Marino is an active boxing trainer and professor of
philosophy at St. Olaf College. He covers boxing for the Wall
Street Journal, is the editor of Ethics: The Essential
Writings (Modern Library Classics, 2010) and is at work
on a book about boxing and philosophy.
training in both philosophy and boxing. Over the years, some
of my colleagues have groused that my work is a contradiction,
building minds and cultivating rational discourse while teaching
violence and helping to remove brain cells. Truth be told, I
think philosophers with this gripe should give some thought
to what really counts as violence. I would rather take a punch
in the nose any day than be subjected to some of the attacks
that I have witnessed in philosophy colloquia. However, I have
a more positive case for including boxing in my curriculum for
unmindful attitude towards the body so prevalent in the West
blinkers us to profound truths that the skin, muscles and breath
can deliver like a punch.
philosophy, even before Descartes’ influential case for
a mind-body dualism, has been dismissive of the body. Plato
— even though he competed as a wrestler — and most
of the sages who followed him, taught us to think of our arms
and legs as nothing but a poor carriage for the mind. In Phaedo,
Plato presents his teacher Socrates on his deathbed as a sort
of Mr. Spock yearning to be free from the shackles of the flesh
so he can really begin thinking seriously. In this account,
the body gives rise to desires that will not listen to reason
and that becloud our ability to think clearly.
In much of Eastern philosophy, in contrast, the search for wisdom
is more holistic. The body is considered inseparable from the
mind, and is regarded as a vehicle, rather than an impediment,
to enlightenment. The unmindful attitude towards the body so
prevalent in the West blinkers us to profound truths that the
skin, muscles and breath can deliver like a punch.
different physical practices may open us to different truths,
there is a lot of wisdom to be gained in the ring. Socrates,
of course, maintained that the unexamined life was not worth
living, that self-knowledge is of supreme importance. One thing
is certain: boxing can compel a person to take a quick self-inventory
and gut check about what he or she is willing to endure and
risk. As Joyce Carol Oates observes in her minor classic, On
the German idealist philosopher G.W.F. Hegel (1770-1831) never
slipped on the gloves, I think he would have at least supported
the study of the sweet science. In his famous Lord and Bondsman
allegory, Hegel suggests that it is in mortal combat with the
other, and ultimately in our willingness to give up our lives,
that we rise to a higher level of freedom and consciousness.
If Hegel is correct, the lofty image that the warrior holds
in our society has something to do with the fact that in her
willingness to sacrifice her own life, she has escaped the otherwise
universal choke hold of death anxiety. Boxing can be seen as
a stylized version of Hegel’s proverbial trial by battle
and as such affords new possibilities of freedom and selfhood.
purely psychologically, practice in what used to be termed the
‘manly art’ makes people feel more at home in themselves,
and so less defensive and perhaps less aggressive. The way we
cope with the elemental feelings of anger and fear determines
to no small extent what kind of person we will become. Enlisting
Aristotle, I shall have more to say about fear in a moment,
but I don’t think it takes a Freud to recognize that many
people are mired in their own bottled up anger. In our society,
expressions of anger are more taboo than libidinal impulses.
Yet, as our entertainment industry so powerfully bears out,
there is plenty of fury to go around. I have trained boxers,
often women, who find it extremely liberating to learn that
they can strike out, throw a punch, express some rage, and that
no one is going to die as a result.
let’s be clear, life is filled with blows. It requires
toughness and resiliency. There are few better places than the
squared circle to receive concentrated lessons in the dire need
to be able to absorb punishment and carry on, “to get
off the canvas” and “roll with the punches.”
It is little wonder that boxing, more than any other sport,
has functioned as a metaphor for life. Aside from the possibilities
for self-fulfillment, boxing can also contribute to our moral
his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle argues that the final
end for human beings is eudaimonia - the good life, or as it
is most often translated, happiness. In an immortal sentence
Aristotle announces, “The Good of man (eudaimonia) is
the active exercise of his soul’s faculties in conformity
with excellence or virtue, or if there be several human excellences
or virtues, in conformity with the best and most perfect among
pages later, Aristotle acknowledges that there are in fact two
kinds of virtue or excellence, namely, intellectual and moral.
Intellectual excellence is simple book learning, or theoretical
smarts. Unlike his teacher Plato and his teacher’s teacher,
Socrates, Aristotle recognized that a person could know a great
deal about the ‘good’ and not lead a good life.
“With regard to excellence,” says Aristotle, “it
is not enough to know, but we must try to have and use it.”
offers a table of the moral virtues that includes, among other
qualities, temperance, justice, pride, friendliness and truthfulness.
Each semester when I teach ethics, I press my students to generate
their own list of the moral virtues. “What,” I ask,
“are the traits that you connect with having character?”
Tolerance, kindness, self-respect, creativity, always make it
on to the board, but it is usually only with prodding that courage
gets a nod. And yet, courage seems absolutely essential to leading
a moral life. After all, if you do not have mettle, you will
not be able to abide by your moral judgments. Doing the right
thing often demands going down the wrong side of the road of
our immediate and long-range self-interests. It frequently involves
sacrifices that we do not much care for, sometimes of friendships,
or jobs; sometimes, as in the case with Socrates, even of our
lives. Making these sacrifices is impossible without courage.
to Aristotle, courage is a mean between rashness and cowardliness;
that is, between having too little trepidation and too much.
Aristotle reckoned that in order to be able to hit the mean,
we need practice in dealing with the emotions and choices corresponding
to that virtue. So far as developing grit is concerned, it helps
to get some swings at dealing with manageable doses of fear.
And yet, even in our approach to education, many of us tend
to think of anything that causes a shiver as traumatic. Consider,
for example, the demise of dodge ball in public schools. It
was banned because of the terror that the flying red balls caused
in some children and of the damage to self-esteem that might
come with always being the first one knocked out of the game.
But how are we supposed to learn to stand up to our fears if
we never have any supervised practice in dealing with the jitters?
Of course, our young people are very familiar with aggressive
and often gruesome video games that simulate physical harm and
self-defense, but without, of course, any of the consequences
and risks that might come with putting on the gloves.
provides practice with fear and with the right, attentive supervision,
in quite manageable increments. In their first sparring session,
boxers usually erupt in “fight or flight” mode.
When the bell rings, novices forget everything they have learned
and simply flail away. If they stick with it for a few months,
their fears diminish; they can begin to see things in the ring
that their emotions blinded them to before. More importantly,
they become more at home with feeling afraid. Fear is painful,
but it can be faced, and in time a boxer learns not to panic
about the blows that will be coming his way.
Aristotle is able to define courage, the study and practice
of boxing can enable us to not only comprehend courage, but
‘to have and use’ it. By getting into the ring with
our fears, we will be less likely to succumb to trepidation
when doing the right thing demands taking a hit. To be sure,
there is an important difference between physical and moral
courage. After all, the world has seen many a brave monster.
The willingness to endure physical risks is not enough to guarantee
uprightness; nevertheless, it can, I think contribute in powerful
ways to the development of moral virtue.
Defense of Heidegger
of a Chronophobe
What's It Good For?