Везде

RAS Global AffairsСША & Канада: экономика – политика – культура USA & Canada: Economics – Politics – Culture

  • ISSN (Print) 26866730
  • ISSN (Online) 3034-6045

We-Alpha: Toward a Model of Social Organization of the Dog and Human

You can
PII
S086954150000401-1-1
DOI
10.31857/S086954150000401-1
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Denis Gvozdikov
Volume/ Edition
Volume / 4
Pages
44-56
Abstract

The article addresses the aspects of relationships between humans and animals that cross over a number of discursive fields such as intellectual theory, social practice, and cultural models of the living. The argument running through them all is that the accepted ways of describing the animal world reflect our own, culturally shaped, view of the “natural” social organization. The ethics of relationships between the humans and “subaltern” species may begin to be transformed when the dominant model of understanding these relationships comes to be challenged by alternative ones. Changes in ethical attitudes towards animals are possible and may stem from the recognition of commonality of “animic” features and principles, recognition of animal subjectivity, and incorporation of animals into a shared symbolic space of the social life and mutual exchange that unfold as a mutual way of being.

Keywords
anthropology of animals, ethics of the living, intra-species research, humans and dogs
Date of publication
11.10.2018
Year of publication
2018
Number of purchasers
10
Views
1853

References

  1. 1. Guillo, D. 2017. Liudi i sobaki [Dogs and Humans]. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie.
  2. 2. Stivenson, S.A. 2010. Laiat’ zapreshcheno: distsiplinirovanie zhivotnykh i ikh vladel’tsev v Yuzhnoi Kalifornii [Barking is Prohibited: The Disciplining of Pets and Their Owners in Southern California]. The Journal of Social Policy Studies 8 (2): 253–272. https://jsps.hse.ru/article/view/3560
  3. 3. Archambault, J.S. 2015. Taking Love Seriously in Human-Plant Relations in Mozambique: Towards an Anthropology of Affective Encounters. Cultural Anthropology 31 (2): 244–271. https://doi.org/10.14506/ca31.2.05
  4. 4. Barker, R.A. 1997. How Can We Train Leaders if We Do Not Know What Leadership Is? Human Relations 50 (4): 343–362. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016950726862
  5. 5. Bateson, G. 1973. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. London: Paladin.
  6. 6. Bernard, A. 2016. Unity versus Interdisciplinarity: A Future for Anthropology. Current Anthropology 57 (13): 145–153. https://doi.org/10.1086/686022
  7. 7. Brabec de Mori, B., and A. Seeger. 2013. Introduction: Considering Music, Humans, and Non-humans. Ethnomusicology Forum 22 (3): 269–286. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17411912.2013.844527
  8. 8. Bradshaw, J.W.S., E.J. Blackwell, and R.A. Casey. 2009. Dominance in Domestic Dogs – Useful Construct or Bad Habit? Journal of Veterinary Behavior 4: 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2008.08.004
  9. 9. Chiarelli, B., ed. 2011. Global Bioethics – Perspective for Human Survival. London: InTech. https://doi.org/10.5772/1009
  10. 10. Chiarelli, B. 2014. The Bioecological Bases of Global Bioethics. Global Bioethics 25 (1): 19–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/11287462.2014.897068
  11. 11. Cohn, E. 2014. Toward an Ethical Practice in the Anthropocene. Hau: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 4 (1): 459–464. http://dx.doi.org/10.14318/Hau4.1.028
  12. 12. Crutzen, P.J. 2002. Geology of Mankind. Nature 415: 23–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/415023a
  13. 13. Descola, P. 2013. Beyond Nature and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  14. 14. Descola, P. 2014. The Grid and the Tree: Reply to Marshall Sahlins’ Comment. Hau: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 4 (1): 295–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.14318/Hau4.1.015
  15. 15. Descola, P., Pálsson, G., eds. 1996. Nature and Society: Anthropological Perspectives. London: Psychology Press.
  16. 16. Gatti, R.C. 2016. Self-Consciousness: Beyond the Looking-Glass and What Dogs Found There. Ethology, Ecology & Evolution 28 (2): 232–240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03949370.2015.1102777
  17. 17. Godelier, M. 1978. Infrastructures, Societies, and History. Current Anthropology 19 (4):763–771.
  18. 18. Graeber, D. 2012. Dead Zones of the Imagination: On Violence, Bureaucracy, and Interpretive Labor. Hau: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 2 (2): 105–128. http://dx.doi.org/10.14318/Hau2.2.007
  19. 19. Haraway, D. 2003. The Companion Species Manifesto: Dogs, People and Significant Otherness. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press.
  20. 20. Haraway, D. 2007. When Species Meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  21. 21. Horowitz, A. 2011. Theory of Mind in Dogs?: Examining Method and Concept. Learning & Behavior 39 (4): 314–317. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13420-011-0041-7
  22. 22. Kappeler, P.M., and J.B. Silk, eds. 2010. Mind the Gap: Tracing the Origins of Human. Heidelberg: Springer.
  23. 23. Khan, N. 2014. Dogs and Humans and What Earth Can Be: Filaments of Muslim Ecological Thought. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 4 (3): 245–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.14318/Hau4.3.015
  24. 24. Knight, C., and J. Lewis. 2017. Wild Voices: Mimicry, Reversal, Metaphor, and the Emergence of Language. Current Anthropology 58 (4): 435-453. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/692905
  25. 25. Langford, G.M. 2013. Wilder Powers: Morality and Animality in Tales of War and Terror. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 3 (3): 223–244. http://dx.doi.org/10.14318/Hau3.3.009
  26. 26. Lock, P. 2017. Elephants as Persons, Affective Apprenticeship, and Fieldwork with Nonhuman Informants in Nepal. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 7 (1): 353–376. http://dx.doi.org/10.14318/Hau7.1.024
  27. 27. Lumsden, C., and E.O. Wilson. 2005. Genes, Mind, and Culture: The Coevolutionary Process. Hackensack: World Scientific.
  28. 28. Rowel, T.E. 1974. The Concept of Social Dominance. Behavioral Biology 11 (2): 131–154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0091-6773 (74)90289-2
  29. 29. Sahlins, M. 2013. On the Culture of Material Value and the Cosmography of Riches. Hau: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 3 (2): 161–195. http://dx.doi.org/10.14318/Hau3.2.010
  30. 30. Sahlins, M. 2014. On the Ontological Scheme of Beyond Nature and Culture. Hau: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 4 (1): 281–290. http://dx.doi.org/10.14318/Hau4.1.013
  31. 31. Sahlins, M. 2011. What Kinship Is (Part One). Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 17(1): 2–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9655.2010.01666.x
  32. 32. Severi, C. 2015. The Chimera Principle: An Anthropology of Memory and Imagination. Chicago: Hau Books.
  33. 33. Simondon, G. 2016. O zhivotnom i cheloveke [On Animal and Man]. Moscow: Grundrisse.
  34. 34. Smith, M., and D.G.C. Harper. 1995. Animal Signals: Models and Terminology. Journal of Theoretical Biology 177: 305–311.
  35. 35. Stépanoff, C. 2012. Human-Animal “Joint Commitment” in a Reindeer Herding System. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 2 (2): 287–312. http://dx.doi.org/10.14318/Hau2.2.015
  36. 36. van der Borg, J.A.M., M.B.H. Schilder, C.M. Vinke, and H. de Vries. 2015. Dominance in Domestic Dogs: A Quantitative Analysis of Its Behavioural Measures. PLOS ONE 10 (8): 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133978
  37. 37. Viveiros de Castro, E. 1998. Cosmological Deixis and Amerindian Perspectivism. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 4: 469–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3034157
  38. 38. Viveiros de Castro, E. 2012. Cosmological Perspectivism in Amazonia and Elsewhere. Manchester: Hau Network of Ethnographic Theory.
QR
Translate

Индексирование

Scopus

Scopus

Scopus

Crossref

Scopus

Higher Attestation Commission

At the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Scopus

Scientific Electronic Library