DOCSLIB.ORG

Animal Passions and Beastly Virtues in the Series Animals, Culture, and Society Edited by Clinton R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Animal Passions and Beastly Virtues in the Series Animals, Culture, and Society Edited by Clinton R Animal Passions and Beastly Virtues In the series Animals, Culture, and Society edited by Clinton R. Sanders and Arnold Arluke Leslie Irvine, If You Tame Me: Understanding Our Connection with Animals Janet M. Alger and Steven F. Alger, Cat Culture: The Social World of a Cat Shelter Rik Scarce, Fishy Business: Salmon, Biology, and the Social Construction of Nature Clinton R. Sanders, Understanding Dogs: Living and Working with Canine Companions Eileen Crist, Images of Animals: Anthropomorphism and Animal Mind Rod Michalko, The Two in One: Walking with Smokie, Walking with Blindness Ralph H. Lutts, ed., The Wild Animal Story Julian McAllister Groves, Hearts and Minds: The Controversy Over Laboratory Animals Arnold Arluke and Clinton R. Sanders, Regarding Animals Animal Passions and Beastly Virtues Reflections on Redecorating Nature MARC BEKOFF Foreword by JANE GOODALL TEMPLE UNIVERSITY PRESS Philadelphia Temple University Press 1601 North Broad Street Philadelphia PA 19122 www.temple.edu/tempress Copyright © 2006 by Temple University All rights reserved Published 2006 Printed in the United States of America The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Bekoff, Marc. Animal passions and beastly virtues : reflections on redecorating nature / Marc Bekoff. p. cm. – (Animals, culture, and society) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 1-59213-347-9 (cloth : alk. paper) – ISBN 1-59213-348-7 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Cognition in animals. 2. Social behavior in animals. 3. Animal rights. 4. Animal welfare. I. Title. II. Series. QL785.B36 2006 591.56–dc22 2005041833 246897531 FOR JAN, WHO REAWAKENS MY SENSES, MY SPIRIT, AND MY HEART We need another and a wiser and perhaps a more mystical concept of animals. Remote from universal nature, and living by compli- cated artifice, man in civilization surveys the creature through the glass of his knowledge and sees thereby a feather magnified and the whole image in distortion. We patronize them for their incomplete- ness, for their tragic fate of having taken form so far below our- selves. And therein we err, and greatly err. For the animal shall not be measured by man. In a world older and wiser and more com- plete than ours they move finished and complete, gifted with exten- tions of the senses we have lost or never attained, living by voices we shall never hear. They are not brethren, they are not underlings; they are other nations, caught with ourselves in the net of life and time, fellow prisoners of the splendour and travail of earth. —Henry Beston, The Outermost House Contents Foreword, by Jane Goodall ix Introduction: What Does It Feel Like to Be a Fox? 1 IEMOTIONS, COGNITION, AND ANIMAL SELVES: “WOW!THAT’S ME!” 23 1 Beastly Passions 35 2 Cognitive Ethology: The Comparative Study of Animal Minds 40 3 On Aims and Methods of Cognitive Ethology, with Dale Jamieson 50 4 Reflections on Animal Selves, with Paul W. Sherman 66 II THE SOCIAL BEHAVIOR OF DOGS AND COYOTES 77 5 The Social Ecology of Coyotes, with Michael C. Wells 86 6 Population and Social Biology of Free-Ranging Domestic Dogs, Canis familiaris, with Thomas J. Daniels 99 7 Ground Scratching by Male Domestic Dogs: A Composite Signal? 112 8 Observations of Scent-Marking and Discriminating Self from Others by a Domestic Dog (Canis familiaris): Tales of Displaced Yellow Snow 116 III SOCIAL PLAY, SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND SOCIAL COMMUNICATION: COOPERATION,FAIRNESS, AND WILD JUSTICE 123 9 Social Communication in Canids: Evidence for the Evolution of a Stereotyped Mammalian Display 134 VIII CONTENTS 10 Virtuous Nature 140 11 Wild Justice, Cooperation, and Fair Play: Minding Manners, Being Nice, and Feeling Good 144 IV HUMAN DIMENSIONS: HUMAN-ANIMAL INTERACTIONS 177 12 Human (Anthropogenic) Effects on Animal Behavior 182 13 Translocation Effects on the Behavior of Black-Tailed Prairie Dogs (Cynomys ludovicianus), with John P. Farrar, Karin L. Coleman, and Eric Stone 192 14 Interactions Among Dogs, People, and the Environment in Boulder, Colorado: A Case Study, with Carron A. Meaney 197 15 Behavioral Interactions and Conflict Among Domestic Dogs, Black-Tailed Prairie Dogs, and People in Boulder, Colorado, with Robert W. Ickes 209 VETHICS, COMPASSION, CONSERVATION, AND ACTIVISM: REDECORATING NATURE 219 16 The Importance of Ethics in Conservation Biology: Let’s Be Ethicists Not Ostriches 225 17 Ethics and the Study of Carnivores: Doing Science While Respecting Animals, with Dale Jamieson 232 Afterword: Minding Animals, Minding Earth–Old Brains in New Bottlenecks 263 References 277 Index 291 Foreword ANIMAL PASSIONS AND BEASTLY VIRTUES is a collection of essays by Marc Bekoff. It is a book for scientists and nonscientists alike. Academic read- ers will be intellectually stimulated by many of the discussions, and lay peo- ple will be fascinated and often inspired. The writing is clear, so even complex subjects can be readily understood by the general public. The essays in this book cover many topics, and we are able to trace the grad- ual development of Marc’s research and ideas over a thirty-year period. There are those detailing his work in the field of social play and the behavioral ecol- ogy of carnivores. Then his interest in the complex issues of animal cognition, emotions, and self-awareness grows stronger. Gradually more and more of his essays focus on moral issues as he discusses the ethics of animal experimen- tation and the social responsibility of scientists and science. Marc’s research has led, in some instances, to essays that discuss topics well outside the initial framework of the studies. Thus, his study of social play led him to speculate about the evolution of human behaviors that we describe as fairness, trust, and morality—he describes what seem to be precursors of these behaviors, describing them as “wild justice.” And his research into animal minds and emotions, to which he has dedicated much of his professional career, has provided him with a growing understanding of animals’ capacity for suffering, so that he is able to write with authority against cruel and abu- sive exploitation of wild and captive animals. Marc’s concern for the destruction of the environment at human hands also is clearly outlined in some of these essays. He writes of the tightly woven tapestry of life on earth, of the close connections between all beings and wild ecosystems. He criticizes those who “redecorate” nature, altering the pattern of the wilderness, destroying habitats, moving or killing wildlife, for their own purposes. Marc is an extraordinarily prolific writer. He has published books for sci- entists and for the lay public, and many of his articles have been written both for scientific journals and popular magazines. He has also worked to bring an understanding of animal behavior to children—recently through the Jane Goodall Institute’s Roots & Shoots program, which encourages youth around the world to take compassionate and informed action to make the world a bet- ter place for animals, as well as for people and the environment. Marc has also worked with senior citizens and prisoners in the Roots & Shoots program. Perhaps the most powerful essays are those which illustrate Marc’s deter- mination to be a voice for the voiceless. He is highly critical of the way ani- mals are so often treated as though they were mere “things” rather than the X FOREWORD sentient beings that he—and I—know them to be. His concern, like mine, is for animals both in the wild and in captivity. Marc is not afraid of plunging into controversial topics, such as hunting, the abuse of animals in zoos and circuses, the ethics of animal medical experimentation, and the use of animals for education in schools and universities. These articles, which have been trans- lated into many different languages, as have many of his books, provide infor- mation which has been used by others who are also fighting for animal wel- fare and animal rights around the world. Marc has the courage of his convictions and is not afraid to speak out— even when his opinion runs directly contrary to that of most of his peers, even when his career could be at stake. When he criticized the reintroduction of Canadian lynx to poor habitat in Colorado (during which many died), the University of Colorado was asked to censure him—fortunately the university supported his right to freedom of speech. And he wrote passionate essays about the infamous dog lab that subjected hundreds of dogs to needless suf- fering at the university’s medical school, pointing out that similar labs had been discontinued in numerous prestigious medical schools with no ill effects on education. The dog lab was terminated in the spring of 2002. Finally, Marc is an excellent spokesman for animals because he is not ashamed to admit his admiration and love for them. This shines through his writing, as does the sheer delight he finds in simply being with animals, and this will move and inspire many of his readers. Marc has learned so much from watching animals and empathizing with them, and by publishing this collection of essays he hopes to share this knowledge with as many people as possible. I will share Animal Passions and Beastly Virtues with colleagues and friends around the world. Jane Goodall Bournemouth, UK Animal Passions and Beastly Virtues Introduction What Does It Feel Like to Be a Fox? MY WONDERFUL PARENTS love to recall many stories about my life- long interest in animals. My father remembers, with a wide smile, that on a ski trip when I was six years old I asked him what a red fox was feeling as he merrily crossed our path as we traversed a frozen lake.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bringing Animal Protection Legislation Into Line with Its Purported Purposes: a Proposal for Equality Amongst Non- Human Animals
    Pace Environmental Law Review Volume 37 Issue 2 Spring 2020 Article 1 May 2020 Bringing Animal Protection Legislation Into Line With its Purported Purposes: A Proposal for Equality Amongst Non- Human Animals Jane Kotzmann Deakin University Gisela Nip Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr Part of the Animal Law Commons, Energy and Utilities Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, International Law Commons, and the Natural Resources Law Commons Recommended Citation Jane Kotzmann and Gisela Nip, Bringing Animal Protection Legislation Into Line With its Purported Purposes: A Proposal for Equality Amongst Non-Human Animals, 37 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 247 (2020) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pelr/vol37/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace Environmental Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLE Bringing Animal Protection Legislation Into Line With its Purported Purposes: A Proposal for Equality Amongst Non-Human Animals JANE KOTZMANN* & GISELA NIP† The United States has a strong history of enacting laws to pro- tect animals from the pain and suffering inflicted by humans. In- deed, the passage of the Massachusetts’ Body of Liberties in 1641 made it the first country in the world to pass such laws. Neverthe- less, contemporary animal protection laws in all jurisdictions of the United States are limited in their ability to adequately realize their primary purpose of protecting animals from unnecessary or unjus- tifiable pain and suffering.
    [Show full text]
  • Reducing Su Ering Among Invertebrates Such As Insects Policy
    Reducing suering among invertebrates such as insects Policy paper Invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms and snails may very well feel pain, and we should therefore take actions to reduce their potential suering. The large number of such invertebrate individuals and the severity of the harms that they endure mean that their potential suering would be an ethical disaster. Sentience Politics advocates that actions should be taken in several areas: Invertebrates should, when possible, not be used in re- search and teaching, and should not be used as food and feed or in the production of silk, shellac, etc. If invertebrates are to be used in these areas, we advocate actions to at least reduce their suering. In addition, attempts to prevent invertebrates from damaging crops should use the least painful methods, and research should be done to develop methods that cause less suering. Finally, policy analysis should take into account the resulting amounts of suering among all invertebrates, whether it is caused by humans or not. May Policy paper by Sentience Politics. Preferred Citation: Knutsson, S. (). Reducing suering among invertebrates such as insects. Pol- icy paper by Sentience Politics ():-. First release May . Last update May . Website: sentience-politics.org Contents Summary . Introduction . Invertebrates such as insects may very well be able to feel pain . Vast amounts of potential suering suggest that we should care about invertebrates . Actions should be taken in several areas where inverte- brates are harmed . Objections and replies . References . Author: S K, Researcher, Foundational Research Institute Project leader: T B, Director of Strategy, Sentience Politics Advisor: A M, President, Sentience Politics Advisor: B T, Researcher Lead, Foundational Research Institute Layout editor: A P Language editor: J S Reducing suering among invertebrates such as insects Summary number of scientists have argued, researchers could be re- quired to induce insensibility to pain and suering before doing potentially painful research on invertebrates.
    [Show full text]
  • Minds Without Spines: Evolutionarily Inclusive Animal Ethics
    Animal Sentience 2020.329: Mikhalevich & Powell on Invertebrate Minds Call for Commentary: Animal Sentience publishes Open Peer Commentary on all accepted target articles. Target articles are peer-reviewed. Commentaries are editorially reviewed. There are submitted commentaries as well as invited commentaries. Commentaries appear as soon as they have been reviewed, revised and accepted. Target article authors may respond to their commentaries individually or in a joint response to multiple commentaries. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMMENTATORS Minds without spines: Evolutionarily inclusive animal ethics Irina Mikhalevich Department of Philosophy, Rochester Institute of Technology Russell Powell Department of Philosophy, Boston University Abstract: Invertebrate animals are frequently lumped into a single category and denied welfare protections despite their considerable cognitive, behavioral, and evolutionary diversity. Some ethical and policy inroads have been made for cephalopod molluscs and crustaceans, but the vast majority of arthropods, including the insects, remain excluded from moral consideration. We argue that this exclusion is unwarranted given the existing evidence. Anachronistic readings of evolution, which view invertebrates as lower in the scala naturae, continue to influence public policy and common morality. The assumption that small brains are unlikely to support cognition or sentience likewise persists, despite growing evidence that arthropods have converged on cognitive functions comparable to those found in vertebrates. The exclusion of invertebrates is also motivated by cognitive-affective biases that covertly influence moral judgment, as well as a flawed balancing of scientific uncertainty against moral risk. All these factors shape moral attitudes toward basal vertebrates too, but they are particularly acute in the arthropod context. Moral consistency dictates that the same standards of evidence and risk management that justify policy protections for vertebrates also support extending moral consideration to certain invertebrates.
    [Show full text]
  • A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 8-2012 Minding Nature: A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics Joel P. MacClellan University of Tennessee, Knoxville, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Ethics and Political Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation MacClellan, Joel P., "Minding Nature: A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2012. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/1433 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Joel P. MacClellan entitled "Minding Nature: A Defense of a Sentiocentric Approach to Environmental Ethics." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Philosophy. John Nolt, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Jon Garthoff, David Reidy, Dan Simberloff Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) MINDING NATURE: A DEFENSE OF A SENTIOCENTRIC APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Joel Patrick MacClellan August 2012 ii The sedge is wither’d from the lake, And no birds sing.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Fish Really Feel Pain?
    F I S H and F I S H E R I E S , 2014, 15, 97–133 Can fish really feel pain? J D Rose1, R Arlinghaus2,3, S J Cooke4*, B K Diggles5, W Sawynok6, E D Stevens7 & C D L Wynne8 1Department of Zoology and Physiology and Neuroscience Program, University of Wyoming, Department 3166, 1000 East University Avenue, Laramie, WY 80521, USA; 2Department of Biology and Ecology of Fishes, Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Mu¨ggelseedamm 310, 12587, Berlin, Germany; 3Inland Fisheries Management Laboratory, Department for Crop and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Horticulture, Humboldt-Universitat€ zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany; 4Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental Science, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1S 5B6; 5DigsFish Services, 32 Bowsprit Cres, Banksia Beach, QLD 4507, Australia; 6Infofish Australia, PO Box 9793, Frenchville, Qld 4701, Australia; 7Biomedical Sciences – Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, Canada, C1A 4P3; 8Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA Abstract Correspondence: We review studies claiming that fish feel pain and find deficiencies in the methods Steven J Cooke, Fish Ecology and Conser- used for pain identification, particularly for distinguishing unconscious detection of vation Physiology injurious stimuli (nociception) from conscious pain. Results were also frequently mis- Laboratory, Depart- interpreted and not replicable, so claims that fish feel pain remain unsubstantiated. ment of Biology and Comparable problems exist in studies of invertebrates. In contrast, an extensive litera- Institute of Environ- ture involving surgeries with fishes shows normal feeding and activity immediately mental Science, Carleton University, or soon after surgery.
    [Show full text]
  • In Search of Evidence for the Experience of Pain in Honeybees: a Self-Administration Study Received: 26 October 2016 Julia Groening1, Dustin Venini1,2 & Mandyam V
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN In search of evidence for the experience of pain in honeybees: A self-administration study Received: 26 October 2016 Julia Groening1, Dustin Venini1,2 & Mandyam V. Srinivasan1,3,4 Accepted: 06 March 2017 Despite their common use as model organisms in scientific experiments, pain and suffering in insects Published: 04 April 2017 remains controversial and poorly understood. Here we explore potential pain experience in honeybees (Apis mellifera) by testing the self-administration of an analgesic drug. Foragers were subjected to two different types of injuries: (i) a clip that applied continuous pressure to one leg and (ii) amputation of one tarsus. The bees were given a choice between two feeders, one offering pure sucrose solution, the other sucrose solution plus morphine. We found that sustained pinching had no effect on the amount of morphine consumed, and hence is unlikely to be experienced as painful. The amputated bees did not shift their relative preference towards the analgesic either, but consumed more morphine and more solution in total compared to intact controls. While our data do not provide evidence for the self- administration of morphine in response to pain, they suggest that injured bees increase their overall food intake, presumably to meet the increased energy requirements for an immune response caused by wounding. We conclude that further experiments are required to gain insights into potential pain-like states in honeybees and other insects. Which animal taxa have evolved the capacity to experience pain is an ongoing debate. Pain is defined as ‘an aver- sive sensation or feeling associated with actual or potential tissue damage’1.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Fish Really Feel Pain?
    F I S H and F I S H E R I E S , 2014, 15, 97–133 Can fish really feel pain? J D Rose1, R Arlinghaus2,3, S J Cooke4*, B K Diggles5, W Sawynok6, E D Stevens7 & C D L Wynne8 1Department of Zoology and Physiology and Neuroscience Program, University of Wyoming, Department 3166, 1000 East University Avenue, Laramie, WY 80521, USA; 2Department of Biology and Ecology of Fishes, Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Mu¨ggelseedamm 310, 12587, Berlin, Germany; 3Inland Fisheries Management Laboratory, Department for Crop and Animal Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Horticulture, Humboldt-Universitat€ zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany; 4Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Department of Biology and Institute of Environmental Science, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1S 5B6; 5DigsFish Services, 32 Bowsprit Cres, Banksia Beach, QLD 4507, Australia; 6Infofish Australia, PO Box 9793, Frenchville, Qld 4701, Australia; 7Biomedical Sciences – Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown, PE, Canada, C1A 4P3; 8Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA Abstract Correspondence: We review studies claiming that fish feel pain and find deficiencies in the methods Steven J Cooke, Fish Ecology and Conser- used for pain identification, particularly for distinguishing unconscious detection of vation Physiology injurious stimuli (nociception) from conscious pain. Results were also frequently mis- Laboratory, Depart- interpreted and not replicable, so claims that fish feel pain remain unsubstantiated. ment of Biology and Comparable problems exist in studies of invertebrates. In contrast, an extensive litera- Institute of Environ- ture involving surgeries with fishes shows normal feeding and activity immediately mental Science, Carleton University, or soon after surgery.
    [Show full text]
  • Egalitarianism and Animals
    109 BETWEEN THE SPECIES Egalitarianism and Animals ABSTRACT The moral consideration of nonhuman animals and the critique of speciesism have been defended by appeal to a variety of ethical theo- ries. One of the main approaches in moral and political philosophy today from which to launch such a defense is egalitarianism, which is the view that we should aim at favoring the worse off by reducing inequality. This paper explains what egalitarianism is and shows the important practical consequences it has for nonhuman animals, both those that are exploited by humans and those in need of aid in the wild. Egalitarianism implies rejecting speciesism, and in practice it prescribes ceasing to exploit nonhuman animals as well as assist- ing them. Moreover, because they are worse off in comparison to humans, egalitarianism prescribes giving priority to the interests of nonhuman animals. Due to this, egalitarianism gives us extra rea- sons to defend them beyond those entailed by other nonspeciesist approaches. OSCAR HORTA University of Santiago de Compostela Volume 19, Issue 1 Aug 2016 © Between the Species, 2016 http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/bts/ 110 OSCAR HORTA 1. Introduction Consider the following cases: Robin Hood. In some country, a small group of very poor people are suffering significantly. Harsh weath- er conditions have ruined their harvest, and they find themselves in terrible indigence. There are, however, many other people in this country who are quite rich. If the rich gave some of their wealth to the poor, they would improve their situation significantly. However, they refuse to do so. The rich also claim to have prop- erty rights which protect against any redistribution of their wealth.
    [Show full text]
  • The Overwhelming Prevalence of Suffering in Nature - Alejandro Villamor Iglesias Rev Bio Y Der
    The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature - Alejandro Villamor Iglesias Rev Bio y Der. 2018; 42: 181-195 Revista de Bioética y Derecho Perspectivas Bioéticas www.bioeticayderecho.ub.edu - ISSN 1886-5887 BIOÉTICA ANIMAL The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature La abrumadora prevalencia del sufrimiento en la naturaleza L'aclaparant prevalença del patiment a la naturalesa ALEJANDRO VILLAMOR IGLESIAS * OBSERVATORI DE BIOÈTICA I DRET DE LA UNIVERSITAT DE BARCELONA La Revista de Bioética y Derecho se creó en 2004 a iniciativa del Observatorio de Bioética y Derecho (OBD), con el soporte del Máster en Bioética y Derecho de la Universidad de Barcelona: www.bioeticayderecho.ub.edu/master. En 2016 la revista Perspectivas Bioéticas del Programa de Bioética de la Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales (FLACSO) se ha incorporado a la Revista de Bioética y Derecho. Esta es una revista electrónica de acceso abierto, lo que significa que todo el contenido es de libre acceso sin coste alguno para el usuario o su institución. Los usuarios pueden leer, descargar, copiar, distribuir, imprimir o enlazar los textos completos de los artículos en esta revista sin pedir permiso previo del editor o del autor, siempre que no medie lucro en dichas operaciones y siempre que se citen las fuentes. Esto está de acuerdo con la definición BOAI de acceso abierto. * Alejandro Villamor Iglesias. Graduado en Filosofía, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela. Estudiante del Máster de Lógica y Filosofía de la Ciencia, Universidad de Salamanca. E-mail: [email protected]. The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature - Alejandro Villamor Iglesias Rev Bio y Der.
    [Show full text]
  • Ethics and Invertebrates: a Cephalopod Perspective
    DISEASES OF AQUATIC ORGANISMS Vol. 75: 119–129, 2007 Published May 4 Dis Aquat Org OPENPEN ACCESSCCESS Ethics and invertebrates: a cephalopod perspective Jennifer A. Mather1,*, Roland C. Anderson2 1University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Alberta T1K 3M4, Canada 2Seattle Aquarium, Seattle, Washington 98101-4359, USA ABSTRACT: This paper first explores 3 philosophical bases for attitudes to invertebrates, Contractar- ian/Kantian, Utilitarian, and Rights-based, and what they lead us to conclude about how we use and care for these animals. We next discuss the problems of evaluating pain and suffering in inverte- brates, pointing out that physiological responses to stress are widely similar across the animal king- dom and that most animals show behavioral responses to potentially painful stimuli. Since cephalopods are often used as a test group for consideration of pain, distress and proper conditions for captivity and handling, we evaluate their behavioral and cognitive capacities. Given these capac- ities, we then discuss practical issues: minimization of their pain and suffering during harvesting for food; ensuring that captive cephalopods are properly cared for, stimulated and allowed to live as full a life as possible; and, lastly, working for their conservation. KEY WORDS: Invertebrates · Ethics · Cephalopods · Animal pain · Animal suffering Resale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher INTRODUCTION perhaps half the animal species in the world and are mostly land animals (Hardy 1988), but humans in Human attitudes towards and values placed on ani- general seem indifferent at best to animals unlike us mals are both varied and differential, depending on (Ponder et al. 2002). the animal evaluated.
    [Show full text]
  • Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild ∗
    DEBUNKING THE IDYLLIC VIEW OF NATURAL PROCESSES: POPULATION DYNAMICS AND SUFFERING IN THE WILD ∗ OSCAR HORTA University of Santiago de Compostela ABSTRACT It is commonly believed that animal ethics entails respect for natural processes, because nonhuman animals are able to live relatively easy and happy lives in the wild. However, this assumption is wrong. Due to the most widespread reproductive strategy in nature, r-selection, the overwhelming majority of nonhuman animals die shortly after they come into existence. They starve or are eaten alive, which means their suffering vastly outweighs their happiness. Hence, concern for nonhuman animals entails that we should try to intervene in nature to reduce the enormous amount of harm they suffer. Even if this conclusion may seem extremely counter-intuitive at first, it can only be rejected from a speciesist viewpoint. Keywords : Anthropocentrism, natural processes, population dynamics, r-selection, speciesism. 1. THE APPEAL OF THE WORD “N ATURAL ” The word “natural” has a strong appeal for many people. It is commonly used as if it identified a valuable and morally relevant feature. That is, as if the fact of something being natural added some kind of value to it, making it good or at least better in some respect. In present times, however, this assumption has been seriously challenged. This has happened in several ways. For instance, some theorists have discussed whether it would be good or not to enhance the capacities human beings have. This amounts to questioning whether our natural features are ones we should consider good in themselves, and, therefore, something it is bad to alter.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Investigation Into the Welfare of Lobsters in the UK
    Carder, Gemma (2017) A preliminary investigation into the welfare of lobsters in the UK. Animal Sentience 16(19) DOI: 10.51291/2377-7478.1262 This article has appeared in the journal Animal Sentience, a peer-reviewed journal on animal cognition and feeling. It has been made open access, free for all, by WellBeing International and deposited in the WBI Studies Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Animal Sentience 2017.067: Carder on Birch on Precautionary Principle [This commentary raises the question of decapod welfare; commentary on this commentary can be submitted as commentary on Birch and the author, Gemma Carder, will respond – ed.] A preliminary investigation into the welfare of lobsters in the UK Commentary on Birch on Precautionary Principle Gemma Carder Crustacean Compassion, London, United Kingdom Abstract: The welfare of invertebrates is overlooked and their needs are not understood. It is assumed that they do not experience pain and suffering. Studies on decapod crustaceans challenge this assumption. Research has focused on distinguishing between nociception (the ability to detect a harmful stimulus and to react to it reflexively) and pain (an aversive feeling or emotional experience). Findings indicate that decapod crustaceans can experience pain, which supports a case for protecting their welfare. I have investigated the current husbandry conditions of a globally consumed decapod crustacean, the lobster, as housed in tanks inside food outlets in the UK. Housing conditions of 325 lobsters were scored on four factors: restraints, stocking density, lighting and shelter. The data indicate that the basic requirements for lobsters are not being met, thereby compromising their welfare.
    [Show full text]