This study re-examines the issue of “excessive coaching” in extracurricular sports activities and clarifies the causes of short of “coaching circuit,” raised by Kubo, by focusing on the coach’s desire. First, I demonstrate the significance of this concept as both recognizing the coaching process as a circuit and introducing the “philosophy” step within the circuit. Although the short of circuit implies “excessive coaching,” Kubo’s discussion simply remains a suggestion of the cause of “excessive coaching,” which would be a limitation of his theory.

In the sport philosophical literature, most researchers discussing the background of “excessive coaching” have analyzed the cause for the relationship between coach and students. Phenomenologically, however, the relationship is the inner structure of a team, and there is scope for further investigation into the external structure. This external structure of a team would indicate the other teams or coaches as competitors for the coach, because competitive sports, with competition as their essence, are played as extracurricular activities. This understanding suggests the new viewpoint of “plurality” of coaches, according to which, a coach unconsciously exaggerates her/his desire for winning for herself/himself while facing competitions with other innumerable coaches. Here, the crucial problem is that this coach’s desire for herself/himself obscures another desire, namely, letting students win a game for their human development, which is supposed to be upheld by the coach. Thus, the short of “coaching circuit” refers to the phenomenon of losing the basic and essential goal of coaching, guided by the result of a triangular desire’s boost. In this situation, the coach would regard the students either as a machine for achieving her/his desires or an obstacle in the path of realizing it, resulting in “excessive coaching,” including abusive or violent behavior.

The purpose of this study is to discuss on the bodywork technique in terms of the cultural dimension and educational values in Budo. It is also an attempt to re-evaluate the bodily culture cultivated through Budo training as a current issue. This attempt may indicate that understanding of tradition through bodywork technique in Budo has a certain educational significance and is a basic viewpoint in the field of human formation. Use of the body integrated into culture is called as bodywork technique and in Budo training there exists the culture cultivated over the years, as well as the philosophy in which we can feel and touch traditional ideas through bodywork technique. In addition, acknowledging the perspective of cultural differences within the training may guide to understand the current issues for education of the body, yet it is necessary for us to recognize the importance of the value again. The bodywork technique in Budo is stylized by Kata at its most basic, then Rei and manner is an important practice of bodywork technique in Budo. In considering Rei and manner as equipment to maintain culture, there can be seen the extent of their properties. That is to say, it is a rule or cultural mechanism. Budo is an educational concept invested with its purpose of human formation since established. The acquisition of Rei and manner through the bodywork technique in Budo encourages to understand the own traditional culture. It would be a vital issue in discussing the educational value of Budo in modern society.

The purpose of this paper is to describe the happiness of coaches from the standpoint of Aristotle’s ethics. Even though the happiness of coaches is obviously very important for their activities and in their life, it seems that this topic has not yet been fully paid attention.

For that purpose, I will (2) outline the concept and meaning of Aristotle’s happiness (εὐδαιμονία) from his ethical literature Nicomachean Ethics, (3) make a supplementary statement on his happiness comparing to “happiness” in English and “kōfuku” in Japanese, (4) define what is coach and its function, (5) describe the happiness of coaches based on the previous argument for the conclusion, and go on to (6) demonstrate that the happiness of coaches is based on the framework of Aristotle’s ethics. I will also demonstrate the reason “winning,” “honor,” “sacrificing oneself for the team,” and “pleasure” can’t be identified as Aristotle’s sense of happiness.

As a result, it will be shown that the good function of coaches resides in developing and realizing the excellence of players and team, and the happiness of coaches resides in fully realizing their excellence as their goodness of function. Therefore we can safely say that the happiness of coaches is not something independent from the happiness of players but coordinating with it in a sense coaches develop and realize the excellence of players in the practice and game.