performing the most menial services....You achieve your identity through self-effacement. You achieve strength by acknowledging your weaknesses.
Sports and religion, in permanent conflict.
This doesn't strike me as quite right, but, I have to confess, it doesn't strike me altogether mistaken, either.
You?
- Comment (72)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (6)
Comments:
Feb '11
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
Paul writes to the Corinthians:
"Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one gets the prize? Run in such a way as to get the prize. Everyone who competes in the games goes into strict training. They do it to get a crown that will not last; but we do it to get a crown that will last forever. Therefore I do not run like a man running aimlessly; I do not fight like a man beating the air. No, I beat my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize."
May '11
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
He seems here to have set two straw locomotives on a collision course, and is now selling tickets. Anybody can do this.
The name David means "beloved", whereas the verb Brook means to barely tolerate that which one detests. Clearly, David Brooks is a meaningless contradiction, perhaps sleeping furiously.
Since he has defined these things in an opposed manner, the inconsistency is clear. Yet one could just as easily decide that the essence of sport is a quest for self-improvement, a demonstration of motivational victory over the plagues of temptation and ease, the setting of an example from which others may draw inspiration in their own struggles, and even (gasp!) proof that not all which we find entertaining must debase and cheapen ourselves.
But that would not suit Mr. Brooks' chosen conclusion. Be not surprised at the supposed conflict he has "found". Be amazed that he had the huevos to put this nonsense in print under his own conflicted name.
May '10
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
I was just going to say that Mr. Brooks doesn't know much about Christianity, because he is obviously ignorant of St. Paul's eloquence in analogizing the religious experience with sport. Well done, Jordan, in beating me to the punch. David Brooks. (((shaking head)))
May '11
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
I just can't get enough of this buckethead.
Brooks perhaps has inappropriately scoped the ethos of an industry down to its constituents. When one purchases bacon, the pig is held innocent of what corporate shenanigans may transpire in the agriculture business.
May '11
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
Brooks has beclowned himself again.
May '10
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
Gary Gaetti was a hard drinking third baseman for Minnesota and was an integral part of their World Series Championships. When he hit age 32 he became born-again. At the same time, age and playing the hot corner caused Gaetti's offensive output to slide. Some blamed his conversion.
Twins 1B Kent Hrbek lamented, "It's almost like he passed away."
When a Giants reliever lost a game on a walk-off HR he attributed it to "God's will." The Giants' real Will, Will Clark, himself an observant Catholic, said in retort, "Hey, I congratulate you on doing something for your life, but this is about baseball. And you'd better get out there and do it for yourself. The Lord didn't hang that slider."
Jerry Manuel, 2000 AL Manager of the year described it like this:
Sep '10
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
Brooks writes:
Mr. Brooks conflates some of the sins of athletes--chiefly pride--with athletics itself. But one doesn't have to be motivated by pride to be a champion.
If Brooks' argument were valid, wouldn't it apply even more strongly to military heroes? But in fact his list of what he considers to be athletic virtues--"proud, assertive, intimidating"--describes the Philistine champion Goliath. And Goliath was defeated by a young man who challenged him with these words:
We all know who won that encounter. Brooks' claim that "the two moral universes are not reconcilable" is hogwash.
Edited on February 20, 2012 at 4:18amMay '11
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
The stupidity continues:
Brooks is poorly following a well-worn rut: Does it mean more for a good person to do good or for a bad one? If you seek to become humble, does achievement render it unachieved? If giving in charity makes you happy, then is it actually charity?
He has proven that sport is of the Devil, because the hare can never overtake the tortoise.
Jun '11
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
It's just like all of us who are competing in a marketplace. Athletes perform to maintain their level of competency, or move up a level or drop down and possibly out.
Its just like, for instance, David Brooks articles which have lost their attractiveness in eyes of many in the last few years.
Sep '10
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
Brooks confuses the carpet with the floor. Being oriented toward victory is not the problem. Confusing victory with glory is the problem. Surely sports has lots of examples of both types (with the balance shifting up and down, as balances tend to do). There's absolutely no "yes, and" or "no, but" with this guy.
Mar '11
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
In team sports, like basketball, a player subordinates his zeal for glory to the playbook. If you don't have a shot or you can't drive to the post you pass the ball. If you have the shot you take it; not taking the shot is a disservice to the team. Team sports are all about humility.
Brooks may have a better argument as it relates to individual sports. Maybe.
Nah.
Jul '11
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
My oldest was/is an incredible athlete and like all my kids a Christian first and foremost. My third son is following along. Tabula rasa's boys were solid football players and great rugby players and devout Mormon boys. The difference in a faith based athlete is that after you beat your foes by playing fairly, you shake their hands and in the case of high school football you circle together and pray afterword. Faith strengthens an athlete the way it strengthens everyone who so chooses. David Brooks is an idiot.
Sep '10
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
So you're saying that David Brooks is perhaps a green idea?
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
This is a brilliant description of Brooks's trick here.
Uh, except that none of us thought morality and sports were at intractable odds until you constructed that premise.
Some hack columnists, like Thomas Friedman and Frank Rich, make their living by conflating invented themes and media narratives with the actual details of public policy. Others, like Nick Kristof, make their living by shaking their heads sadly while conspicuously avoiding any actual point of view.
But David Brooks? He makes his living by inventing Very Important And Fundamental Clashes Between Competing Visions, based on his patented blend of pseudo-sociology and amateur moral philosophy.
In my humble opinion, Ross Douthat is the only Times opinion writer worth his salt. But he is really good.
Edited on February 20, 2012 at 4:26amNov '10
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
Thanks for your comment. I was going to say that Brooks was a doofus, but I like what you said better.
I disagree with this premise: It doesn’t really matter whether he has good intentions.
Of course it matters.
I think a good example of how off the mark Brooks is comes from that scene in the film “Chariots of Fire” ... when the runner Eric Liddell, about to win the gold, exalts, “He also made me fast, and when I run, I feel His pleasure."
In my opinion, there is nothing timid or self effacing about Christ. Aren't we Christians actually commanded not to stick our light under a bushel?
Maybe Brooks is confusing glory with vein-glory.
Feb '11
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
"The last shall be first." A fortnight ago, Jeremy Lin was toiling in benched obscurity.
Many religious traditions spotlight the wild flux of human welfare and existence. Reversals of fortune are common in both sports and life generally. Brooks is wrong to describe athletic success as a "straight shot." For all but the very greatest athletes, their ascent is slow, filled with stumbling blocks, and hard won.
Nov '10
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
I don't think anyone here agrees that sports and faith are incompatible. However, I think we should at least admit that the life of a modern professional athlete, or pop star, or politician for that matter, offers exceptional temptations to a person of faith. That said, "all things are possible with God," including this. When I hear about a person in the position of a Jeremy Lin, I am immediately moved to pray for him.
Nov '11
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
Corinthians again (1 Cor. 1:31): "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God."
It's a question of who gets the glory.
May '10
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
Liberals want all Christians to be the Shakers - celibate and pacifistic. Their problem is that we keep having kids that cling to God and Guns.
Nov '10
Re: Sports, Religion, and David Brooks
Let me add to my last comment that true humility is not self abasement, it is an honest consciousness of one's own true position--with respect to God and others. I haven't got much direct experience with sports, but I'm willing to bet that it sure helps a person to improve if he's got that kind of humility. It does in other areas of endeavor. If you are arrogant, you don't take criticism well, and that keeps you from identifying the areas where your skills still need work.