New York Times Ethics Column Weighs In on Oscar Pistorius

The man you see above is Oscar Pistorius, a South African sprinter who races on prosthetic legs like the one he's holding. Pistorius is really fast -- so fast that he nearly qualified for the 2008 Olympics, which raised questions about whether his prosthetics give him an unfair advantage. Now the New York Times ethics column has weighed in on the debate.

From The Ethicist:

The fact is that prosthetics are not like steroids or even the Speedo LZR Racer swimsuit (whose subtle aerodynamics grant anybody who can squeeze into one a measurable advantage by turning him into an artificial dolphin). You don't see lots of amputees winning able-bodied races, and you don't see lots of able-bodied runners strapping on their own Cheetahs. The fact is that this piece of equipment isn't supernatural and doesn't bestow any occult powers on those who possess it - even if many of us have dreamed of such things ever since we bought out first pair of PF Flyer high-tops, whose "flying wedge" was supposed to make us "run faster and jump higher." Turns out, the "flying wedge" technology only activates if you put a superior athlete in the tennis shoes.

I'm not sure I buy all of The Ethicist's arguments, but I certainly agree that Pistorius is no cheater, and I'd love to see him compete in the Olympics in 2012 if his times are fast enough to qualify. The day may come when runners on prosthetics regularly outrun those on human legs, and when that day comes, we'll need to re-evaluate the rules of track and field. But for now, we ought to let Pistorius run in any race he's good enough to run in.