Pub Date : 2023-10-12DOI: 10.1163/25889567-bja10041
Krishna Prasad Acharya, R. Trevor Wilson
{"title":"Animal Sacrifice and Poor Outlook for Animal Welfare in Nepal","authors":"Krishna Prasad Acharya, R. Trevor Wilson","doi":"10.1163/25889567-bja10041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/25889567-bja10041","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":73601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied animal ethics research","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136015455","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5406/21601267.13.2.02
Nico Dario Müller
Abstract Animal ethicists have worried that hoping for the success of the animal rights movement is epistemically irrational because it contradicts our best evidence and practically irrational because it makes animal rights advocates complacent. Against these worries, this article defends the claim that animal rights advocates can rationally hope for the success of their movement despite grim prospects. To this end, the article draws on Philip Pettit's (2004) account of hope to articulate the novel notion of “careful substantial hope.” Hope in this sense is a cognitive strategy of thinking as if movement success is likely because the right strategies and tactics will be employed. The article concludes with suggestions for how philosophers can encourage this kind of hope.
{"title":"Rational Hope for the Animal Rights Movement","authors":"Nico Dario Müller","doi":"10.5406/21601267.13.2.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21601267.13.2.02","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Animal ethicists have worried that hoping for the success of the animal rights movement is epistemically irrational because it contradicts our best evidence and practically irrational because it makes animal rights advocates complacent. Against these worries, this article defends the claim that animal rights advocates can rationally hope for the success of their movement despite grim prospects. To this end, the article draws on Philip Pettit's (2004) account of hope to articulate the novel notion of “careful substantial hope.” Hope in this sense is a cognitive strategy of thinking as if movement success is likely because the right strategies and tactics will be employed. The article concludes with suggestions for how philosophers can encourage this kind of hope.","PeriodicalId":73601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied animal ethics research","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136203799","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5406/21601267.13.2.21
B. V. E. Hyde
The history of humankind is a story of moral progress. The most notable proponents of this position are Steven Pinker (2011) and Michael Shermer (2015). Factory farming might look like a counterexample to this, but people are very concerned about animal ethics and have been for at least the last 40 years. Part of the reason why such an inconsistency can exist between moral consciousness and action is a certain wilful ignorance: 75% of Americans, for example, believe that they only eat meat, dairy, and eggs from humane sources, but more than 99% of animals in the United States live on concentrated animal feeding operations, or factory farms. As well as denial, David Livingstone Smith (2012) tells us that a common prerequisite to atrocities is dehumanization and the refusal of moral status.The notion of humane factory farming presents numerous challenges, particularly in terms of its practical implementation and scalability. To maintain a consistently high level of animal welfare across the industry, extensive regulations and enforcement mechanisms would be required, including regular independent inspections, livestreamed security footage, and increased allocation of space per animal. Moreover, the system would necessitate a substantial investment in veterinary care and medical supplies as well as the reversal of artificial breeding practices that prioritize rapid production of meat, milk and eggs. Presently, even the most conscientious farms fail to meet these welfare standards, implying that the costs associated with truly humane farming are prohibitively high. Given the projected global population of 10 billion by 2050, it is doubtful that humane animal farming can be feasibly scaled to meet the demands of such a populous world. Consequently, the complete abolition of factory farming seems to be the only viable solution.In The End of Animal Farming, Jacy Reese concerns himself with what to do about animal farming. He does not spend any real effort on making the moral case against it, which he assumes is fairly self-evident, but instead concentrates on solutions.Vegetarianism is one such solution with vegetarian alternatives multiplying rapidly. Plant-based agriculture focuses on producing protein-rich, nutrient-dense foods derived entirely from plants. This approach involves the development of novel food products that replicate the taste, texture, and nutritional profile of animal products without the need for animal farming. Hampton Creek, for example, has created an eggless egg; a reporter for Business Insider said that he was “blown away” and that its taste was “distinctly egg” (Brodwin, 2017). Meat alternatives are improving all the time, but one might be concerned about what improvement actually means. As a writer for Current Affairs also says, “plant-based burgers no longer taste like plants” (Robinson, 2018), suggesting that the determinant of progress is taste, just like the eggless egg was lauded for its tasting of egg. However, corresp
{"title":"The End of Animal Farming: How Scientists, Entrepreneurs, and Activists Are Building an Animal-Free Food System","authors":"B. V. E. Hyde","doi":"10.5406/21601267.13.2.21","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21601267.13.2.21","url":null,"abstract":"The history of humankind is a story of moral progress. The most notable proponents of this position are Steven Pinker (2011) and Michael Shermer (2015). Factory farming might look like a counterexample to this, but people are very concerned about animal ethics and have been for at least the last 40 years. Part of the reason why such an inconsistency can exist between moral consciousness and action is a certain wilful ignorance: 75% of Americans, for example, believe that they only eat meat, dairy, and eggs from humane sources, but more than 99% of animals in the United States live on concentrated animal feeding operations, or factory farms. As well as denial, David Livingstone Smith (2012) tells us that a common prerequisite to atrocities is dehumanization and the refusal of moral status.The notion of humane factory farming presents numerous challenges, particularly in terms of its practical implementation and scalability. To maintain a consistently high level of animal welfare across the industry, extensive regulations and enforcement mechanisms would be required, including regular independent inspections, livestreamed security footage, and increased allocation of space per animal. Moreover, the system would necessitate a substantial investment in veterinary care and medical supplies as well as the reversal of artificial breeding practices that prioritize rapid production of meat, milk and eggs. Presently, even the most conscientious farms fail to meet these welfare standards, implying that the costs associated with truly humane farming are prohibitively high. Given the projected global population of 10 billion by 2050, it is doubtful that humane animal farming can be feasibly scaled to meet the demands of such a populous world. Consequently, the complete abolition of factory farming seems to be the only viable solution.In The End of Animal Farming, Jacy Reese concerns himself with what to do about animal farming. He does not spend any real effort on making the moral case against it, which he assumes is fairly self-evident, but instead concentrates on solutions.Vegetarianism is one such solution with vegetarian alternatives multiplying rapidly. Plant-based agriculture focuses on producing protein-rich, nutrient-dense foods derived entirely from plants. This approach involves the development of novel food products that replicate the taste, texture, and nutritional profile of animal products without the need for animal farming. Hampton Creek, for example, has created an eggless egg; a reporter for Business Insider said that he was “blown away” and that its taste was “distinctly egg” (Brodwin, 2017). Meat alternatives are improving all the time, but one might be concerned about what improvement actually means. As a writer for Current Affairs also says, “plant-based burgers no longer taste like plants” (Robinson, 2018), suggesting that the determinant of progress is taste, just like the eggless egg was lauded for its tasting of egg. However, corresp","PeriodicalId":73601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied animal ethics research","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136206363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5406/21601267.13.2.17
Alastair Harden
In this new contribution to the Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series, Idan Breier of Bar-Ilan University explores animal ethics using a range of evidence from the Ancient Near East. Breier tackles a huge body of material through seven distinct but related thematic studies dealing with various genres of Near Eastern text and synoptic overviews of the evidence from the Hebrew Bible. His aim is to present an interdisciplinary study examining human-animal relations in two parts: secular literary texts from Mesopotamia (Chapters 2–4) and various portions of the Hebrew Bible (Chapters 5–8). The seven self-contained chapters are referenced with forensic detail, each with its own bibliography, and are thoroughly presented with a plethora of ancient evidence.In his introduction, Breier sets out his understanding of ethics in both its academic and its real-world settings and the history of animal ethics. He includes a short history of Mesopotamia condensed into a little over two pages; such heavy lifting, with its abundance of references and fulsome bibliography, is characteristic of the book's generous scene-setting for newcomers.The first study (Chapter 2) focuses on Sumerian proverbs of the early second millennium BC. It follows a species-by-species structure divided into “Wild” and “Domestic.” After a well-researched zoological overview of a specific species, we are shown its role in the life of a Mesopotamian human followed by a handful of illustrative examples from the Sumerian proverbs and lastly some conclusions on the relevant lessons from the texts. Following the old maxim of animals being “good to think with,” Breier argues that these uncloistered sayings were “designed to instill values that enable a person to prosper and succeed in life on the one hand and ethical principles for living in society on the other” (p. 40) This can lead to some unsurprising outcomes (lions as symbols of strength, goats as hardy survivors), but it is instructive to read some ancient views of domesticated “draft animals”: Not only are “furrows pleasant to a threshing ox,” but “the fettered oxen are stronger than the men who fettered them” (p. 34).Chapter 3 examines faunal fables from Sumer alongside their more famous and accessible Greek descendants conventionally attributed to Aesop. Breier's approach is to find parallels between animal elements within these corpora and to synthesize a set of ethical precepts that he considers a kind of teachable moral code. Breier avoids any discussion of anthropomorphism in this chapter, instead concluding that the fables present features “based on the attributes of each species, the fox being cunning” and so forth (p. 62) and that this facilitated the spread of the fables across the cultures of the Mediterranean.A wide variety of Mesopotamian literary texts are studied and analyzed in Chapter 4. Breier has taken on a large body of diverse material and presented a fascinating selection of pertinent passages for comment, citing
{"title":"An Ethical View of Human-Animal Relations in the Ancient Near East","authors":"Alastair Harden","doi":"10.5406/21601267.13.2.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21601267.13.2.17","url":null,"abstract":"In this new contribution to the Palgrave Macmillan Animal Ethics Series, Idan Breier of Bar-Ilan University explores animal ethics using a range of evidence from the Ancient Near East. Breier tackles a huge body of material through seven distinct but related thematic studies dealing with various genres of Near Eastern text and synoptic overviews of the evidence from the Hebrew Bible. His aim is to present an interdisciplinary study examining human-animal relations in two parts: secular literary texts from Mesopotamia (Chapters 2–4) and various portions of the Hebrew Bible (Chapters 5–8). The seven self-contained chapters are referenced with forensic detail, each with its own bibliography, and are thoroughly presented with a plethora of ancient evidence.In his introduction, Breier sets out his understanding of ethics in both its academic and its real-world settings and the history of animal ethics. He includes a short history of Mesopotamia condensed into a little over two pages; such heavy lifting, with its abundance of references and fulsome bibliography, is characteristic of the book's generous scene-setting for newcomers.The first study (Chapter 2) focuses on Sumerian proverbs of the early second millennium BC. It follows a species-by-species structure divided into “Wild” and “Domestic.” After a well-researched zoological overview of a specific species, we are shown its role in the life of a Mesopotamian human followed by a handful of illustrative examples from the Sumerian proverbs and lastly some conclusions on the relevant lessons from the texts. Following the old maxim of animals being “good to think with,” Breier argues that these uncloistered sayings were “designed to instill values that enable a person to prosper and succeed in life on the one hand and ethical principles for living in society on the other” (p. 40) This can lead to some unsurprising outcomes (lions as symbols of strength, goats as hardy survivors), but it is instructive to read some ancient views of domesticated “draft animals”: Not only are “furrows pleasant to a threshing ox,” but “the fettered oxen are stronger than the men who fettered them” (p. 34).Chapter 3 examines faunal fables from Sumer alongside their more famous and accessible Greek descendants conventionally attributed to Aesop. Breier's approach is to find parallels between animal elements within these corpora and to synthesize a set of ethical precepts that he considers a kind of teachable moral code. Breier avoids any discussion of anthropomorphism in this chapter, instead concluding that the fables present features “based on the attributes of each species, the fox being cunning” and so forth (p. 62) and that this facilitated the spread of the fables across the cultures of the Mediterranean.A wide variety of Mesopotamian literary texts are studied and analyzed in Chapter 4. Breier has taken on a large body of diverse material and presented a fascinating selection of pertinent passages for comment, citing ","PeriodicalId":73601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied animal ethics research","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136203784","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5406/21601267.13.2.05
Thilo Hagendorff
Abstract This article explores the potential ways in which artificial intelligence (AI) can support veganism, a lifestyle that aims to promote the protection of animals and also avoids the consumption of animal products for environmental and health reasons. The first part of the article discusses the technical requirements for utilizing AI technologies in the mentioned field. The second part provides an overview of potential use cases, including facilitating consumer change with the help of AI, technologically augmenting undercover investigations in factory farms, raising the efficiency of nongovernment organizations promoting plant-based lifestyles, and so forth. The article acknowledges that the deployment of AI should not happen in a “solutionist” manner, meaning to always consider nontechnical means for achieving desired outcomes. However, it is important for organizations promoting veganism to realize the potential of modern data-driven tools and to merge and share their data to reach common goals.
{"title":"How Artificial Intellegence Can Support Veganism: An Exploratory Analysis","authors":"Thilo Hagendorff","doi":"10.5406/21601267.13.2.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21601267.13.2.05","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article explores the potential ways in which artificial intelligence (AI) can support veganism, a lifestyle that aims to promote the protection of animals and also avoids the consumption of animal products for environmental and health reasons. The first part of the article discusses the technical requirements for utilizing AI technologies in the mentioned field. The second part provides an overview of potential use cases, including facilitating consumer change with the help of AI, technologically augmenting undercover investigations in factory farms, raising the efficiency of nongovernment organizations promoting plant-based lifestyles, and so forth. The article acknowledges that the deployment of AI should not happen in a “solutionist” manner, meaning to always consider nontechnical means for achieving desired outcomes. However, it is important for organizations promoting veganism to realize the potential of modern data-driven tools and to merge and share their data to reach common goals.","PeriodicalId":73601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied animal ethics research","volume":"136 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136203798","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5406/21601267.13.2.19
Philip J. Sampson
This book is exactly what it says it is on the cover. A sensitive and detailed reading of selected pericopes from the Hebrew Bible, interacting with current approaches to animal studies, including theorists such as Judith Butler, Donna Haraway, and Jacques Derrida. Of course, contemporary texts have little in common with those written more than 2,500 years ago. Moreover, the wide cultural gap radically affects basic presuppositions such as the place of animals. For us, animals (except “pets”) are usually dead, dismembered body parts; cellophane-wrapped food products on the shelf. For the ancient near-Eastern authors of the Hebrew Bible, they were live animals good for labor, dung, milk, and transport; occasionally for meat; or else a threat to life and livelihood.Stone makes this heterogeneity a virtue, indeed, a strength. It echoes, he argues, the diversity of the texts that constitute the Hebrew Bible itself as well as the interdisciplinary nature of animal studies, “the variable forms of life that we refer to collectively if simplistically as ‘animals,’” and even the multiple differentiations between humans (p. 14). In fact, he proposes “multiple interpretative approaches” rather than a quest for a single meaning; an openness to differences that forces reflection (p. 93). He thereby seeks to illuminate aspects of the biblical texts that would otherwise be obscured by a wrongly supposed familiarity and, conversely, to shed light on the relationships between human and other animals that we mistakenly take for granted.The book has seven interrelated chapters, each rereading a biblical pericope or theme in dialogue with selected questions from contemporary animal studies. From the role of goats in the narrative of Jacob, to the silent dogs of Exodus, and to the distinctive “zoological gaze” of the ancient near-eastern farmer and shepherd, we are drawn into discussions of domesticated “companion species,” their free-living brethren, and animals as “subjects” rather than “objects.” This might sound like a collection of essays rather than a unified text, which would, indeed, be in line with its honoring of heterogeneity. But it is more than this. Unifying themes run through the book, which make it more than a postmodern celebration of difference—themes that are at the heart of the growing scholarly interest in the interaction between human and other animals.As Darwin argued, there would be no humans without other animals, and the kind of animals we are derives from the kind of animals they were. Stone draws on Lévi-Strauss's observation that animals are good to think with, to make a more cultural case. “[W]ithout the presence of the specific animals . . . [in the Hebrew Bible], neither biblical theologies nor the religions of Judaism and Christianity . . . would exist in anything like their current forms” (p. 4). Indeed, neither would those cultures which have been shaped by these religious traditions. Animals have provided both symbols we can use to
{"title":"Reading the Hebrew Bible With Animal Studies","authors":"Philip J. Sampson","doi":"10.5406/21601267.13.2.19","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21601267.13.2.19","url":null,"abstract":"This book is exactly what it says it is on the cover. A sensitive and detailed reading of selected pericopes from the Hebrew Bible, interacting with current approaches to animal studies, including theorists such as Judith Butler, Donna Haraway, and Jacques Derrida. Of course, contemporary texts have little in common with those written more than 2,500 years ago. Moreover, the wide cultural gap radically affects basic presuppositions such as the place of animals. For us, animals (except “pets”) are usually dead, dismembered body parts; cellophane-wrapped food products on the shelf. For the ancient near-Eastern authors of the Hebrew Bible, they were live animals good for labor, dung, milk, and transport; occasionally for meat; or else a threat to life and livelihood.Stone makes this heterogeneity a virtue, indeed, a strength. It echoes, he argues, the diversity of the texts that constitute the Hebrew Bible itself as well as the interdisciplinary nature of animal studies, “the variable forms of life that we refer to collectively if simplistically as ‘animals,’” and even the multiple differentiations between humans (p. 14). In fact, he proposes “multiple interpretative approaches” rather than a quest for a single meaning; an openness to differences that forces reflection (p. 93). He thereby seeks to illuminate aspects of the biblical texts that would otherwise be obscured by a wrongly supposed familiarity and, conversely, to shed light on the relationships between human and other animals that we mistakenly take for granted.The book has seven interrelated chapters, each rereading a biblical pericope or theme in dialogue with selected questions from contemporary animal studies. From the role of goats in the narrative of Jacob, to the silent dogs of Exodus, and to the distinctive “zoological gaze” of the ancient near-eastern farmer and shepherd, we are drawn into discussions of domesticated “companion species,” their free-living brethren, and animals as “subjects” rather than “objects.” This might sound like a collection of essays rather than a unified text, which would, indeed, be in line with its honoring of heterogeneity. But it is more than this. Unifying themes run through the book, which make it more than a postmodern celebration of difference—themes that are at the heart of the growing scholarly interest in the interaction between human and other animals.As Darwin argued, there would be no humans without other animals, and the kind of animals we are derives from the kind of animals they were. Stone draws on Lévi-Strauss's observation that animals are good to think with, to make a more cultural case. “[W]ithout the presence of the specific animals . . . [in the Hebrew Bible], neither biblical theologies nor the religions of Judaism and Christianity . . . would exist in anything like their current forms” (p. 4). Indeed, neither would those cultures which have been shaped by these religious traditions. Animals have provided both symbols we can use to","PeriodicalId":73601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied animal ethics research","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136206365","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5406/21601267.13.2.14
Clifton P. Flynn
As a scholar in this field for more than two decades, I have appreciated the first edition of this book for both its academic and pedagogical value. With the incredible development of human-animal studies since 1996, a second edition was not only needed but welcome.The overall approach of the authors is appealing due to its thorough and skillful application of symbolic interactionism and its associated methods of empirical investigation to help us understand other animals and our relationships with them, and, in that process, understand ourselves. In particular, its focus on the inconsistencies in how we “regard” other animals and how humans live with those contradictions appeals to students and scholars alike.The book is organized in three sections. The first section, “The Human-Animal Tribe,” presents and expands on the theoretical and methodological framework from the first edition. The second section, “Living with Contradiction,” presents eight chapters of empirical research, including four from the first edition and four new studies. The final section, “Paradox and Change,” summarizes the authors’ conclusions concerning how we regard other animals. The eight chapters drawing on the social scientific examination of our construction and application of contradictory meanings of animals in social settings move from the micro level to the macro level, examining those processes in interactions (Chapters 3–5), organizations (Chapters 6–8), and institutions and cultures (Chapters 9–10).It would be easy to criticize for omitted areas—but not everything can be covered, and decisions must be made about what to include. Four new chapters—studies of the homeless and their companions (“Pet Ownership on the Streets” by Irvine), how teenagers make sense of their abuse of animals (“Animal Abuse and Adolescents” by Arluke), the work of veterinary technicians (“Dirty Work and Good Intentions” by Sanders), and animals in the media (“Making News About Animals” by Irvine)—are diverse and inherently interesting examples of how we define and think about other animals and how that helps us understand our own attitudes and behavior. Further, they represent the best of qualitative sociological research.Some of the best scholarship in this area has been done by Leslie Irvine, including her work on animal selfhood (2004), the homeless and their companions (2013), and companion animals in natural disasters (2009). Thus, the addition of Irvine as an author and the incorporation of her scholarship in the second edition makes perfect sense. The notion of self is central to symbolic interaction theory, and Irvine's work not only has examined human selfhood, but she is the leading scholar on animal selfhood. Consequently, her work enhances an already excellent book—it is just the right fit and effectively rounds out this new version. In her chapter on “pet ownership” among the homeless, Irvine skillfully demonstrates how companion animals are used in identity work to mitigate
{"title":"Regarding Animals. Second Edition","authors":"Clifton P. Flynn","doi":"10.5406/21601267.13.2.14","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21601267.13.2.14","url":null,"abstract":"As a scholar in this field for more than two decades, I have appreciated the first edition of this book for both its academic and pedagogical value. With the incredible development of human-animal studies since 1996, a second edition was not only needed but welcome.The overall approach of the authors is appealing due to its thorough and skillful application of symbolic interactionism and its associated methods of empirical investigation to help us understand other animals and our relationships with them, and, in that process, understand ourselves. In particular, its focus on the inconsistencies in how we “regard” other animals and how humans live with those contradictions appeals to students and scholars alike.The book is organized in three sections. The first section, “The Human-Animal Tribe,” presents and expands on the theoretical and methodological framework from the first edition. The second section, “Living with Contradiction,” presents eight chapters of empirical research, including four from the first edition and four new studies. The final section, “Paradox and Change,” summarizes the authors’ conclusions concerning how we regard other animals. The eight chapters drawing on the social scientific examination of our construction and application of contradictory meanings of animals in social settings move from the micro level to the macro level, examining those processes in interactions (Chapters 3–5), organizations (Chapters 6–8), and institutions and cultures (Chapters 9–10).It would be easy to criticize for omitted areas—but not everything can be covered, and decisions must be made about what to include. Four new chapters—studies of the homeless and their companions (“Pet Ownership on the Streets” by Irvine), how teenagers make sense of their abuse of animals (“Animal Abuse and Adolescents” by Arluke), the work of veterinary technicians (“Dirty Work and Good Intentions” by Sanders), and animals in the media (“Making News About Animals” by Irvine)—are diverse and inherently interesting examples of how we define and think about other animals and how that helps us understand our own attitudes and behavior. Further, they represent the best of qualitative sociological research.Some of the best scholarship in this area has been done by Leslie Irvine, including her work on animal selfhood (2004), the homeless and their companions (2013), and companion animals in natural disasters (2009). Thus, the addition of Irvine as an author and the incorporation of her scholarship in the second edition makes perfect sense. The notion of self is central to symbolic interaction theory, and Irvine's work not only has examined human selfhood, but she is the leading scholar on animal selfhood. Consequently, her work enhances an already excellent book—it is just the right fit and effectively rounds out this new version. In her chapter on “pet ownership” among the homeless, Irvine skillfully demonstrates how companion animals are used in identity work to mitigate","PeriodicalId":73601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied animal ethics research","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136203783","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5406/21601267.13.2.06
Lauren Bestwick
Abstract In this article, I will be looking at the person and works of Margaret Cavendish (1623–1673), an aristocrat and author whose philosophical texts and poetry defended the rational capacity of nonhuman animals. Generally, society in 17th-century England did not consider nonhuman animals to have any intelligence or emotional capacity and treated them accordingly. In her works, Cavendish sheds a light on these commonly accepted views, providing arguments against them and indicating their inconsistencies.
{"title":"“Mad Madge”: The Contribution of Margaret Cavendish to Animal Ethics","authors":"Lauren Bestwick","doi":"10.5406/21601267.13.2.06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21601267.13.2.06","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this article, I will be looking at the person and works of Margaret Cavendish (1623–1673), an aristocrat and author whose philosophical texts and poetry defended the rational capacity of nonhuman animals. Generally, society in 17th-century England did not consider nonhuman animals to have any intelligence or emotional capacity and treated them accordingly. In her works, Cavendish sheds a light on these commonly accepted views, providing arguments against them and indicating their inconsistencies.","PeriodicalId":73601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied animal ethics research","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136203786","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5406/21601267.13.2.15
Cini Bretzlaff-Holstein
This book is a collection of 15 essays written by advocates and leaders in the farmed animal protection movement specifically, and the animal protection, animal rights, animal welfare, and animal liberation movements broadly speaking. These essays written by several individuals active in the movement were first published by Sentient Media, a nonprofit journalism organization that reports on animal rights and animal welfare issues with a goal of bringing the well-being of animals into the mainstream media. The title alone, Antiracism in Animal Advocacy, is one that stands out as antiracism has yet to be seen as an essential part of the animal protection/rights/welfare/liberation movement. As such, this collection of writings is an important, valuable, and necessary contribution to the narrative and advocacy efforts seeking the well-being of animals and fighting to end their exploitation and oppression.Four themes outline the trajectory of the various essays and their particular focus/emphasis. The first group of essays focuses on the theme of awakening to the plight of animals and gaining an understanding of the issues they face. Awakening is followed by various authors’ journeys of introspection, whereby they explore their experiences of looking inward and unlearning the disconnect and separation of human issues and animal issues. The third grouping of essays emphasizes accountability and what that might look like individually and within organizations and systems within the animal protection/rights/welfare/liberation movement. And last, the final group of essays engages in reflections on antiracist leading and structural transformation within the movement. In addition to the structure of four distinctive essay themes, the book provides a glossary of terms to clearly articulate what the authors mean when they write about topics such as the following: anti-Blackness; antiracism; Black, Indigenous, and people of the global majority (BIPGM); colonialism; diversity; equality; equity; implicit bias; inclusion; intersectionality; microaggressions; power; racial justice; racism; tokenism; White fragility; White privilege; and White supremacy culture. Such a glossary is a helpful tool to minimize assumptions of what is meant by the terminology being used and to assist the readers in understanding what the authors mean by these precise terms.The primary goal the authors present within each of their individual essays is to build a racially equitable animal protection/rights/welfare/liberation movement—particularly one that emphasizes the intersection of racial equity, inclusion, and animal advocacy versus the covert expectation of assimilation to White norms and White culture within the movement (i.e., perpetuation of covert White supremacy). Strictly speaking, the collection of essays was compiled to center racial justice in the work done for animals and to make the case for an expanded understanding of antiracism to include the animal protection/rights/we
{"title":"Antiracism in Animal Advocacy: Igniting Cultural Transformation","authors":"Cini Bretzlaff-Holstein","doi":"10.5406/21601267.13.2.15","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21601267.13.2.15","url":null,"abstract":"This book is a collection of 15 essays written by advocates and leaders in the farmed animal protection movement specifically, and the animal protection, animal rights, animal welfare, and animal liberation movements broadly speaking. These essays written by several individuals active in the movement were first published by Sentient Media, a nonprofit journalism organization that reports on animal rights and animal welfare issues with a goal of bringing the well-being of animals into the mainstream media. The title alone, Antiracism in Animal Advocacy, is one that stands out as antiracism has yet to be seen as an essential part of the animal protection/rights/welfare/liberation movement. As such, this collection of writings is an important, valuable, and necessary contribution to the narrative and advocacy efforts seeking the well-being of animals and fighting to end their exploitation and oppression.Four themes outline the trajectory of the various essays and their particular focus/emphasis. The first group of essays focuses on the theme of awakening to the plight of animals and gaining an understanding of the issues they face. Awakening is followed by various authors’ journeys of introspection, whereby they explore their experiences of looking inward and unlearning the disconnect and separation of human issues and animal issues. The third grouping of essays emphasizes accountability and what that might look like individually and within organizations and systems within the animal protection/rights/welfare/liberation movement. And last, the final group of essays engages in reflections on antiracist leading and structural transformation within the movement. In addition to the structure of four distinctive essay themes, the book provides a glossary of terms to clearly articulate what the authors mean when they write about topics such as the following: anti-Blackness; antiracism; Black, Indigenous, and people of the global majority (BIPGM); colonialism; diversity; equality; equity; implicit bias; inclusion; intersectionality; microaggressions; power; racial justice; racism; tokenism; White fragility; White privilege; and White supremacy culture. Such a glossary is a helpful tool to minimize assumptions of what is meant by the terminology being used and to assist the readers in understanding what the authors mean by these precise terms.The primary goal the authors present within each of their individual essays is to build a racially equitable animal protection/rights/welfare/liberation movement—particularly one that emphasizes the intersection of racial equity, inclusion, and animal advocacy versus the covert expectation of assimilation to White norms and White culture within the movement (i.e., perpetuation of covert White supremacy). Strictly speaking, the collection of essays was compiled to center racial justice in the work done for animals and to make the case for an expanded understanding of antiracism to include the animal protection/rights/we","PeriodicalId":73601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied animal ethics research","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136203800","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-01DOI: 10.5406/21601267.13.2.18
Aaron Neber
This work traverses an impressive terrain as it illuminates crucial links between the aims and methods of feminist/queer scholarship and animal advocacy. In her introduction, editor Amber E. George frames the collection as an attempt to retain the “moral values that support dignity, respect, and equity” without the “patriarchal and species-based oppression that keeps so many beings trapped in a perpetual cycle of abuse” (p. 3). Compiling essays that address literature, film, science and technology studies, pedagogy, ethology, animal reproduction, and the extremely fraught questions that accompany discussions of bestiality, this anthology is an exciting contribution to the growing body of work that sees the struggle for animal justice as an integral component of all liberatory movements.The collection excels when demonstrating how Western cultural presumptions regarding gender and sexuality are uncritically written onto the bodies of animals, often resulting in a kind of double oppression: the animals in question are culturally and materially denied the subjectivity and autonomy typically reserved for humans yet are classified or judged according to local norms of human gender and sexuality. Samantha Orsulak's investigation into honeybees is especially fascinating in this regard. Orsulak documents how the honeybee serves as a kind of palimpsest for human anxieties regarding the rewriting of gender roles throughout history—at times the queen is a “leader,” at others she is “lazy”; at times the workers are “emasculated,” at others, they are “providers” (pp. 102–109). As social and political concerns regarding gender and sexuality mutate, so too does the description of the honeybee. Similarly, Annika Hugosson's contribution details how the female hyena's external genitalia—an elongated, retractable clitoris capable of covering the vagina and which resembles the male hyena's penis (p. 92)—is viewed as an oddity, at best, or an abomination, at worst. Because her genitalia appear errant from the point of view of anthropocentric sexual dimorphism, and because the female hyena exercises some agency in her genitalia's visibility, she is depicted as “duplicitous” (p. 82), “conniving” (p. 83), “immoral” (p. 87). These descriptions ascribe intentional states typically reserved for beings supposed to possess a supreme command of rationality (i.e., humans), but the female hyena is denied the kind of subjectivity and autonomy that usually accompany such rational capacities. Thus, the female hyena is held within a kind of double bind: denied subjectivity in her own right but judged according to anthropocentric sexual normativity.These essays also productively engage broad questions regarding Western notions of subjectivity. In this regard, Anastassiya Andrianova's essay on bestiality, and a certain incoherence that accompanies discussions of animal consent, is worth special mention. As “property,” animals are typically denied subjective characteristics, and yet,
因此，在Andrianova看到“不一致”和潜在的荒谬的地方跟随她可能是合理的;然而，比起简单的“不一致”，人们可以认识到这种关于同意的摇摆是西方主体性结构的一个特征——部分主体的创造，其利益和代理总是有条件的。当然，同意只是反对兽交的一个理由，尤其是对动物身体造成的伤害。这本书教育读者对特定物种和阶段的迷人和重要的历史，与西方现代性的主要原则进行了批判性的接触。然而，他们错过了参与的机会。出于空间的考虑，我将讨论一个。很少有人讨论将“异性恋”和“酷儿”等概念应用于动物生活意味着什么。这本书里的文章——正确而合理地——批判了人类性规范被用来对付动物的各种方式，但当作者赞许地使用“酷儿”、“性别酷儿”或“LGBTQIA”来描述非人类动物时，一种紧张感就出现了。将这些概念应用到动物生活中，会不会无意中扩展了这本选集试图拆除的以人类为中心的框架?在一个例子中，Amber E. George讨论了“来自爱尔兰的‘同性恋公牛’Benjy因为拒绝让农民的奶牛怀孕而被指定送去屠宰”的案例(第3页)。George将Benjy纳入LGBTQIA社区，并描述他生活在“一个同性恋可以杀死[他]的地方”(第2页)。本杰被酷儿积极分子的国际网络所拯救，并被转移到一个避难所(第3页)。虽然认识到酷儿人类的从属地位会影响一些人对非人类动物的“同性”行为的看法或谈论，而且进一步认识到许多表现出这些行为的动物通常因未能繁殖而被杀死，这似乎是绝对正确的，人们可能会对“同性恋公牛”被合理地称为“酷儿”或“恐同”暴力的受害者持怀疑态度。另一种说法是，“同性恋公牛”受到了暴力的、强制性的人类中心主义的双重影响:首先，在物质层面上，那些人会因为他无法繁殖而将他掏心挖脑——他们认为公牛只是一种商品，没有按照预期的方式繁殖资本。其次，在概念层面上，那些倾向于自然化和扩展人类性概念(即酷儿)的人，作为特定政治和历史进程的一部分出现的性的迭代。总而言之，将酷儿问题简化为许多(可能是大多数)物种参与的一系列性活动，这是否排除了该术语的特定情感和政治维度?Jess Ison最接近这个问题，她得出结论，“‘酷儿身份’是一个政治术语”，而不是一个生物学术语，“扩展酷儿身份”可能会对继续面临歧视的酷儿群体产生有害影响(第215-216页)。对这一辩论进行更有意义的讨论，将是对这一史无前例的选集的一个受欢迎的补充。
{"title":"Gender and Sexuality in Critical Animal Studies","authors":"Aaron Neber","doi":"10.5406/21601267.13.2.18","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21601267.13.2.18","url":null,"abstract":"This work traverses an impressive terrain as it illuminates crucial links between the aims and methods of feminist/queer scholarship and animal advocacy. In her introduction, editor Amber E. George frames the collection as an attempt to retain the “moral values that support dignity, respect, and equity” without the “patriarchal and species-based oppression that keeps so many beings trapped in a perpetual cycle of abuse” (p. 3). Compiling essays that address literature, film, science and technology studies, pedagogy, ethology, animal reproduction, and the extremely fraught questions that accompany discussions of bestiality, this anthology is an exciting contribution to the growing body of work that sees the struggle for animal justice as an integral component of all liberatory movements.The collection excels when demonstrating how Western cultural presumptions regarding gender and sexuality are uncritically written onto the bodies of animals, often resulting in a kind of double oppression: the animals in question are culturally and materially denied the subjectivity and autonomy typically reserved for humans yet are classified or judged according to local norms of human gender and sexuality. Samantha Orsulak's investigation into honeybees is especially fascinating in this regard. Orsulak documents how the honeybee serves as a kind of palimpsest for human anxieties regarding the rewriting of gender roles throughout history—at times the queen is a “leader,” at others she is “lazy”; at times the workers are “emasculated,” at others, they are “providers” (pp. 102–109). As social and political concerns regarding gender and sexuality mutate, so too does the description of the honeybee. Similarly, Annika Hugosson's contribution details how the female hyena's external genitalia—an elongated, retractable clitoris capable of covering the vagina and which resembles the male hyena's penis (p. 92)—is viewed as an oddity, at best, or an abomination, at worst. Because her genitalia appear errant from the point of view of anthropocentric sexual dimorphism, and because the female hyena exercises some agency in her genitalia's visibility, she is depicted as “duplicitous” (p. 82), “conniving” (p. 83), “immoral” (p. 87). These descriptions ascribe intentional states typically reserved for beings supposed to possess a supreme command of rationality (i.e., humans), but the female hyena is denied the kind of subjectivity and autonomy that usually accompany such rational capacities. Thus, the female hyena is held within a kind of double bind: denied subjectivity in her own right but judged according to anthropocentric sexual normativity.These essays also productively engage broad questions regarding Western notions of subjectivity. In this regard, Anastassiya Andrianova's essay on bestiality, and a certain incoherence that accompanies discussions of animal consent, is worth special mention. As “property,” animals are typically denied subjective characteristics, and yet, ","PeriodicalId":73601,"journal":{"name":"Journal of applied animal ethics research","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136206366","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：