Afterword -- The Educational Significance of Human and Non-human Animal Interactions: Blurring the Species Line by Suzanne Rice and A.G. Rud, eds. (Palgrave Macmillan, 2015) (original) (raw)
Related papers
Educational Theory, 2018
While Indigenous people across the world have recognized our kinship and relationality with other species for many centuries, it is a peculiar fact that the Western 1 world has only reluctantly inched toward a view that has humans in continuity with the rest of the biosphere. This has not primarily occurred through a newfound respect for these other traditions, but rather through the ontological insights offered by evolution and then ecology, as each has risen to cultural prominence. Whereas evolution shows that humans were in fact part of a much more inclusive ancestry than once thought, and therefore have significant homologies and resonances with other organisms, ecology reveals the myriad ways in which humans and other species are mutually intertwined, for better or worse, in a shared fate. Evolutionary epistemology and comparative biology, whatever their weaknesses, have drawn us into deeper contemplation of how alleged differences between humans and other species are often rooted in unwarranted biases. Genetic advances in molecular biology reveal, in another language again, the marvelous continuity we share with others on the planet. And yet, despite this flurry of boundary breaking, continuity and kinship remain for Western culture largely something abstract and propositional. It is not an ethical or performative connection that has been restored, and as such it still seems to lack much of what other cultural ways of engaging with other species have long nurtured. Outside of biology, multispeciesification and more-than-humanizing now assert themselves as prominent alternative approaches within posthuman geography , anthropology, semiotics and communication, and sociology. Movement in this direction is palpable in education too, though it is surprisingly late to enter the game. But is it, in fact, surprising that education should be a laggard here? Education is the process by which we ensure both the perpetuation and the development of our culture. It seeks novelty as much as stasis. Other social sciences are not burdened with this paradoxical responsibility. And so, in cases where education is perpetuating a culture built upon sharp ontological categories, educational processes work to contain that which seeks to blur them. This means that restoring continuity is encouraged within certain disciplines (like biology) while other disciplines are protected against that responsibility. One such discipline is education itself, the field, research methods, and practices where the boundary between beings that are educationally considerable — that is, worthy of engaging in learning and/or teaching relationships — is continually reestablished between humans and other species. I know of no teacher's college with courses on interspecies pedagogy (please contact me if such an institution exists — I would be delighted) and believe it would strike many teacher educators as absurd to offer such courses. And this does not appear to be mainly the result of it being outside of professional aims,
Introduction: Human-Animal Relations
Environment and Society: Advances in Research, vol. 4, 2013
In studying the lives and livelihoods of human beings, the social sciences and humanities oft en fi nd their lines of inquiry tugged in the direction of other, nonhuman beings. When Claude Lévi-Strauss (1963) suggested that "thinking with" animals was relevant and fruitful to the study of humankind, scholars began to follow these leads with academic rigor, enthusiasm, and creativity. Propelled into the new millennium by the passion of the environmental movement, compounded by natural and anthropogenic disaster, and now entrenched in the discourse of the Anthropocene, recent scholarship has simultaneously called into question the validity of human exceptionalism and expanded our social and political worlds to include animals and myriad other nonhuman beings. Th is move is paradoxical: as the signifi cance of human action on this planet has increased, the category of the human is continually challenged and redrawn. While contemporary posthumanist critique rethinks the importance of animals and strives to destabilize long-standing ontological exceptions, it does so just as the eff ects of human presence overwhelmingly single out our species as the dominant agents of planetary change (see Chakrabarty 2009; Steff en, Crutzen, and McNeill 2007).
Exploring the Animal Turn: Human-animal relations in Science, Society and Culture
2014
Animals' omnipresence in human society makes them both close to and ye tremarkably distant from humans. Human and animal lives have always been entangled, but the way we see and practice the relationships between humans and animals - as close, intertwined, or clearly separate - varies from time to time and between cultures, societies, and even situations. By putting these complex relationships in focus, this anthology investigates the ways in which human society deals with its...
Considering Animals: Contemporary Studies in Human-Animal Relations
Annals of Science, 2013
In 2005 a small group of academics gathered at the University of Western Australia for a modest yet highly significant interdisciplinary conference focused on scholarship in the emerging field of human-animal studies. A critical mass of academics from the University of Tasmania attended that first conference and pledged to host a second human-animal studies conference two years later. True to their word a second human-animal studies conference was held in Hobart, Australia, in 2007. The organisers called the second conference "Considering Animals" and the book under review here is a compilation of papers presented at that conference. The first striking feature of the book Considering Animals (hardback version), is the artwork on the dust jacket (Figure 1). While some may not pay a book's dust jacket much heed, I view Considering Animals stunning cover-art as quite a coup. In an age of publishing rationalisation and belt-tightening, I imagine that the editors must have fought hard for permission to display a colour image on the book's cover; and for the inclusion of such a large number of pictures throughout the book. If this is the case, then their persistence paid off. Not only is Yvette Watt's cover-art beautiful and thought provoking in and of itself, it also serves to remind readers that this book is dealing with a highly interdisciplinary field of academic inquiry. Human-animal studies is not only about words. It is about images, representation, art and interpretation. One of the most noteworthy features of the biannual Australian Animal Studies Group, and the Minding Animals, conferences is the extent to which visual and other creative artists contribute to the field. With the use of such powerful cover-art the editors give effect to the contribution made by creative arts to the emerging discipline of human-animal studies. The book opens with a forward by well-known ecologist Marc Becoff and an introduction by two of the book's editors: Carol Freeman and Elizabeth Leane. The remainder of the book consists of 14 papers by (often prominent) academics, all of who presented at the 2007 University of Tasmania "Considering Animals" conference.
Investigating the Other: Considerations on Multi-Species Research
Studies in Qualitative Methodology, 2014
Purpose The last few decades have seen the rise of a new field of inquiry – human–animal studies (HAS). As a rich, theoretically and disciplinarily diverse field, HAS shines a light on the various relations that humans have with other animals across time, space and culture. While still a small, but rapidly growing field, HAS has supported the development of multiple theoretical and conceptual initiatives which have aimed to capture the rich diversity of human–animal interactions. Yet the methodologies for doing this have not kept pace with the ambitions of such projects. In this chapter, we seek to shed light on this particular issue. Design/methodology/approach We consider the difficulties of researching other-than-human beings by asking what might happen if methods incorporated true inter-disciplinarity, for instance if social scientists were able to work with natural scientists on multi-species ethnographies. The lack of established methodology (and the lack of cross disciplinary research between the natural and social sciences) is one of the main problems that we consider here. It is an issue complicated immensely by the ‘otherness’ of animals – the vast differences in the ways that we (humans) and they (animals) see the world, communicate and behave. This chapter provides the opportunity for us to consider how we can take account of (if not resolve) these differences to arrive at meaningful research data, to better understand the contemporary world by embarking upon more precise investigations of our relationships with animals. Findings Drawing upon a selection of examples from contemporary research of human–animal interactions, both ethnographic and scientific, we shed light on some new possibilities for multi-species research. We suggest that this can be done best by considering and applying a diversity of theoretical frameworks which deal explicitly with the constitution of the social environment. Originality/value Our methodological exploration offers the reader insight into new ways of working within the template of human animal studies by drawing upon a range of useful theories such as post-structuralism and actor network theory (ANT) (for example, Callon, 1986; Hamilton & Taylor, 2013; Latour, 2005; Law, Ruppert, & Savage, 2011) and post-humanist perspectives (for example, Anderson, 2014; Haraway, 2003; Wolfe, 2010). Our contribution to this literature is distinctive because rather than remaining at the philosophical level, we suggest how the human politics of method might be navigated practically to the benefit of multiple species. Keywords: Ethnography, human-animal studies, interdisciplinary, ontology, epistemology, politics
2014
Animals´ omnipresence in human society makes them both close to and yet remarkably distant from humans. Human and animal lives have always been entangled, but the way we see and practice the relationships between humans and animals – as close, intertwined, or clearly separate – varies from time to time and between cultures, societies, and even situations. By putting these complex relationships in focus, this anthology investigates the ways in which human society deals with its co-existence with animals. The volume was produced within the frame of the interdisciplinary “Animal Turn”-research group which during eight months in 2013–2014 was hosted by the Pufendorf Institute for Advanced Studies, Lund university, Sweden. Along with invited scholars and artists, members of this group contribute with different perspectives on the complexities and critical issues evoked when the human-animal relationship is in focus. The anthology covers a wide range of topics: From discussions on new disciplinary paths and theoretical perspectives, empirical case-studies, and artistic work, towards more explicitly critical approaches to issues of animal welfare. Phenomena such as vegansexuality, anthropomorphism, wildlife crimes, and the death of honey-bees are being discussed. How we gain knowledge of other species and creatures is one important issue in focus. What does, for example, the notion of wonderment play in this production of knowledge? How were species classified in pre-Christian Europe? How is the relationship between domesticated and farmed animals and humans practiced and understood? How is it portrayed in literature, or in contemporary social media? Many animals are key actors in these discussions, such as dogs, cows, bees, horses, pigeons, the brown bear, just to mention a few, as well as some creatures more difficult to classify as either humans or animals. All of these play a part in the questions that is at the core of the investigations carried out in this volume: How to produce knowledge that creates possibilities for an ethically and environmentally sustainable future.
Taylor TASA A Sociology for other animals text 2017 (read in conjunction with slides)
In this piece I wrestle with the question of what a sociology of other animals is for. For me, this is tied to a bigger question of what kind of research we do – and how we do it-in the neoliberal university. In my view, we need to develop some clarity (although not uniformity) in purpose about why we, as sociologists, study human relations with other animals. While there are some excellent tools available in sociological thought to study the various ways humans interact with other species, and the institutions within which this interaction occurs, my view is that if our aims are not in some way emancipatory for the animals involved, then we should rethink our focus and avoid sociological questions about animals altogether. To do otherwise, is to collude with master narratives that position animals as either irrelevant or as existing primarily, if not exclusively, for human benefit. I say this because approaches claiming to be apolitical and that do not seek, in some way, to better the lives of other species, ultimately reconstitute animals as objects, in this instance, objects to be studied. Just as ethical researchers have a duty to dignify their human participants and not treat them as exploitable commodities, the same needs to apply to sociologists who work with/for (other) animals.
WHAT THE COURSE IS ABOUT When we think of 'society' or use the word in the social sciences, there is typically no animal in the picture we see with our mind's eye. Yet, social life is something we have in common with animals in more than one way. A fundamental orientation to social existence is something humans share with other species: animals know how to do 'society,' too, no problem here, thank you very much. Many of us share their lives with animals in a variety of roles and forms of companionship. The civilizations we built were built in deep partnerships with animals, and animals are even our partners for us to represent our own society and selves to ourselves. Last but not least, and however forgetful we humans tend to be of the place and role of animals in what we call society, it is something that animals themselves cannot ignore: there is virtually no place on Earth today where animal life is not impacted, often in troubling, destructive ways, by human society. When we think of 'society' or use the word in the social sciences, there is typically no animal in the picture we see with our mind's eye-and no doubt there should be. This course is about correcting that. Using the works of anthropologists and other scholars, we will conduct a sustained exploration of the many ways and forms in which we are in the world together with animals-and in which animals are part of us, and us part of animals. In doing so, we will look at a variety of tools and methods for a rigorous investigation of human-animal entanglements, and think hard about how such an investigation requires us to revise our understanding of the social.