Skip to main content
placeholder image

Uncanny Animals: Thinking Differently About Ethics and the Animal-Human Relationship

Journal Article


Abstract


  • Maintaining the attention to bodily difference human and

    animal ontology has long been constructed on rigid physical

    characterizations seemingly untouched by culture. In

    “Reframing the Ethical Issues in Part-Human Animal Research,”

    Haber and Benham (2012) call into question most

    of the formal elements of essentialism that an earlier mode

    of thought took for granted. Two views on the nature of human

    and interspecies animal bodies are in contention here.

    The first offers an argument grounded in the essential developmental

    properties of human and animal material and

    biological systems such that giving life to “animals with human

    derived material,” exemplified by animal–human hybrids

    and chimeras, effaces physical distinctions between

    animal and human. Dualism is invoked as an interpretive

    aid, structuring thought and shaping understanding.

    Against nonhuman animals, human life, in all its stages and

    forms, uniquely requires some fundamental form of moral

    consideration. Because of this presumptive obligation, an

    “inexorable moral confusion” is an inevitable by-product

    of scientific change, since fixed constructions of animal and

    human bodies as unified and separate wholes are lost in any

    clear-cut sense (Robert and Baylis 2003).

Authors


  •   Irvine, Rob (external author)
  •   Degeling, Chris
  •   Kerridge, Ian (external author)

Publication Date


  • 2012

Citation


  • Irvine, R., Degeling, C. & Kerridge, I. (2012). Uncanny Animals: Thinking Differently About Ethics and the Animal-Human Relationship. The American Journal of Bioethics, 12 (9), 30-32.

Scopus Eid


  • 2-s2.0-84865027966

Number Of Pages


  • 2

Start Page


  • 30

End Page


  • 32

Volume


  • 12

Issue


  • 9

Place Of Publication


  • United States

Abstract


  • Maintaining the attention to bodily difference human and

    animal ontology has long been constructed on rigid physical

    characterizations seemingly untouched by culture. In

    “Reframing the Ethical Issues in Part-Human Animal Research,”

    Haber and Benham (2012) call into question most

    of the formal elements of essentialism that an earlier mode

    of thought took for granted. Two views on the nature of human

    and interspecies animal bodies are in contention here.

    The first offers an argument grounded in the essential developmental

    properties of human and animal material and

    biological systems such that giving life to “animals with human

    derived material,” exemplified by animal–human hybrids

    and chimeras, effaces physical distinctions between

    animal and human. Dualism is invoked as an interpretive

    aid, structuring thought and shaping understanding.

    Against nonhuman animals, human life, in all its stages and

    forms, uniquely requires some fundamental form of moral

    consideration. Because of this presumptive obligation, an

    “inexorable moral confusion” is an inevitable by-product

    of scientific change, since fixed constructions of animal and

    human bodies as unified and separate wholes are lost in any

    clear-cut sense (Robert and Baylis 2003).

Authors


  •   Irvine, Rob (external author)
  •   Degeling, Chris
  •   Kerridge, Ian (external author)

Publication Date


  • 2012

Citation


  • Irvine, R., Degeling, C. & Kerridge, I. (2012). Uncanny Animals: Thinking Differently About Ethics and the Animal-Human Relationship. The American Journal of Bioethics, 12 (9), 30-32.

Scopus Eid


  • 2-s2.0-84865027966

Number Of Pages


  • 2

Start Page


  • 30

End Page


  • 32

Volume


  • 12

Issue


  • 9

Place Of Publication


  • United States