Aaron Meskin provided this as part of his response to a question about performance enhancing drugs: "...But there might be other sorts of reasons. Professional athletes are entertainers, and one of the things we value in entertainment is the manifestation of human skill at a very high level. Sport and other forms of entertainment are like art in that way. The use of performance enhancing drugs tends to undercut our sense that sport is valuable and enjoyable because it allows us to experience high levels of skill and human achievement." I think this is a reason IN SUPPORT of performance enhancing drugs! There are individuals who are biologically high on these same hormones, who no doubt enjoy enhanced performance over those who are naturally lower on these same hormones. Why not level the "playing field"? We would see enhanced performance from all players, but the highest from those who have perfected their technique. I don't see how use of these drugs "undercuts" our appreciation of sports. I fully...

I think that you’re absolutely right– if a significant amount of thepleasure that we achieve from watching sports is “the experience ofhigh levels of skill and human achievement,” then anything that raisesthe levels of such skill and achievement, including enhancement drugs,should improve the quality of our experience. But in fact, it seems notto work that way. When we watch a gifted athlete perform an action ofextraordinary grace and prowess, we marvel at the act and at the veryexistence of a person who could perform such an act, and we feelpleasure. But when we learn that his heightened skills were due toperformance-enhancing drugs, we are no longer so impressed; in fact,many of us feel disappointed. There’s nothing special about thisathlete, we reason, since anyone who took these drugs might haveperformed just as well. All of this suggests that part of the source ofour pleasure in watching sports is not simply experiencing “high levelsof skill and human achievement,” but rather experiencing high levels...