DOCSLIB.ORG

Summer Academy Animal Law 2021 Conference Handbook

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Summer Academy Animal Law 2021 Conference Handbook Summer Academy Animal Law 2021 Conference Handbook 19/20 June 2021 Live Zoom event Summer Academy Animal Law 2021 We are thankful to taOtfefniwciuanld serp oisnt sdoerr Oofff itzhieelle sponSsuomr dmere sro mAmcaerdaekmadyemie 2021Animal Law 2021 The mission of Animal Interfaith Alliance is to create a united voice for animals from all the major faiths to bring about a world where they are treated with respect and compassion. AIA has the following objectives: 1.To provide a stronger voice for animals through the interfaith group than can be provided by many separate voices from individual faiths; 2.To create a co-ordinated approach across the faiths to educate people on the humane treatment of animals; 3.To create a strong and co-ordinated campaigning organisation; 4.To provide a forum to learn from and share the wisdoms of other cultures and traditions; 5.To disseminate that wisdom through literature, including a regular newsletter, books and orders of service, and through the internet, including a website and social media, which can also be used as a campaign tool; 6.To inspire others through interfaith conferences and services with a major event celebrating World Animal Day on 4th October; 7.To promote a vegetarian/vegan diet, which also embraces the issues of environmental protection, healthy lifestyles and ending world hunger, and to end animal exploitation. www.animal-interfaith-alliance.com Table of contents Foreword 6 Message of Greeting 8 Program 9 Time Zone Conversation Table 11 The Summer Academy 2021 13 Joining the Summer Academy via Zoom 14 Panel Discussion 15 The Summer Academy Team 16 Annex: Preparatory reading list 17 Foreword Humans kill billions of animals every year. While there is already a vibrant discussion about human animal relations in the humanities - one also speaks of an "animal turn" in the humanities - the legal profession still turns a blind eye on the human treatment of animals. In 2016, as an undergaduate student, I founded the Animal Law Academy in Berlin to counteract the "animal blindness" of the legal profession. By offering seminars, workshops and lecture series, the Animal Law Academy aims to promote animal law as a distinct field of study, to arouse interest among law students and budding lawyers for animal law, and to thereby generate momentum for improving the protection of animals through the legal system. However, the Animal Law Academy has another important aim. Like Richard Dawkins said, lectures do not exist to transmit knowledge. Knowledge one derives from books or nowadays also from the internet. Lectures exist to inspire! Animal activists frequently meet with incomprehension and even ridicule by the larger society. In addition, internal strifles and sectarianism inside the animal movement lead to an increased risk of burnout. It is therefore all the more important to regain inspiration on a regular basis! I am very glad that an outstanding line-up of highly inspiring speakers has agreed to teach at the Summer Academy Animal Law 2021. This year, participants have the rare chance to get taught by some of the founding fathers of the modern animal rights movement. The Summer Academy also provides the opportunity to network with fellow course participants from all over the globe. I am very thankful to the speakers who have all waived their speakers fees to make this extraordinary event possible. I am also thankful to the course participants without whom the Summer Academy would not be a Summer Academy. A project such as this only achieves its purpose if new joint projects arise from it. Therefore, I hope that the Summer Academy 2021 will not only be a high-class teaching event, but also a catalyst for new projects and initiatives by the course participants. For the animals, Julius Berrien Message of Greeting I welcome all participants to the Summer Academy Animal Law, and look forward to stimulating discussions of how we can best use the law to protect the rights of animals and reduce the suffering that we are currently inflicting on such vast numbers of them. Best wishes, Peter Singer, AC Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics University Center for Human Values Princeton University Program Saturday, 19 June 2021 8:45 Julius Berrien Introduction 9:00 Peter Singer (Ira W. DeCamp Professor for Bioethics at Princeton Universität): Ethics beyond the Species Boundary 10:00 Jonathan Birch (Associate Professor for Philosophy at LSE): The place of animals in Kantian ethics 11:00 Short break 11:15 Richard D. Ryder (President of the RSPCA): Speciesism, Painism and Legislation 12:15 Barbara Gardner (Animal Interfaith Alliance): The Golden Rule and Animals in the World's Major Faiths 13:15 Lunch break 14:15 Mark Rowlands (Professor for Philosophy at the University of Miami): Contractarianism and Duties to Animals Program Sunday, 20 June 2021 11:00 Antoine F. Goetschel (Global Animal Law GAL Association): Global Animal Protection 12:00 Raffael Fasel (Cambridge Centre for Animal Rights Law): Sentience-based constitutionalism 12:45 Short break 13:00 Panel discussion Protecting animals through law 14:30 Lunch break 15:15 David Favre (Professor for Property Law and Animal Law at Michigan State University): A Few Rights for a Few Animals 16:15 Steven Wise (Nonhuman Rights Project): Legal Rights for Nonhuman Animals All times correspond to CET (Central European Time) Time zone conversion tables The Summer Academy Animal Law 2021 is a truly global event. It spans four continents and a multitude of time zones. Please note that all times in the program correspond to CET (the time zone of Berlin, Germany). There are time zone converters on the internet that you can use to calculate your local time. The following is a schedule of the Summer Academy including time conversion tables. Despite our efforts to provide correct times, we cannot assume any warranty for the correctness of these informations. If in doubt, please double-check. The Summer Academy 2021 On two intense days, the Summer Academy Animal Law explores the philosophic underpinnings and the legal realization of animal rights. On the first day, participants will acquire a solid foundation in the central theories of animal rights. Peter Singer's utilitarian position on animals is of particular historic importance. Richard Ryder developed the moral theory of Painism which differs from utilitarianism in important aspects. Jonathan Birch will present his Kantian deontological theory of animal rights. Mark Rowlands developed a neo-Rawlsian account of animal rights rooted in contractualism. The second day will focus on how to leverage the law to protect animals. The two days are related content-wise and the entire program of the Summer Academy constitutes a harmonious whole. However, the individual blocks do not build on each other. Therefore, it is possible to participate in just some lectures and still not lose track. The lectures are suitable for beginners as well as seasoned academics. Most lectures consist of 30 minutes speech plus 15-30 minutes Q&A and live discussion. The talks are interspersed with five minute breakout sessions. Smalls groups comprising five participants each will be automatically re-directed to individual breakout rooms to discuss and reflect on the lessons learned. After the time has lapsed, participants will automatically be sent back to the main conference room. Some speakers provide preparatory reading lists. The links are to be found in the annex of the conference handbook. The conference language is English. Joining the Summer Academy via Zoom To join the Summer Academy on Zoom please click on this link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84 200532744? pwd=L2F4aFkxa0wxZzdTQWdWeDlhUVd5Zz09 You can also join using the Me eting ID and Code: Meeting ID: 842 0053 2744 Code: Summer2021 Panel discussion: Protecting animals through law Sunday, 20th June, 1pm (Berlin time) The panel discussion on Sunday 1 pm Berlin time (please check time zone conversion tables) will be a special highlight of this year's Summer Academy. A group of leading minds from the fields of animal ethics and animal law will discuss how to best use the law to protect animals. We encourage active contributions from our participants. Please make use of this extraordinary opportunity to ask live questions and to discuss animal philosophy and animal law with the panelists and fellow participants. We look forward to a stimulating discussion. The panelists: Richard Ryder Peter Singer David Favre Jonathan Birch Mark Rowlands Raffael Fasel The Summer Academy Team Julius Berrien is the founder of the Animal Law Academy. He also moderates the sessions. Wera Uschakowa supports the Animal Law Academy as a camera operator. Martin Birr is the Zoom Operator. He also runs his own YouTube channel. Nico Siewert is member of the technical support team. Together with Martin he ensures a smooth running of the Zoom event. Attachment: Preparatory reading list Peter singer Peter Singer's recommendation is that participants read something that takes a different view from him, like the articles by Bernard Williams and Roger Scruton Bernard Williams: The Human Prejudice https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.ph p/4851188/mod_resource/content/1/WI LLIAMS%2C%20Bernard.%20The%20Hu man%20Prejudice.pdf Roger Scruton: Animal Rights https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal- 02163073/document This early paper by Peter Singer summarizes his position on animals Peter Singer: All Animals Are Equal https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/ phil_ex/vol5/iss1/6/ JOnathan The talk by Jonathan Birch is based on his research on Christine Korsgaard's Kantian Birch theory of animal rights Jonathan Birch: The place of animals in Kantian Ethics: Christine M. Korsgaard, Fellow creatures: our obligations to the other animals. http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/102437/1/Birch_p lace_of_animals_in_Kantian_ethics_pu blished.pdf His presentation can be downloaded here: Jonathan Birch: The place of animals in Kantian ethics https://personal.lse.ac.uk/birchj1/pdf/ck.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2. Animal Ethics
    2. Animal ethics It was started to provide animal welfare and stop cruel practices on animals, for example factory farming, animal testing, using animals for experimentation or for entertainment. In the most of Western philosophy animals were considered as beings without moral standing, namely those that do not have to be included into our moral choices. The very typical example of this approach is the Cartesian one, according to Rene Descartes (1596-1650), animals are just simple machines that cannot experience pain. The philosopher was known for making vivisections on living animals and claiming that none of the animals could feel the pain during this. In consequence of this approach until modern times there were conducted many unnecessary and cruel experiments with animal usage, also animal’s condition at factory farms or in entrainment were terrible. All these practices caused a huge amount of suffering of animals. The approach to animals was changed with Peter Singer’s influential book on Animal Liberation (1975). Singer raised the issue that animals can suffer and amount of suffering that they experience is not worth what we gain from these cruel practices. His argumentation was utilitarian, which is one of the approaches of normative ethics. Deontological and utilitarian argumentation in animal ethics Normative ethics aims at providing moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct. This may involve articulating the good habits that we should acquire, the duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our behavior on others. The most popular approaches to normative theory are: deonotology and conseqentialism. The word deontology derives from the Greek words for duty (deon) and science (or study) of (logos).
    [Show full text]
  • Guest of the Issue
    122 Guest of the Issue AVANT Volume III, Number 1/2012 www.avant.edu.pl/en 123 Mark Rowlands AVANT editors and co-workers had a chance to meet Mark Rowlands in Toruń, Poland a year ago in 2011. He gave two talks at Philosophers’ Rally , the first one on “Intentionality and the Extended Mind” (involving the discus- sion of his latest book The New Science of The Mind: From Extended Mind to Embodied Phenomenology, 2010) and the second – less formal, on his The Philosopher and the Wolf (2008) me- moirs. Professor Rowlands is certainly a man of many (philosophical) interests. His works may be divided into three cate- gories: the philosophy of the mind and cognitive science (starting from Super- venience and Materialism (1995) and The Nature Of Consciousness (2001), followed by the 2006 and 2010 books already mentioned), ethics, the moral status of non- human animals and problems of natural environment (Animal Rights (1998), The Environmental Crisis (2000) and Animals Like Us (2002)), and broadly construed cultural criticism and philosophy 101-style books (The Philosopher at the End of the Universe (2003), Everything I Know I Learned from TV (2005) and Fame (2008)). Rowland’s article Representing without Representations published in this issue is related to his earlier book, Body Language (2006). Mark Rowlands is currently the Professor of Philosophy at the University of Miami. He began his academic career with an undergraduate degree in engineering at the University of Manchester and then switched to philosophy. He was awarded his PhD in philosophy at the University of Oxford.
    [Show full text]
  • Animals & Ethics
    v ABOUT THIS BOOK This book provides an overview of the current debates about the nature and extent of our moral obligations to animals. Which, if any, uses of animals are morally wrong, which are morally permissible (i.e., not wrong) and why? What, if any, moral obligations do we, individually and as a society (and a global community), have towards animals and why? How should animals be treated? Why? We will explore the most influential and most developed answers to these questions – given by philosophers, scientists, and animal advocates and their critics – to try to determine which positions are supported by the best moral reasons. Topics include: x general theories of ethics and their implications for animals, x moral argument analysis, x general theories of our moral relations to animals, x animal minds, and x the uses of animals for food, clothing, experimentation, entertainment, hunting, as companions or pets, and other purposes. The book offers discussion questions and paper assignments to encourage readers to develop positions on theoretical and practice issues concerning ethics and animals, give reasons for their support, and respond to possible objections and criticisms. This book is organized around an initial presentation of three of the most influential methods of moral thinking for human to human interactions. We then see how these ethical theories have been extended to apply to human to animal interactions, i.e., how humans ought to treat non-human animals. These perspectives are: x a demand for equality or equal moral consideration of interests (developed by Peter Singer); vi x a demand for respect of the moral right to respectful treatment (developed by Tom Regan); and x a demand that moral decisions be made fairly and impartially and the use of a novel thought experiment designed to ensure this (developed by Mark Rowlands, following John Rawls).
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Rights and Self-Defense Theory
    The Journal of Value Inquiry (2009) 43:165–177 Ó Springer 2009 DOI 10.1007/s10790-009-9149-9 Animal Rights and Self-Defense Theory JOHN HADLEY School of Communication, Centre for Applied Philosophy & Public Ethics (CAPPE), Charles Sturt University, N5 Cunningham House, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst, NSW 2795, Australia; e-mail: [email protected] Through his recent discussion of rights-based approaches to the morality of abortion, Jeff McMahan sheds light on the implications for extending self-defense theory to nonpersons that are afforded full moral status.1 McMahanÕs principal target is Judith Thompson who argues that a woman has a right to procure an abortion on the grounds of self-defense, even if the fetus is afforded maximum moral status.2 Central to ThompsonÕs argument is her claim that people should not be obliged to help others at great cost to themselves. She says: ‘‘[N]obody is morally required to make large sacrifices, of health, of all other interests and concerns, of all other duties and commitments, for nine years, or even for nine months, in order to keep another person alive.’’3 According to Thompson, while it is reasonable to expect people to provide so-called minimal aid and assistance to individuals in need, it is asking too much of women to demand they carry an unwanted pregnancy to term given the significant personal costs involved. While broadly sympathetic to her pro-abortion position, McMahan believes that Thompson fails to notice a decisive implication of her thoroughly rights-based theory. His focus is not her key claim that the duty to assist others only goes so far but her treating a fetus as a person with full moral rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Syllabus Is Subject to Change
    Photo: JoAnne McArthur Ethics and Animals1 Fall 2015 ANST-UA 400.001 Descripon This course is an introduc<on to the ethics of our rela<onships to nonhuman animals, from historical and contemporary standpoints. We will examine the ways animals have been denied and granted moral status in philosophical tradi<ons and in prac<ce, the significance of the human/animal difference, and what “speciesism” means. We will then survey the main philosophical theories arguing about the treatment of animals, and we will cover various prac<cal issues surrounding our use of, or concern for, animals. We will address the morality of raising and killing animals for food, animal experimenta<on, keeping animals in cap<vity for entertainment or science, keeping them as pets, managing urban wildlife, reducing suffering in the wild, wildlife conserva<on, etc. We will ask whether animals should have legal rights, and which are the best strategies to protect them. There are no prior requirements in philosophy, animal studies, ethics, or any other field, except for a genuine willingness to confront with a variety of views, concepts, arguments, and hot topics. Given the controversial nature of the subject, student par<cipa<on, based on careful argumenta<on and respecRul apprecia<on of different views, is strongly encouraged; no specific view will be favored. Praccal Informaon Time: Tues. 5:00-7:30pm Place: Global Center for Academic and Spiritual Life, #269 Instructor: Nicolas Delon Email: [email protected] Office: 285 Mercer st, #1006 Office hours: T & W 9-11:30am (reserve slot: goo.gl/0tl38l), or by appointment Grader: Sharisse Kanet, [email protected], office hours by appointment 1 This syllabus is subject to change.
    [Show full text]
  • E. Rincón Y J. Riechmann TAUROMAQUIA 2017
    Publicado en Diálogo Filosófico 99, septiembre-diciembre de 2017, p. 393-418. ISSN 0213-1196. ¿Cabe seguir justificando la tauromaquia en el siglo XXI? Jorge Riechmann (UAM, Madrid) Eduardo Rincón (UNIMINUTO, Bogotá) RESUMEN: Necesitamos construir una cultura no de dominación sobre la naturaleza, sino de simbiosis con ella. En esa perspectiva de transformación cultural profunda, renunciar al toreo tiene una dimensión simbólica importantísima –más allá del sufrimiento de los animales directamente implicados (que son muy pocos en comparación con los implicados en las prácticas harto más atroces de la ganadería industrial). La filosofía moral contemporánea ha argumentado con solidez la necesidad de dejar atrás el antropocentrismo y el especismo en nuestro trato con los animales no humanos. ABSTRACT: We need to build a culture not of domination over nature, but of symbiosis with it. In this perspective of profound cultural transformation, renouncing bullfighting has an important symbolic dimension - beyond the suffering of the animals directly involved (which are very few compared to those involved in the most atrocious practices of industrial livestock). Contemporary moral philosophy has strongly argued the need to leave behind anthropocentrism and speciesism in our dealings with nonhuman animals. PALABRAS CLAVE: tauromaquia, especismo, antropocentrismo, utilitarismo, derechos, virtudes. 1 Planteamiento En el contexto de las discusiones contemporáneas sobre el tipo de relaciones que tenemos con los animales no humanos, muchos son los debates y las fuentes argumentativas que dan cuenta de la complejidad del asunto. Con respecto a la tauromaquia, han sido reiteradas las discusiones que se han venido sosteniendo en España, Colombia, México, Portugal y Francia, países en donde aún subsiste a la baja la práctica del toreo en diversas modalidades.
    [Show full text]
  • Editors' Introduction
    Editors’ Introduction Extending the Boundaries of “The Ethical” I also think that quite clearly, even if it is not as simple as that, even if animals are not considered as human beings, the ethical extends to living beings. I really think so. —Emmanuel Levinas, “The Animal Interview” Since the topic of Levinas and animals has by now received rather a lot of attention, the reader may be wondering why we felt compelled to compile this volume of essays. The short answer is that though Levinas’s neglect of animals in his philosophical work has already been subject to repeated criticism,1 the majority of commentators and critics still write as though Levinas’s “profound anthropocentrism and humanism”2 rather than a serious flaw in need of remedy, were entirely justified. Most take it for granted that it is not possible for the Other to be anything other than human. Only posterity knows whether this will ever change, though it looks unlikely that it will. This is not due to any deficiencies in the arguments for including animals within the scope of Levinas’s ethics. It is probably because the force behind the conviction that humans are the center of the moral universe is more affective than philosophical, and wells from the same source as what Freud called “the universal narcissism of men.” But even if a single collection of essays like this one is unlikely to make much of a difference here, it behooves us as academics to keep reminding ourselves that the animal question is a live one and as long as an ethics like Levinas’s does not take the question into account, then so much the worse for it philosophically.
    [Show full text]
  • La Argumentación De Singer En Liberación Animal: Concepciones Normativas, Interés En Vivir Y Agregacionismo
    La argumentación de Singer en Liberación animal: concepciones normativas, interés en vivir y agregacionismo OSCAR HORTA Fundación Española para la Ciencia y la Tecnología/ Rutgers University [email protected] Resumen: Este artículo examina los presupuestos metodológicos, axiológicos y normativos en los que descansa la que posiblemente sea la obra más co- nocida de Peter Singer, Liberación animal. Se exploran las tensiones entre la posición normativa, de compromisos mínimos, que se intenta adoptar en esa obra, y las posiciones de Singer acerca del utilitarismo de las preferencias y el argumento de la reemplazabilidad. Se buscará elucidar en particular el modo en el que surgen tales tensiones al abordarse la consideración del agregacio- nismo y el interés en vivir en relación con el uso de animales no humanos. Palabras clave: especismo, principio de no maleficencia, utilitarismo, valor de la vida Abstract: This paper examines the methodological, axiological and normative assumptions on which Animal Liberation —arguably the most poular work by Peter Singer— rests. It explores the tensions between the normative position this book intends to adopt, which tries to compromise as little as possible with any specific normative theory, and Singer’s views on preference utilitarianism and the replaceability argument. In particular, the paper tries to assess the way in which such tensions arise when aggregationism and the question of the interest in living are considered in relation to the use of nonhuman animals. Key words: speciesism, principle of nonmaleficence, utilitarianism, value of life 1 . Introducción Las posiciones defendidas por Peter Singer en Liberación animal1 han alcanzado una notable popularidad. De hecho, aunque a menudo se olvide, fue esta obra la que catapultó inicialmente a Singer al primer 1 P.
    [Show full text]
  • BRIDGET WILLIAMS.Pdf
    This dissertation is submitted in part fulfilment of the requirements for the Master’s Degree in Anthrozoology Walking With Wolves: An Ethnographic Investigation into the Relationship Between Socialised Wolves and Humans. Bridget Williams 2012 Master’s Degrees by Examination and Dissertation Declaration Form. 1. This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not being concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree. Signed……Bridget Williams.……………………………………………………… Date …………30th March 2012………………………………………... 2. This dissertation is being submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of …Masters in Anthrozoology……………………………………………................. Signed …… Bridget Williams …………………………………………… Date ………30th March 2012………………………………………...………………………... 3. This dissertation is the result of my own independent work/investigation, except where otherwise stated. Other sources are acknowledged by footnotes giving explicit references. A bibliography is appended. Signed candidate: ………… Bridget Williams ……………………… Date: ……………30th March 2012………………………………………...……. 4. I hereby give consent for my dissertation, if accepted, to be available for photocopying, inter- library loan, and for deposit in the University’s digital repository Signed (candidate)……………………………………….………….…………... Date………………………………………………….…………….…………….. Supervisor’s Declaration. I am satisfied that this work is the result of the student’s own efforts. Signed: ………………………………………………………………………….. Date: ……………………………………………………………………………... i. ABSTRACT Wolves
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association
    January 2008 Volume 81, Issue 3 Proceedings and Addresses of The American Philosophical Association apa The AmericAn PhilosoPhicAl Association Pacific Division Program University of Delaware Newark, DE 19716 www.apaonline.org The American Philosophical Association Pacific Division Eighty-Second Annual Meeting Hilton Pasadena Pasadena, CA March 18 - 23, 2008 Proceedings and Addresses of The American Philosophical Association Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association (ISSN 0065-972X) is published five times each year and is distributed to members of the APA as a benefit of membership and to libraries, departments, and institutions for $75 per year. It is published by The American Philosophical Association, 31 Amstel Ave., University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716. Periodicals Postage Paid at Newark, DE and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Proceedings and Addresses, The American Philosophical Association, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716. Editor: David E. Schrader Phone: (302) 831-1112 Publications Coordinator: Erin Shepherd Fax: (302) 831-8690 Associate Editor: Anita Silvers Web: www.apaonline.org Meeting Coordinator: Linda Smallbrook Proceedings and Addresses of The American Philosophical Association, the major publication of The American Philosophical Association, is published five times each academic year in the months of September, November, January, February, and May. Each annual volume contains the programs for the meetings of the three Divisions; the membership list; Presidential Addresses; news of the Association, its Divisions and Committees, and announcements of interest to philosophers. Other items of interest to the community of philosophers may be included by decision of the Editor or the APA Board of Officers. Microfilm copies are available through National Archive Publishing Company, Periodicals/Acquisitions Dept., P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Advocacy in a Pluralist Society Submitted September 2015
    Ian Starbuck School of Politics and Law PhD Thesis Title: Animal Advocacy in a Pluralist Society Submitted September 2015 Contents Introduction………………………………...………..…...…..…..1 Chapter One: Utilitarianism and Animal Advocacy…..………..13 Chapter Two: Moral Rights and Animal Advocacy….….……..36 Chapter Three: Contractarianism and Animal Advocacy…........73 Chapter Four: Animals and the Ethic of Care……...….…..……93 Chapter Five: Capabilities and Animals…………….….…...…112 Chapter Six: Animal Citizenship………………………...…….137 Chapter Seven: Multiculturalism and Animals………....……..168 Chapter Eight: Animal Advocacy and Liberalism……….……192 Conclusion……………………………………….…...…..……219 Bibliography and References………………………....………..231 Introduction Human concern with the moral status of non-human animals can be seen to stretch quite some way back into human history. In ancient Greece such concerns were considered to be very much a part of the ethical agenda, with thinkers on the issue being divided into four main schools of thought: animism; vitalism; mechanism; and anthropocentrism (Ryder 1989, chapter two). The leading light of the animist school was the renowned mathematician Pythagoras (circa 530 BC), who asserted the view that animals, like humans, were in possession of immaterial souls which, upon death, would be reincarnated in another human or animal body. In accordance with his beliefs, Pythagoras practiced kindness to animals and adhered to a vegetarian diet. Vitalism, of which perhaps the most famous exponent was Aristotle (384-322 BC), held to a belief in the interdependence of soul and body. Aristotle accepted the idea that human beings were animals, but he considered them to be at the apex of a chain of being in which the less rational existed only to serve the needs of the more rational.
    [Show full text]
  • Book Reviews – October 2011
    Scope: An Online Journal of Film and Television Studies Issue 21 October 2011 Book Reviews – October 2011 Table of Contents History by Hollywood By Robert Brent Toplin Cinema Wars: Hollywood Film and Politics in the Bush-Cheney Era By Douglas Kellner Cinematic Geopolitics By Michael J. Shapiro A Review by Brian Faucette ................................................................... 4 What Cinema Is! By Dudley Andrew The Personal Camera: Subjective Cinema and the Essay Film By Laura Rascaroli A Review by Daniele Rugo ................................................................... 12 All about Almodóvar: A Passion for Cinema Edited by Brad Epps and Despina Kakoudaki Stephen King on the Big Screen By Mark Browning A Review by Edmund P. Cueva ............................................................. 17 Crisis and Capitalism in Contemporary Argentine Cinema By Joanna Page Writing National Cinema: Film Journals and Film Culture in Peru By Jeffrey Middents Latsploitation, Exploitation Cinemas, and Latin America Edited by Victoria Ruétalo and Dolores Tierney A Review by Rowena Santos Aquino ...................................................... 22 Film Theory and Contemporary Hollywood Movies 1 Book Reviews Edited by Warren Buckland Post-Classical Hollywood: Film Industry, Style and Ideology Since 1945 By Barry Langford Hollywood Blockbusters: The Anthropology of Popular Movies By David Sutton and Peter Wogan A Review by Steen Christiansen ........................................................... 28 The British Cinema Book Edited
    [Show full text]