What is Needed to Roll Cigars?
Historically, animals have been used as a foil for humans, presented less in terms of their own
capabilities and traits than as beings deficient in some fundamentally
human features. The
field
of Human-Animal Studies (HAS) has endeavoured to change this by exploring the relationships
between humans and (nonhuman) animals,
and by challenging our construction, understanding,
and
treatment of them.
This article, published in the journal Society & Animals, reviews the evolution and future of
HAS. For animal advocates, the review provides insight into the broad
spectrum of
perspectives
that make up a field that provided an early academic basis for the animal protection movement.
It also suggests challenges and opportunities
that the field — and animal advocacy — could
face
in the future.
HAS consists of an academic presence through courses, graduate programs, and research centers;
publication venues such as academic journals and book series;
and a public presence through
policy papers, outreach, and conferences. As an academic field, it brings together perspectives,
researchers, and methodologies from
disciplines ranging from animal law and anthropology to
psychology, religion, and cultural studies.
HAS grew out of work in philosophy first published in the 1960s-1980s that, by emphasizing the
moral importance of animal welfare, turned traditionally human-
centered views of animals
on
their head. These works, such as Singer’s Animal Liberation, Midgley’s Beast and Man, and
Regan’s The Case for Animal Rights, became
the foundation of the animal protection and
welfare
movement. As HAS grew, its focus evolved in the groups of animals it was concerned with; how
lines between
humans and animals are drawn; and the methodological approaches used for
research.
One such shift illustrates how HAS has contributed to changing perceptions of animals:
- In raising animal being, HAS has marshalled scientific evidence suggesting that animals have
capabilities and behaviors such as empathy and agency that were
previously thought to be exclusive to humans. - In lowering human being, HAS has shown that humans display many behavioral patterns that
were previously considered limited to animals. For example,
psychological research has demonstrated the role of instinctual and irrational behavior in human decision-making. - In blurring the distinction, HAS has considered both humans and animals as mixtures of other beings, blunting the historical notion of human exceptionalism.
- In begging the question, HAS has embraced differences between humans and animals, promoting the value of respecting differences and “otherness.”
More recent shifts in perspectives in the field of HAS have questioned basic
distinctions made between nature and human culture, and between individuals and
groups. One
noteworthy consequence of this shift has been a new focus on the role of group membership,
creating a tighter connection between HAS and
environmental movements. Furthermore, recent
advances in neuroscience may give scientists a more rigorous grasp of emotion and affect in
animals, which could
fundamentally alter our understanding of the differences between
humans and
animals.
