DOCSLIB.ORG

Peter-Singer-Animal-Liberation-1.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Peter-Singer-Animal-Liberation-1.Pdf EARLY BIRD BOOKS FRESH EBOOK DEALS, DELIVERED DAILY BE THE FIRST TO KNOW ABOUT FREE AND DISCOUNTED EBOOKS NEW DEALS HATCH EVERY DAY! 2 Animal Liberation The Definitive Classic of the Animal Movement Peter Singer 3 To Richard and Mary, and Ros and Stan, and—especially to—Renata This revised edition is also for all of you who have changed your lives in order to bring Animal Liberation closer. You have made it possible to believe that the power of ethical reasoning can prevail over the self-interest of our species. 4 Contents Preface to the Fortieth Anniversary Edition Preface to the 2009 Edition Preface to the 1975 Edition 1 All Animals Are Equal … or why the ethical principle on which human equality rests requires us to extend equal consideration to animals too 2 Tools for Research … your taxes at work 3 Down on the Factory Farm … or what happened to your dinner when it was still an animal 4 Becoming a Vegetarian … or how to produce less suffering and more food at a reduced cost to the environment 5 Man’s Dominion … a short history of speciesism 6 Speciesism Today … 5 defenses, rationalizations, and objections to Animal Liberation and the progress made in overcoming them Further Reading Notes Acknowledgments Index A Biography of Peter Singer 6 Preface to the Fortieth Anniversary Edition People often ask me what I was expecting to happen when Animal Liberation appeared forty years ago. One thing I wasn’t expecting was that the book would be continuously in print for the next forty years! Nor, of course, was I expecting it to appear as an ebook, because it was typed on a manual typewriter long before there was an Internet or anyone had a personal computer. That isn’t, however, what people really want to know. They want to know what impact I expected the book to have. On that, my expectations fluctuated between two extremes. In my more optimistic moments, the arguments against our oppression of animals seemed so clear and irrefutable that surely, I thought, a popular movement would arise to inform people how we are treating animals (for then most people knew nothing about factory farming or the kind of experiments done on animals). This better-informed public would boycott animal products, so that factory farming, or perhaps the entire meat industry, would shrink and eventually disappear, along with the kind of research on animals that I describe in chapter two. In my more pessimistic (or realistic) moments, I understood the enormity of the task facing the movement that I envisaged. How can one change habits as widespread and as deeply ingrained as eating meat? It would first be necessary to transform people’s attitudes toward animals, and these attitudes would be especially difficult to change because as chapters five and six demonstrate, people are very good at finding rationalizations for doing what they want to do. 7 Against the background of those more realistic assumptions, we can be pleased that despite the obstacles, we have made significant progress. We can rightly deplore the fact that today, forty years on, animals are still being mistreated on a vast scale, but we should not despair of making a positive difference in the lives of animals. In many parts of the world, including Europe and the United States, there has been a huge shift in attitudes toward animals. The powerful animal advocacy movement I hoped would emerge does exist, and thanks to undercover videos and the Internet, the information it provides cannot be denied or suppressed. The animal movement has challenged the huge agribusiness industry with remarkable success, forcing producers of meat and eggs across the entire European Union—all twenty-eight member nations—to give hens and pigs and veal calves more space and conditions better suited to their needs. Similar changes have now become law in California as well, following an overwhelming victory for animal advocates in a referendum in 2008. Admittedly, these changes are still far from giving factory-farmed animals acceptable lives, but they are a significant improvement on what was standard practice before the reforms came into effect. Perhaps even more satisfying is the popularity of becoming vegetarian or vegan, and the still-larger number who have cut down their meat consumption, for both ethical and health reasons. In the 1970s, to be a vegetarian was to be a crank—a thought reflected in the self-mocking name of what was then London’s best vegetarian restaurant, Cranks. If you used the term vegan, you invariably got a blank look and had to explain what it meant. Since then, the number of vegetarians and vegans in the United Kingdom and the United States has risen steadily and continues to do so. Even in countries like 8 Germany and Austria, where virtually every main course was based on meat or eggs, vegan foods are appearing on menus and in supermarkets. In the United States, something remarkable happened in 2008. For the whole of the twentieth century, the US had the reputation of being “a nation of meat eaters.” Consumption of meat kept going up and up, with just one or two small blips for events like the Great Depression of the 1930s. Beef consumption peaked in the mid-1970s, but a sharp increase in chicken consumption more than made up for that drop. Then in 2008, total meat consumption, including that of poultry, fell, and it has fallen again every year since. No one quite knows why, but probably more people having at least one meat-free day a week has made a bigger difference than the increasing number of vegetarians and vegans. Greater awareness of the huge contribution that the livestock industry makes to greenhouse-gas emissions—more than that of the entire transport sector—has led many environmentalists to become vegetarian, vegan, or “flexitarian” (eating meat only on special occasions). The demand for plant-based products that imitate meat—or that, in the case of attempts to cultivate bovine cells in vitro, really are meat, although they have never been part of a living, sentient being—is increasing. Whatever the reason, it is a hopeful sign that we are not inevitably heading for a future in which more and more animals suffer, more and more grain and soybeans are wasted, and more and more greenhouse gases from livestock production accelerate the rate at which our planet is warming. Despite all this, it is probably still true that there are more animals suffering at the hands of humans now than ever 9 before. That is because there are more affluent people in the world than ever before, and satisfying their demand for meat has meant a vast expansion of factory farming, especially in China. But to see this as an indication that animal advocates have made no progress would be like saying that because there are more slaves in the world now than there were in 1800, the antislavery movement has achieved nothing. With the world’s population now more than seven times what it was in 1800, numbers do not tell the whole story. There will always be periods in which the animal movement seems to be struggling to hold its own, or even going backward. But there can be no doubt that attitudes about animals are completely different from what they were forty years ago. Just as I was drafting this introduction, the front page of the New York Times carried a long article headlined “U.S. Research Lab Lets Livestock Suffer in Quest for Profit.” The article reported the results of a long investigation by a Times journalist into the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center in southern Nebraska.1 At the time of writing this preface, a bipartisan group of congressional representatives had said that they would move legislation to bring government institutions like the Meat Animal Research Center under the Animal Welfare Act, which already regulates experiments by nongovernment institutions.2 The experiments described in the Times article obviously caused great suffering to many animals, but many of the experiments I describe in chapter two caused even more suffering, were also taxpayer funded, and could not plausibly be claimed to have had a more important scientific justification or to be likely to lead to a greater benefit than those carried out at the Meat Animal Research Center. Yet 10 when those experiments were going on, major newspapers did not report anything about them, let alone send reporters to investigate and put the story on the front page. What we did to animals, it seemed, didn’t really matter. Now it does. That’s an important step forward, and a sign that over the next forty years we may see even bigger changes in the ways we treat animals. Peter Singer February 2015 1 Michael Moss, “U.S. Research Lab Lets Livestock Suffer in Quest for Profit,” New York Times, January 19, 2015. 2 Michael Moss, “Lawmakers Aim to Protect Animals in U.S. Research,” New York Times, February 5, 2015. 11 Preface to the 2009 Edition In 2008, tens of millions of Americans watched with horror and disbelief when they saw on their evening news an undercover video of cattle too sick to walk being kicked, shocked with electric prods, jabbed in the eye with a baton, and pushed around with a forklift, all so that they could be driven near enough to the “kill box” to be slaughtered and processed into meat. The video was taken at the Westland/ Hallmark slaughterhouse, in Chino, California—a large, supposedly state-of-the-art operation and a major supplier to the National School Lunch Program, located not in a rural backwater but just thirty miles from the heart of Los Angeles.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • It's a (Two-)Culture Thing: the Laterial Shift to Liberation
    Animal Issues, Vol 4, No. 1, 2000 It's a (Two-)Culture Thing: The Lateral Shift to Liberation Barry Kew rom an acute and, some will argue, a harsh, a harsh, fantastic or even tactically naive F naive perspective, this article examines examines animal liberation, vegetarianism vegetarianism and veganism in relation to a bloodless culture ideal. It suggests that the movement's repeated anomalies, denial of heritage, privileging of vegetarianism, and other concessions to bloody culture, restrict rather than liberate the full subversionary and revelatory potential of liberationist discourse, and with representation and strategy implications. ‘Only the profoundest cultural needs … initially caused adult man [sic] to continue to drink cow milk through life’.1 In The Social Construction of Nature, Klaus Eder develops a useful concept of two cultures - the bloody and the bloodless. He understands the ambivalence of modernity and the relationship to nature as resulting from the perpetuation of a precarious equilibrium between the ‘bloodless’ tradition from within Judaism and the ‘bloody’ tradition of ancient Greece. In Genesis, killing entered the world after the fall from grace and initiated a complex and hierarchically-patterned system of food taboos regulating distance between nature and culture. But, for Eder, it is in Israel that the reverse process also begins, in the taboo on killing. This ‘civilizing’ process replaces the prevalent ancient world practice of 1 Calvin. W. Schwabe, ‘Animals in the Ancient World’ in Aubrey Manning and James Serpell, (eds), Animals and Human Society: Changing Perspectives (Routledge, London, 1994), p.54. 1 Animal Issues, Vol 4, No. 1, 2000 human sacrifice by animal sacrifice, this by sacrifices of the field, and these by money paid to the sacrificial priests.2 Modern society retains only a very broken connection to the Jewish tradition of the bloodless sacrifice.
    [Show full text]
  • One Issue: Animal Liberation
    One Issue: Animal Liberation We are occasionally asked why the Animal Rights Coalition is a “multi-issue” organization, instead of working solely on helping people to adopt a vegan diet. The Animal Rights Coalition mission states that ARC is “dedicated to ending the suffering, abuse, and exploitation of non-human animals through information, education, and advocacy.” One of the most important things about ARC is the consistency of our message and actions. ARC started out as, and has firmly remained, an abolitionist animal rights organization – which means that we challenge the dominant conversation that humans have about our relationships with other species. Most people view other animals as commodities for humans to use and own, and we view other animals as persons who are here for their own reasons and deserving of personal and bodily integrity. So, while some may consider us a multi-issue organization, the reality is that there is only one issue – animal liberation – and no matter what subject we’re talking about, we’re having essentially the same conversation again and again – emphasizing that animals matter in their own right, outside of what they can provide for humans, and that it is not justifiable for us to exploit or abuse them for any reason. As one facet of the conversations we have with people, we encourage them to adopt a plant-based (vegan) diet. However, we believe that veganism is about more than what one does and doesn’t eat. Veganism rejects the commodity status of animals, and with animals as commodities in more than just the food production system, we have a moral imperative to protest the use of animals in labs, circuses, the clothing industry, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 HSUS Annual Report
    2015 Annual Report You Changed the World WITH YOUR SUPPORT, WE AND OUR AFFILIATES DIRECTLY HELPED 171,476 ANIMALS—AND DROVE CHANGE FOR MILLIONS MORE. With you by our side, 2015 was the highest impact year in the history of The Humane Society of the United States. Thank you for caring so much about animals. We could not have done this without you. As Kathy Klueh, a monthly donor from Florida, told us, “When we pool our resources we are a force that cannot be stopped.” HUMANE HEROES: Throughout this report, we’ve highlighted some of the people and organizations that helped us in 2015. ISLAND CONNECTION: OUR DONORS’ STORY In April, The HSUS and Humane Society International partnered with agencies in Puerto Rico to launch an island-wide initiative to help stray animals struggling to survive. In November, 15 donors came to help provide vaccines, flea/tick preventative and triage at a dog sanctuary, check in animals at an HSI spay/neuter clinic, visit shelters and assist with a stray dog feeding route. PICTURED ABOVE: Amanda Hearst, Steve Read and Daran Haber helped island dogs. NOT SHOWN: Pia Acker- man, Kami Anderson, Georgina Bloomberg, David Brownstein, Lisa Feria, Marion Look Jameson, Stacey Kivowitz, Colleen Lang, Marti Peretzman, Jerry Rosenthal, Bob Rhue and Courtney Stroum Meagher. OPPOSITE PAGE: Puppy mills campaign staffer Tara Loller visited with some of the dogs who will be helped by our work on the island. ON THE COVER: Cecil RIP July 1, 2015. This was an enormous year for our campaign to stop trade in products from endangered and rare animals.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethics, Agency & Love
    Ethics, Agency & Love for Bryn Browne Department of Philosophy, University of Wales Lampeter Speciesism - Arguments for Whom? Camilla Kronqvist Please do not quote without permission! Since the publication of Animal Liberation by Peter Singer in 1975 there has been an upshot of literature concerned with the moral standing of animals and our attitudes and reactions towards them. The starting point for most of these discussions can mainly be found in the notion of speciesism, a term that originally was introduced by Richard Ryder but that has become more widely spread with the writings of Peter Singer. It is also Singer that I am discussing in this essay although many other philosophers have brought forward similar ideas. The idea that lies behind this notion is basically that we as human beings have prejudices in our attitudes towards animals and that we discriminate against them on grounds that are unacceptable in a society that stresses the importance of equality. The line that we draw between human beings, or members of the species Homo Sapiens as Singer prefers to put it, and animals is as arbitrary as the lines that previously have been drawn on the basis of sex or race. It is not a distinction that is based on any factual differences between the species but simply on the sense of superiority we seem to pride ourselves in with regard to our own species. Allowing the species of a being to be the determining factor for our ethical reactions towards is, according to the argument, as bad as letting sex or race play the same part.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal People News
    European Commission votes to ban dog &cat fur B R U S S E L S ––The European Commis- sion on November 20 adopted a proposal to ban the import, export, and sale of cat and dog fur throughout the European Union. “The draft regulation will now be considered by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers for adoption by the co- decision procedure,” explained the EC Asian dog. (Kim Bartlett) announcement. “There is evidence that cat and dog fur been found not just on clothing, but also on a is being placed on the European market, usually number of personal accessories, as well as chil- dren’s soft toys.” Asian rabbits. (Kim Bartlett) undeclared as such or disguised as synthetic and other types of fur,” the EC announcement sum- “Just the idea of young children playing marized. “The vast majority of the cat and dog with toys which have been made with dog and Olympics to showcase growing fur is believed to be imported from third coun- cat fur is really something we cannot accept,” tries, notably China.” European Consumer Protection Commissioner Fifteen of the 25 EU member nations Markos Kyprianou said. Chinese animal testing industry have already individually introduced legislation “Kyprianou stopped short of calling B E I J I N G ––The 2008 Olympic Glenn Rice, chief executive of Bridge against cat and dog fur. “The proposed regula- for every product containing fur to have a label Games in Beijing will showcase the fast- Pharmaceuticals Inc., is outsourcing the tion adopted today addresses EU citizens con- detailing its exact origin,” wrote London Times growing Chinese animal testing industry, work to China, where scientists are cheap cerns, and creates a harmonized approach,” the European correspondent David Charter, the official Xinhua news agency disclosed and plentiful and animal-rights activists are EC announcement stipulated.
    [Show full text]
  • Framing Farming: Communication Strategies for Animal Rights Critical Animal Studies 2
    Framing Farming: Communication Strategies for Animal Rights Critical Animal Studies 2 General Editors: Helena Pedersen, Stockholm University (Sweden) Vasile Stănescu, Mercer University (U.S.) Editorial Board: Stephen R.L. Clark, University of Liverpool (U.K.) Amy J. Fitzgerald, University of Windsor (Canada) Anthony J. Nocella, II, Hamline University (U.S.) John Sorenson, Brock University (Canada) Richard Twine, University of London and Edge Hill University (U.K.) Richard J. White, Sheffield Hallam University (U.K.) Framing Farming: Communication Strategies for Animal Rights Carrie P. Freeman Amsterdam - New York, NY 2014 Critical Animal Studies 2. Carrie P. Freeman, Framing Farming: Communication Strategies for Animal Rights. 1. Kim Socha, Women, Destruction, and the Avant-Garde. A Paradigm for Animal Liberation. This book is printed on recycled paper. Cover photo: Jo-Anne McArthur / We Animals The paper on which this book is printed meets the requirements of “ISO 9706:1994, Information and documentation - Paper for documents - Requirements for permanence”. ISBN: 978-90-420-3892-9 E-Book ISBN: 978-94-012-1174-1 © Editions Rodopi B.V., Amsterdam – New York, NY 2014 Printed in The Netherlands Table of Contents List of Images 9 Foreword 11 Author’s perspective and background 11 Acknowledgements 14 Dedication 15 Chapter 1: Introduction 17 Themes and Theses in This Book 19 The Unique Contributions of This Book 20 Social Significance of Vegetarianism & Animal Rights 22 The Structure and Content of This Book 26 Word Choice 29 PART I OVERVIEW OF ANIMAL RIGHTS, VEGETARIANISM, AND COMMUNICATION Chapter 2: Ethical Views on Animals as Fellows & as Food 33 Development of Animal Activism in the United States 34 Western Thought on Other Animals 36 Western Vegetarian Ethics 43 Human Eating Habits 62 Chapter 3: Activist Communication Strategy & Debates 67 Communication and the Social Construction of Reality 68 Strategies for Social Movement Organizations 75 Ideological Framing Debates in U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Sexual Politics of Meat by Carol J. Adams
    THE SEXUAL POLITICS OF MEAT A FEMINISTVEGETARIAN CRITICAL THEORY Praise for The Sexual Politics of Meat and Carol J. Adams “A clearheaded scholar joins the ideas of two movements—vegetari- anism and feminism—and turns them into a single coherent and moral theory. Her argument is rational and persuasive. New ground—whole acres of it—is broken by Adams.” —Colman McCarthy, Washington Post Book World “Th e Sexual Politics of Meat examines the historical, gender, race, and class implications of meat culture, and makes the links between the prac tice of butchering/eating animals and the maintenance of male domi nance. Read this powerful new book and you may well become a vegetarian.” —Ms. “Adams’s work will almost surely become a ‘bible’ for feminist and pro gressive animal rights activists. Depiction of animal exploita- tion as one manifestation of a brutal patriarchal culture has been explored in two [of her] books, Th e Sexual Politics of Meat and Neither Man nor Beast: Feminism and the Defense of Animals. Adams argues that factory farming is part of a whole culture of oppression and insti- tutionalized violence. Th e treatment of animals as objects is parallel to and associated with patriarchal society’s objectifi cation of women, blacks, and other minorities in order to routinely exploit them. Adams excels in constructing unexpected juxtapositions by using the language of one kind of relationship to illuminate another. Employing poetic rather than rhetorical techniques, Adams makes powerful connec- tions that encourage readers to draw their own conclusions.” —Choice “A dynamic contribution toward creating a feminist/animal rights theory.” —Animals’ Agenda “A cohesive, passionate case linking meat-eating to the oppression of animals and women .
    [Show full text]
  • El Animal No Humano Como Nuevo Sujeto De Derecho Constitucional
    Universidad de Chile Facultad de Derecho Departamento de Derecho Público El animal no humano como nuevo sujeto de Derecho Constitucional Ariadna Georgina Beroiz Díaz José Alejandro Briones Rodríguez MEMORIA PARA OPTAR AL GRADO DE LICENCIADO EN CIENCIAS JURÍDICAS Y SOCIALES Profesor Guía José Ignacio Vásquez Márquez SANTIAGO DE CHILE 2018 DEDICATORIA A mi tata Aurelio, mamita Adolfa, Sinfonía, Buck, Niño, Bis, Sultán, Zar, Nevado, Chisco, Gretel, Coto, Carlota, Coke, Lipi, Barti, Max, Bonnie, Paris, Federico, Maradona, Martina, Gladys, Estrellita, Belén, Cielito, Canitrot, Juanfle, Zorrón, Cotito y a todos aquellos cuyas voces inadvertidas se apagan día a día sin que nadie abogue por ellas. In memoria, a mis padres por mantenerme, a mi familia y amigos por apoyarme, a mis compañeros no humanos por inspirarme y a mi jefe por aguantarme. AGRADECIMIENTOS Quisiéramos agradecer a todas las personas que fueron parte vital de la formación de las ideas que leerán a continuación. A nuestras familias, amigas y amigos, pareja y todos aquellos que nos dieron su constante apoyo y preocupación para ser capaces de finalizar este proceso. También, a todos aquellos que nos dieron la inspiración necesaria para definir este tema como eje de nuestra tesis de pregrado. Aquellos que han sido parte de nuestras vidas, y cuyo amor no ha pasado inadvertido. Finalmente, a nuestro profesor guía, quien con gusto aceptó, y sin reparos, nuestras ideas para este trabajo. Muchas gracias, profesor. Nunca imaginamos que un tema así se convertiría en una de nuestras cartas vitales para convertirnos en abogados, pero aquí nos encontramos. Aquí nos encontramos intentando abogar por aquellos que jamás han tenido la representación necesaria.
    [Show full text]
  • The Scope of the Argument from Species Overlap
    bs_bs_banner Journal of Applied Philosophy,Vol.31, No. 2, 2014 doi: 10.1111/japp.12051 The Scope of the Argument from Species Overlap OSCAR HORTA ABSTRACT The argument from species overlap has been widely used in the literature on animal ethics and speciesism. However, there has been much confusion regarding what the argument proves and what it does not prove, and regarding the views it challenges.This article intends to clarify these confusions, and to show that the name most often used for this argument (‘the argument from marginal cases’) reflects and reinforces these misunderstandings.The article claims that the argument questions not only those defences of anthropocentrism that appeal to capacities believed to be typically human, but also those that appeal to special relations between humans. This means the scope of the argument is far wider than has been thought thus far. Finally, the article claims that, even if the argument cannot prove by itself that we should not disregard the interests of nonhuman animals, it provides us with strong reasons to do so, since the argument does prove that no defence of anthropocentrism appealing to non-definitional and testable criteria succeeds. 1. Introduction The argument from species overlap, which has also been called — misleadingly, I will argue — the argument from marginal cases, points out that the criteria that are com- monly used to deprive nonhuman animals of moral consideration fail to draw a line between human beings and other sentient animals, since there are also humans who fail to satisfy them.1 This argument has been widely used in the literature on animal ethics for two purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Does a Vegan Diet Contribute to Prevention Or Maintenance of Diseases? Malia K
    Cedarville University DigitalCommons@Cedarville Kinesiology and Allied Health Senior Research Department of Kinesiology and Allied Health Projects Fall 11-14-2018 Does a Vegan Diet Contribute to Prevention or Maintenance of Diseases? Malia K. Burkholder Cedarville University, [email protected] Danae A. Fields Cedarville University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/ kinesiology_and_allied_health_senior_projects Part of the Kinesiology Commons, and the Public Health Commons Recommended Citation Burkholder, Malia K. and Fields, Danae A., "Does a Vegan Diet Contribute to Prevention or Maintenance of Diseases?" (2018). Kinesiology and Allied Health Senior Research Projects. 6. https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/kinesiology_and_allied_health_senior_projects/6 This Senior Research Project is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@Cedarville, a service of the Centennial Library. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kinesiology and Allied Health Senior Research Projects by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Cedarville. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Running head: THE VEGAN DIET AND DISEASES Does a vegan diet contribute to prevention or maintenance of diseases? Malia Burkholder Danae Fields Cedarville University THE VEGAN DIET AND DISEASES 2 Does a vegan diet contribute to prevention or maintenance of diseases? What is the Vegan Diet? The idea of following a vegan diet for better health has been a debated topic for years. Vegan diets have been rising in popularity the past decade or so. Many movie stars and singers have joined the vegan movement. As a result, more and more research has been conducted on the benefits of a vegan diet. In this article we will look at how a vegan diet may contribute to prevention or maintenance of certain diseases such as cancer, diabetes, weight loss, gastrointestinal issues, and heart disease.
    [Show full text]
  • Ford Hall Forum Collection (MS113), 1908-2013: a Finding Aid
    Ford Hall Forum Collection 1908-2013 (MS113) Finding Aid Moakley Archive and Institute www.suffolk.edu/moakley [email protected] Ford Hall Forum Collection (MS113), 1908-2013: A Finding Aid Descriptive Summary Repository: Moakley Archive and Institute, Suffolk University, Boston MA Collection Number: MS 113 Creator: Ford Hall Forum Title: Ford Hall Forum Collection Date(s): 1908-2013, 1930-2000 Quantity: 85 boxes, 41 cubic ft., 39 lin. ft. Preferred Citation: Ford Hall Forum Collection (MS 113), 1908-2013, Moakley Archive and Institute, Suffolk University, Boston, MA. Abstract: The Ford Hall Forum Collection documents the history of the nation’s longest running free public lecture series. The Forum has hosted some the most notable figures in the arts, science, politics, and the humanities since its founding in 1908. The collection, which spans from 1908 to 2013, includes of 85 boxes of materials related to the Forum's administration, lectures, fund raising, partnerships, and its radio program, the New American Gazette. Administrative Information Acquisition Information: Ownership transferred to Suffolk University in 2014. Use Restrictions: Use of materials may be restricted based on their condition, content or copyright status, or if they contain personal information. Consult Archive staff for more information. Related Collections: See also the Ford Hall Forum Oral History (SOH-041) and Arthur S. Meyers Collection (MS114) held by Suffolk University. Additional collection materials related to the organization --primarily audio and video
    [Show full text]
  • Theideologyfox2018journalartic
    This is the pre-peer reviewed version of the following article: Fox, M. A. (2018). The Ideology of Meat-Eating. The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 25, 37-49. doi: 10.5840/harvardreview201853114 which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.5840/harvardreview201853114. Downloaded from [email protected], the institutional research repository of the University of New England at Armidale, NSW Australia. The Ideology of Meat-Eating Michael Allen Fox Published in Harvard Review of Philosophy, 25 (2018): 37-49. This material ©copyright The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 2018. Abstract: A network of beliefs and values (an ideology) underlies much of our behavior. While meat-eaters may not acknowledge that they have an ideology, I argue that they do by attempting to identify and deconstruct its elements. I also include numerous historical and philosophical observations about the origins of meat- eaters’ ideology. Explaining and examining ideologies may encourage discussion about a particular area of life (for example, dietary choice) and stimulate change in relation to it. Both adherents to vegetarian/vegan approaches and meat-eaters who wish to become less dependent on animal food sources (for ethical and environmental reasons) can benefit from the broader understanding that such an analysis provides. Key words: animals, anthropocentrism, diet, ideology, livestock, meat, veganism, vegetarianism On ideology and ideologies Generally, we all have reasons—good or bad—for what we choose and do. But behind some of our actions there is a more complex outlook, or what might be called an ideology. An ideology is often thought of as a set of notions tainted by values one disagrees with or finds odious: An ideology belongs to my opponent, not to me, I might think, dismissively.
    [Show full text]