|（1.School of Physical Education，Jiangxi Normal University，Nanchang 330022，China；2.Zhejiang Vocational College of Posts and Telecommunications，Shaoxing 312006，China)
Abstract: The separation of the concept of game derived from etymology can’t be used as the foundation for defin-ing the concept of athletics, while both play and game are not provided with the priority to define the concept of athletics. In the mean time, the complexity, variability and randomness of game meanings are proven again in the process of distinguishing the concept of “game”, hence game is not the most appropriate generic concept of athlet-ics. Distinguishing the concept of game within this and that, and deconstructing the game itself, failed to enable ath-letics to be constructed in terms of concept; while screening beyond the concept of game is really the rational way to resolve the ambiguity of the concept of athletics, and skill is provided with more priority in the definition of athlet-ics. Differences between Chinese and western context make the concept of game ambiguous, obscure and multivo-cal, the theory of the essence of athletics being not game, and the theory of the essence of athletics being skill, are conclusions drawn from the logical definition of athletics.
Key words: sports philosophy；ontology；athletics；skill；game；play