张琪 夏春 龚正伟

摘 要：采用历史与逻辑相统一的视角对竞技本质技艺论的理论体系提出质疑。提出了4个疑点：“游戏”概念的混乱使用；经验归纳的研究方法论割裂了客观事实的整体性和连续性；对竞技本质游戏论的批判未能把握静态和动态两个层面的经验质料；竞技本质技艺论的立论混淆了技艺和游戏在竞技活动中的层次。研究认为：应当剔除竞技本质技艺论的本质属性，以竞技技艺论重新给技艺在竞技活动中定位；研究竞技本质问题还需依托游戏论作为基础，而技艺论则应着重关注竞技活动中的技术现象。

关 键 词：体育哲学；竞技；本质；游戏；技艺

中图分类号：G80-05 文献标志码：A 文章编号：1006-7116（2018）02-0009-08

The questioning of the theory that the nature of competition is skill and

the establishing of the theory that competition is skill

ZHANG Qi1，XIA Chun2，GONG Zheng-wei1

（1.School of Leisure Sports and Art，Shanghai Sports University，Shanghai 200438，China；

2.School of Physical Education and Sport Training，Shanghai Sports University，Shanghai 200438，China）

Abstract： From the perspective of history and logic unification， the authors questioned the theoretical system of the theory that the nature of competition is skill， and put forward 4 questioning points： the conception of “game” was used chaotically； the research methodology concluded based on experience separated the wholeness and continuity of objective facts； the criticism on the theory that the nature of competition is skill failed to grasp the static and dynamic essence of experience； the establishment of the theory that the nature of competition is skill mixed up the levels of skill and game in competitive activities. The authors drew the following conclusions： the nature attribute of the theory that the nature of competition is skill should be removed， while the orientation of skill in competitive activities should be reestablished based on the theory that competition is skill； studying the issue about the nature of competition still need to be carried out based on the game theory， while the skill theory should focus more on technical phenomena in competitive activities.

Key words： sports philosophy；competition；nature；game；skill

《体育学刊》于2010开始，相继刊登了数篇关于竞技本质游戏论和竞技本质技艺论的文章。竞技本质属性的归属，关乎到如何构建体育理论和开展体育实践活动等重要问题。在经历了训练比赛说、活动说、身体活动说、社会实践说、游戏说和双重本质说之后，张军献[1]提出“我们仍然需要将竞技的目的与手段统一起来，寻找竞技的本质，而不是停留在双重本质或者多本质的阶段”。刘欣然[2]提出的竞技本质技艺论认为：“在原初的性质上，游戲产生于天性和本能，竞技源自于练习和习惯，这呈现出两个不同性质和方向，两者虽然在某些性质上具有同一性，但却可以确定为不同的事物……”，将竞技本质的讨论由游戏转向了技艺。陈璐[3]在与刘欣然的商榷中提出：“国内学者不求甚解引入西方的游戏理论，忽视作为sport概念基础的play与game研究，对二者不加区分胡乱翻译，必将导致竞技和游戏研究更加混乱。