Making a Sport of Fists: The Battles, Decline and Death of Tom Johnson, the Champion of England (1783 -1791). By Ray Esten

 

                The Good of Boxing:  Some Ethical Considerations

This article looks at the good of boxing, and contrasts it with ring ethics, trash talk and distorted passions in trying to offer a more comprehensive overview of the sport’s ethical dilemmas. 

The Boxing Club

The good in boxing is often abstract. While it is primarily a physical activity, it also contains social principles. When considering the ethical dimensions of boxing it is worth noting the power of sport to bring people together and foster community.

Boxing acted as a magnet to Irish immigrants in London. For instance, the Fisher Catholic Boxing Club (still active) which was established in the early nineteen hundreds by the Monks of Downside Abbey was by 1958 a venue that, ‘caters for any young Irish boxers coming to work in England.’ Fast forward to the Troubles in Northern Ireland (1968-1998). Particularly, Eamonn McGee (WBC- 2007) reflections on his time at The Sacred Heart Boxing Club in Belfast. He considered this club, a ‘saviour and sanctuary’ and a safe haven where the local Catholic Community could congregate. 

Donald McRae expands on this kind of relationship and he contemplates in his book In Sunshine or in Shadow how ‘a strange business-like boxing could inspire the people of Northern Ireland, from all corners and sides, to believe that another way was possible.’ Two-time world champion boxer Carl Frampton, a protestant, who many consider to have cut across sectarian lines, felt that boxing transcending sectarianism was somewhat a romanticism but overall, it had a more progressive environment in comparison to different sports.

Boxing and Community

Hence the boxing club can serve as a setting in which people of diverse, competing or hostile backgrounds might come together in creating a good within the community. What boxing writer Catherine Dunn communicates through a sparring partner, ‘you might not know each other's names but, ‘come to know the deepest identity as you learn theirs.’

This phenomenon is perhaps best expressed through the Mexican politician named Edard Roybal, who in the 1960s purchased an old church, in East Los Angeles, as a place in which the youth could be deterred from rioting ‘-offering the violence of the ring as a panacea.’ 

The Resurrection Boxing Gym was later bought by multiple world champion boxer and former gym member Oscar De La Hoya who added facilities to the building including a study place, tutoring, computers and family activity. Furthermore, in similar fashion George Foreman (two-time world champion-later ordained a Christian minister) erected The George Foreman Youth & Community Centre in 1984 and returning to the ring in 1987 as a time to preach -as a way of,’ getting people's attention and then tell them about Jesus.'

Take, for instance, Joe Frazer (HWC-1970-1973) who battled Muhammad Ali (HWC 1974 -1978) three times. His Philadelphia gym, according to Frazer, offers more than learning to fight. ‘We have five rules which include. Respect God. Respect your mother and father. Respect your brothers and sisters. Respect others.' This can only strengthen one's reserve that the sport contains a number of goods, recreational/social life, cardiovascular health, knowledge, all of which have a final purpose. Be they social, educational or fitness related or to becoming an Olympian. It offers a route towards professional boxing which suggests financial benefits and prestige, but, as we shall see, it can have detrimental consequences. Yet, boxing is a way of moving forward. In this respect, it is intrinsically desirable and serves the will's final cause. This outlines the sport as much more than mere brutality.

In God We Trust

John F. Grabowski describes boxing, ‘as a solitary struggle in which one relies on perseverance, determination, and courage to help them overcome their opponent. ‘If this is to be considered reasonable the athlete must contemplate its worth. What is the price I pay? What do I get out of it? Through this process of deduction, the risks are weighed. If it is to be considered a noble endeavour that judgement is to be made freely. Hence the participant follows the activity as a good in itself. To quote Tommy Loughran (LHWC 1927-1929), ’…we’ve been given reasoning power, we’ve been given intelligence, we’ve been given free will, we’ve been given all the capabilities of reasoning, pondering things, judging what is right and wrong, and the only thing that I can hope for is that God is infinitely merciful to us in every way, and that He will allow for the influences there that cause us to do certain things at certain times.’

This reflects Loughran’s deep Catholic faith, and he like the priestly writer of Gen 1 held that,’ man is by natural endowment like God; not that he naturally acts like God, always choosing truth and right; but that he has the natural capacity to make those choices.’ Whereas, Wayne McCullough (BWC 1995-1997) does not question his choice or hope that God will be merciful. Instead, he believes that the talent to box is a God given. The risks are the risks that God has set out. That once we are born, God has already chosen the day we will die. He quotes Job 14.5 ‘seeing his days are determined, the number of his months are with thee, thou hast appointed his bounds that he cannot pass. 

‘Hence the participant follows the activity as a good and is cooperating with God, in that he is fulfilling God's plan.

The Danger of Boxing v. The Danger of Life

For others it is not a question of free will or predestination. Yes, boxing has its risks, but life is full of risk. It can be argued that no activity or sport is free from death or injury. Take, for example, the danger involved in motocross, rock climbing, cave diving etc. What Lt. Col Wilber K. Anderson argued in Ring Magazine in 1951, ‘if I created the world, I would have made things different,’ though we must accept the world the way it is. The element of danger is everywhere. It is a paradox that when danger does not come, we seek it out.’ To which he references scaling the mountain tops of the world and marathon cycling which stretches the body beyond endurance. This argument, although it side lines intent in boxing, is legitimate as sports that appear less violent often have high casualty rates.

Yet, the case against boxing is not based on statistics alone. It is grounded in moral considerations. Objections to boxing, such as, from the British Medical Association, stem, ‘not only, from the understanding that we as doctors have the biomedical facts surrounding boxing, but from a different, more moral set of values that most of us hold and apply as compared to boxing’s advocates and, more importantly, spectators.’ The argument of the BMA is as much in line with a moral consensus of community or the natural law than it has with medical concerns. This has been accused of coming from a standpoint of legal moralism. This, it is argued, is based on a simplistic understanding of intentions. That even if it caused no harm, it is simply immoral on the grounds that it contains violent intent. Therefore, the trouble with the sport is not injury or death, but that boxing more distinctly resembles a fight, when contrasted with say rugby. Yet, this fails to comprehend the human capacity to understand and interpret the world around them.  

Practical Reasoning: Fighting the Good Fight 

The sport is often aligned with poverty and the vast majority of boxers come to the sport from backgrounds of privation. Such rags to riches stories are represented by boxing champions such as Jack Dempsey (WHC 1919-1926) who grew up poor, and frequented hobo camps before his career was elevated. What makes this element of lives like Dempsey's worth mentioning is that the inclination to box appears less intimidating. For, ‘the backdrop of such a harsh urban [or rural] environment, boxing can hardly seem particularly violent.’ This deduction depicts a rational desire for boxing, which not only offers a capacity to escape, but a means of advancement too. Therefore, the boxer is not moved by brute force or ignorance but by their will. 

British boxer Randolph Turpin (WMC 1951) who like Dempsey before him and Mike Tyson (WHC 1987-1990) observed fighting as a fundamental way of life. As did Floyd Patterson (WHC 1956 and 1962) who grew up in poverty and engaged in petty crime before discovering boxing. He noted that whether it [boxing] was a sport or not, he wanted it to be so, because it was the only thing he was good at. Turpin perceived boxing to be an extension of life. For, ‘I was fighting as a kid in the Leamington streets, fighting in the booths, fighting policemen, fighting as an amateur, fighting as a professional. It’s my life.’ The fact that other courses of action or possibilities may have existed, is only relevant if he had known all information or the full extent of which was inaccessible to an agent engaged in deliberation.

What was known was self-preservation which was achieved by fighting. Afterwards it became attractive as it offered rewards through professional contracts. The fact that the vast majority of boxers come from lower socio-economic backgrounds, and don’t in fact make it in the sport or are damaged by it was obscured. With all things considered, although their will was open to alternative courses of action and their choices are conditioned, yet chosen. The prize ring appeared rational as their backgrounds may cause their reasoned consideration to be obscured. It could be argued that they are not aware of the relative dangers because it has been withheld or their knowledge is limited. Hence, the criteria used to define these alternatives is guided by what is possible in a relative sense. In this deduction, boxing was a place in which skill, endurance and intelligence could flourish and one could reasonably advance. The harm in this sense is made insignificant. 

Controlled Aggression 

Catholic author Mark Galli argues what takes place within the ropes is controlled aggression. For him it is a sport that operates within tight constraints. Yet, in keeping the match from becoming a free for all, those restraints must be honoured. He suggests that boxers need to be admired as ‘masters of control.’ Particularly as the aggression is contained within the ropes. Concentrate on a goal. The pain and injury they suffer and the damage inflicted on the other is but a necessary evil, yet, it is no more than that. 

There are boxers like the once multiple world champion Roy Jones Jnr for which, ‘continuing to fight is not a choice … it’s in my blood.’ Professional boxing, however, is generally perceived as work, and in their average life athletes are not particularly violent. 

Take Bob Fitzsimmons (world titles in three weight divisions), a man described universally to be, ‘mild tempered, slow to anger, and swift to forgive.’ Yet, when he entered the ring, one adversary noted, he was capable of delivering terrific blows. This is reflected in Rocky Marciano (HWC 1952-1956). His wife felt that, ‘one reason I don’t mind going to the fights, is that I know they are all business with Rocky. ‘You see him punching hard in the ring, but I know that he is a good natured and generous man’ 

For Marciano, ‘all that was not the fight was excluded from consciousness. '

However, the intention was never harm for harm's sake nor was it about anger. It was noted as far back as the 1870s that success in boxing consists of keeping your temper, ‘no doubt that it is aggravating to get a dab on the nose, but to be disconcerted by it, and lose your presence of mind, is to lose a fight.’

Marciano, who won mostly by knockout, did this in a state of calm. The aggression was not only concentrated, it was impersonal and,’ although the competition is intense and each will try to knock the other out, afterwards they are as friendly as competition admits.'

This was confirmed by Carl Frampton, who maintained in 2016, that he makes a psychological analysis of his opponent, measuring guts and skill with flicks of the jab and testing their stoicism with punishing body shots. However, it was done without emotion, as ‘feelings cannot come into it ‘’as soon as you enter the ring with anger, you’ve lost.’ Therefore, it can be assumed that the sport is free of homicidal will. The violence is not personal, the punches hurt but frequently they don’t. ‘It is but a small part of the dialogue you are witnessing.’

Men and Monsters in the Ring?

Floyd Patterson (HWC 1956 and 1962) on dislodging the mouth guard of a Chicago fighter named Mieszala and observing his opponent bent over and motioning to retrieve it, he did not attack. This would have been a perfect opening to score a knockout blow. Yet, Patterson, in consequent passion, chose to join Mieszala in search of the missing mouth guard. Furthermore, Patterson had not trained at the same gym as Mieszala in case it gave him an unfair advantage ‘inadvertently pick up some tips’ by watching Mieszala. Patterson later stood by these actions on moral grounds and in spite of criticism.

In this case, Patterson can be observed as a rational agent ‘protect and preserve life’ who did not have to check an external set of rules that had been written down. For within him was generated concepts that were recognisable as simply rational. In this sense, his judgement of reason acted in a manner that was contrary to his passions. The ‘killer instinct’ being a highly valued concept in combat sports. 

It is often the case that the boxer who appears the most brutal can be the most compassionate. A boxer wrongly perceived to have a killer instinct was Joe Louis (HWC 1937-1949). He had a high knockout ratio and was often depicted as cruel or someone who lacked emotion.

Harry Carpenter, a boxing correspondent who studied photographs of Louis for many years believed that Louis was never emotionally involved or that he ‘wears the same set mask whether he is signing an autograph, stepping on the scales, trashing a rival, or celebrating a win.’ This description casts Louis somewhat in the role of a machine, on the other hand, it also shows him to be a master of controlled aggression. Louis was in the ring to do a job and could not remember disliking any particular boxer. Recounting the fight with John Henry Lewis (LHWC 1935-1938), this was the first world title between two black men, held in 1939, Louis revealed himself as not someone who acted solely on instinct or stimulus response. Louis reasoned as a human being that, ‘I didn’t want that fight, when he came against me, he was finished. However, ‘they wrote and built it up that I would not fight another negro (Louis was under pressure to fight an opponent because of an issue of race). ‘I knocked him out in the first round.’ In this case the knock out was an act of mercy. Lewis passed his best and it was Louis’s intellect that brought the contest to a quick end.

This is what makes a human action distinct from that of fighting cock and other non-human creatures. We see this again when Louis faced his rival Max Schmeling (HWC 1930-1932). He recounted, …I wanted to knock him out as a man who was in there trying to knock me out. He described hating as,’ something that comes deep. I never learned that.’ Yet, as Roberts noted in his biography of Louis, a man who fought coldly and without rage or anger, the second fight with Schmeling carried the concerns of black America and white America in the face of Hitler’s champion. In a team sport the weight of a nation rests on a group’s shoulders. In boxing it can be a test of manhood between rival nations which is decided by fists. Louis was concerned by this, and that he might destroy Schmeling. This outlines his humanity, but it also outlines the dangers of the ring and how a contest can become a ‘death fight.’ It is where we find a deviation in Louis’s passions. He, however, was aware of this and he told a friend pre-fight that he was scared. Not scared for himself but, ‘scared I might kill Schmeling tonight’

During the fight noted Harry Carpenter Louis knew what was to be done and he did it with cold precision and power, ‘a startling application of the often-quoted ‘killer instinct’, yet done with scarcely the flicker of an eyebrow.’ Yet Louis was perplexed, noted the referee ‘and I think frightened -as, ‘I most certainly was -that death was going to strike in the ring.’ The last 124 sec of the battle was described as the most concentrated and destructive in two and a half centuries of prize fighting.

Distorted Passions

This begs the question. Can one love one’s neighbour while trying to subdue. It is, after all, a game of injuring, maiming, and rendering an opponent unconscious. It remains the boxer's job, wrote L. A. G. Strong in 1938, to put each other out. If they find a weak spot, they naturally concentrate on it. For, when the opportunity presents itself, ‘one plays for an already damaged eye as the quickest way to finish the fight. ‘For, as Joyce Carol Oates wrote, ‘once the boxer disrobes at ringside, they must also disrobe from reason and instincts caution.’ The desire is to win and more broadly it might encompass a desire for power, riches, fame or for virtue or friendship or community. Yet, what may appear to be good can be distorted by sorrow or fury. The ethically minded Floyd Patterson discovered this in 1960 after a rematch with Ingemar Johanson (WHC 1959-1960).

Patterson demitted that for, ‘the whole year, I lived with hate, which was brought out through the viciousness which I displayed’ The fight itself was good in that it offered some career and financial reward. However, the intended good was at too great a cost or was dipropionate in unintended effects. Hate had made him miserable, for,’ when a man hates he can’t have any peace of mind. 'Clearly his emotions were disordered, misdirected, hence unreasonable. In fact, when Johannsson hit the canvas, he stayed so still that Patterson thought he had killed him.

Patterson, a man known as compassionate, had rational desires which were distorted by hate. As we have seen, a boxer can be merciful. Yet, this is not always possible. Tony Bellow (CWC 2015-2016) perhaps understood this when he stated that, ‘we all have a bit of craziness in us- it was being a fighter that I’m willing to go further than anyone else. It made me realise that I was willing to die in a boxing ring. I’m not proud of it but at least now I’m aware of it. Bellow was willing to accept his own death. Which contrasts with the very thing he was fighting for, to flourish. Yet, in the ring Bellow never resigned ….’ I have never quit. I’d die before I gave up. Nobody ever kept me down on the floor. I’ve never been left asleep on the canvas. And never once have I chosen to watch from one knee as a referee counted me out. Even when I couldn’t get up, I still got up. Even if after I’ve dragged myself up, I’m like a fucking zombie. I’ll carry-on fighting.’

It appears that he was living moment to moment rather than taking his life as a whole. This appears irrational, yet, boxers regularly scrape themselves off the canvas, rise on wobbly legs or convince a referee they have been okay and go on and win. This risky behaviour is frequently praised as the winning mentality, and while it is the product of free judgement, it does not promote bodily integrity or contribute to human flourishing. Generally, because it is dismissive of the real danger. Bellow, reflecting on this unreasonable instinct, is now aware of his passions. What is needed in this case, as John Finnis has noted, is ‘cool reflection’, clear-thinking as a human person which brings that person to the same set of basic goods

Trash Talk

The boxer who during a press conference, expresses a desire to hurt, to kill an opponent. This could be considered a symbolic death as the knockout and otherwise rendered unconscious is not designed to kill and each non-fatal knockout is therefore symbolic. Yet, the lines between real and representative are often blurred. It is generally accepted that a boxer does not engage in a fight for personal animosity which is unlawful and therefore criminal activity. Nevertheless, trash talk, talk of killing, maiming or hurting an opponent is often legitimised in boxing. Such sentiments real or imagined are sent out into the world. It is often unclear if this is true and the graveness of their words can have consequences. For instance, Canadian lightweight champion Goetan Hart after winning the title from Cleveland Danny in 1978, commented, ‘you can be friends with the guy before the fight, but in the ring, you have to hate him. Hart claimed that he focuses on the other's face and repeats the word hate. To which he adds, ‘if he has a cut, punch it, if his nose is broken, swing at it.’ This could not possibly be a part of his training. Yet, fighters like Hart are trained to dominate the other. For instance, they are thought to imagine that they are punching a spot behind the head of an opponent.

Professional boxing does not correlate with play as described by John Finnis. Sports historian Randy Roberts confirmed this when he wrote, ‘you don’t play, ‘cut eyes, swallowing your own blood, trying to move away from an opponent in a dull metal fog.’ Yet, this aspect of it can be diminished or ignored, which reflects the idea that boxing is a game and therefore unreal. For example, Hart admitted that men do die but he never dwells on it. The implications, in fact, are very real. Case in point, Hart and Danny met again in the boxing ring in 1980. Danny died 16 days later following a knock-out.

The Inexcusable Sport

In the end, what makes this so ethically flawed is that the person who inflicts the most punishment is the winner. Ralph Whiley, sports writer, termed ‘assault and battery with deadly weapons the fists of men.’ This is a ’sport’ that makes light of brutality. Tom Callahan of Time Magazine, shed light on this during the lead up to Tyson vs. Spinks. He termed Mike Tyson ‘the monster that men have worried was at the heart of their indefinable passion, of their indefensible sport, has come out in flesh to be the champion of the world.’ In other words, ‘the baddest man on the planet was not only a man who knocked other men out but a man with a distorted moral view. This badness can be translated as an action that distorts, damages or corrupts or impedes a person and so is a privation. Tyson confirms this by speaking of bad intentions, to attack vital areas by blows to the heart, kidney and liver. The shattering of an adversary’s eardrum who would ‘cry like a woman’

Tyson was the poor kid who channelled ‘the dark power into a good’ Yet as David Remnick noted the dark side overwhelmed him. His clouded reason and overpowering emotions were channelled into fights, ‘I was hitting him with murderous precision. I was out for blood. I wanted the title and no way was I coming home without it’. Again, the very essence of the winning mentality, yet, was the pursuit of a particular good jeopardising the good of the whole man. This was made manifest by Tyson when he bit the ear of Evander Holyfield during their second contest for the WBA World Heavyweight Championship. 

Tyson noted, "I bit him because I wanted to kill him. I was really mad about my head being bumped and everything," Tyson said. "I really lost consciousness during the whole fight. It took me out of my fight plan and everything." Evidently, human actions can be either in accordance with the order of reason or not. ‘Even if the action is indifferent in kind, it violates the order of reason to perform that action in inappropriate circumstances or for the sake of an immoral end.’

When a boxer is self-indulgent or hedonistic they look past the bad act. They might feel remorse, but the pleasure is always good irrespective of the context. Had Tyson been in good working order, more complete, more fulfilled this aggression may not have manifested in this way. Tyson now seeks harmony with God and has since grown in his religion and no longer worships himself instead of something bigger. He said ‘’so I decided in life to be a good person more than a great person. And that’s just been my concept, good is so much more than great when it’s used in the proper context.’ It is evident that the violence in boxing distorts the moral actor or that violent people distort boxing. The words and actions of Tyson and others have done little to embellish the sport. Instead, their actions remain a talking point on the sports morality. And, there is much to ponder when contrasting ring ethics, trash talk and distorted passions. If this article fails to address such questions it may instead offer a more comprehensive overview of the sport’s ethical dilemmas. 

In many respects, the negative actions associated with boxing are considered a fundamental element of the professional game.

 

Bibliography

Basil Cole, ‘An Introduction to the Concept «Basic Goods» in the Writings of Germain Grisez’, Angelicum Vol. 70, No. 1 (1993).

Anthony J. Lisska, Aquinas’s Theory of Natural Law: An Analytic Reconstruction (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996).

Barbara Piattelli Dempsey, Dempsey (London: W. H. Allen, 1977).

Carl Frampton with Paul Gibson, Carl Frampton: My Autobiography (Kildare: Merrion Press, 2023).

Harry Carpenter, Masters of Boxing (London, 1964).

Carvill, Death of a Boxer (Biteback Publishing, 2024).

Chapter 1 Utilitarianism Ethics for A-Level, 2017.

Chris Bengel, ‘Mike Tyson recalls infamous Evander Holyfield incident: 'I bit him because I wanted to kill ‘him’ CBS Sports https://www.cbssports.com/boxing/news/mike-tyson-recalls-infamous-evander-holyfield-incident-i-bit-him-because-i-wanted-to-kill-him/ [accessed 10/09/2024]

Christopher Rivers, “Settling their Differences in the Ring: French Boxer Georges Carpentier’s Conquest of England, 1911–1919,” Contemporary French Civilization 38.2 (2013).

Coleen McCluskey, Evil as Privation. In Thomas Aquinas on Moral Wrongdoing (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016).

Donald J Mrozek, Sport and the American Mentality 1880-1910 (Knoxville: University of Tennessee, 1983).

George Kimball, John Schulian, The Hurt Business: A Century of the Greatest Writing on Boxing (London: Arum Press, 2013).

George Willis, Twice Bitten: The Untold Story of Holyfield-Tyson II (Edinburgh & London: Mainstream, 2013).

Gregory S. Rodriguez, "Saving Face, Place, and Race Oscar De La Hoya and the ‘’All-American’’ Dream of U.S. Boxing in John Bloom & Michael Nevin Willard ed., Sports Matters Race, Recreation, and Culture (New York: New York University Press, 2002).

Hilary Bok, ‘Freedom and Practical Reasoning’ in Free Will ed., Gary Watson (Oxford: Oxford University Press 2003).

Ian Probert, Dangerous: An Intimate Journey into the Heart of Boxing (Sussex, Pitch Publishing, 2016).

Jack Anderson, ‘The Business of Hurting People: A Historical, Social, And Legal Analysis of Professional Boxing’ Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal Summer 2007, Vol. 7 Issue 1.

Joe Frazer, with Marvis Frazier, ‘Life Champions’ in ed., John Gattuso, Shadow Boxers.

John F. Grabowski, History of Sports: Boxing (U.SA: Lucent Books, 2003).

John Hennessy Mick Tyson (London: Bisan Books, 1990).

 John K. Kerr, Rethinking Aggression and Violence in Sport (London & New York: Routledge Press 2005).

Joseph Shaw,’ Intention in Ethics’, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Jun., 2006, Vol. 36, No. 2 (Jun., 2006).

Joyce Carol Oates, On Boxing (London: Pan Books, 1987).

Katherine Dunn, ‘School of Hard Knocks’ in John Grosso ed. Shadow Boxers: Sweat, Sacrifice & The Will to Survive in American Boxing Gyms (New Jersey: Stone Creek Publications, 2005).

L. A. G Strong, Shake Hands and Come Out Fighting (London: Chapman & Hall 1938).

LoIc J. D Wacquant, ‘The Pugilistic Point of View: How Boxers Think and Feel about Their Trade’, Theory and Society, Vol. 24, No. 4 (Aug., 1995).

Lt. Col. Wilber K. Anderson, ‘Fighting Chaplain Boosts Joe Walcott and His Faith’ The Ring Oct, 1951 Vol. XXX No. 9.

Manly Exercises, Sports, and Games: By the Champion Players of Old England (London: Dean &Son, 1877).

Mark Dimmock and Andrew Fisher, ‘Ethics for A-Level’

Michael Moutoussis, ‘On the Barbaric Nature of Boxing: Through Following the Panorama Debate on Banning Boxing after Yet Another Death’, Medicine, Conflict and Survival, Vol. 12, No. 1 (January-March 1996).

Mrinal Mishra, ‘Born Christian Later Converted to Muslim, Mike Tyson Reveals Real Reason Why He Chose Islam While Serving His Prison Sentence’ Essential Sports  https://www.essentiallysports.com/boxing-news-born-christian-later-converted-to-muslim-mike-tyson-reveals-real-reason-why-he-chose-islam-while-serving-his-prison-sentence/ [accessed 02/08/2025].

Nicholas Dixon, ‘Boxing, Paternalism, and Legal Moralism’, Social Theory and Practice, Vol. No. 2 (April 2001).

Nicholas Dixon, A Moral Critique of Mixed Martial Arts Public Affairs Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 4 (October 2015).

Nigel Warburton, ‘Freedom to Box’, Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Feb., 1998).

Paul D. Gibson, The Lost Soul of Eamonn McGee (Cork: Mercier Press, 2018).

Paul Davis, ‘Ethical Issues in Boxing’, Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 1993/1994, Vol. 20/21 Issue 1.

Peter Brooke-Ball, Boxing.

Peter Heller, In This Corner: Forty World Champions Tell Their Stories (New York, Simon & Shuster, 1973).

Ralph Whiley, Serenity: A Boxing Quest from Sugar Ray Robinson to Mike Tyson (Edinburgh: Mainstream Publishing, 1999).

Randy Roberts, Joe Louis: Harm Times Man (New Haven & London: Yale University Press, 2010).

Richard Wolff, Fighting Sports and the Church (North Carolina: McFarland, 2021).

Roberts, Joe Louis

S. Kirson Weinberg and Henry Around,’ The Occupational Culture of the Boxer’ in Steve A. Reiss ed., The American Sporting Experience: A Historical Anthology of Sport in History (London: Leisure Press, 1984).

S. Vernon McCasland,’ "The Image of God" According to Paul’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 69, No. 2 (Jun., 1950).

The Irish Times

The Oakland Tribune

The Ottawa Journal

Thomas Hauser, An unforgiving sport: an inside look at another year in boxing (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 2009).

Tom Callahan, ‘Cover Story Boxings’ allure from the heart of primal passion comes the terror of Mike Tyson ‘, Time Magazine, 004070781X, Vol. 131, Issue 26.

Tony Bellow, Everybody has a Plan until they get Punched in the Face. 12 things boxing teaches you about life (London: The Orian Publishing Group, 2021).

Tris Dixon, Damage: The Untold Story of Brain Trauma in Boxing (London: Hamilcar Publications 2021).

W. K Stratton, Floyd Patterson: The Fighting Life of Boxing's Invisible Champion (Boson & New York: Houghton Miffin Harcourt, 2012).

Wayne McCullough, Don’t Quit! The Autobiography of Wayne McCullough Pocket Rocket (Edinburgh & London: Mainstream, 2005).