How our love of pets grew from a clash of world views

Surekha Davies

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00541-7

IF: 64.8

2024-02-24

Nature

Abstract:Indigenous Americans' relationships with and knowledge of animals have influenced how Europeans have thought about animals since 1492. Indigenous Americans' relationships with and knowledge of animals have influenced how Europeans have thought about animals since 1492.

multidisciplinary sciences

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

A Special Relationship-Aspects of Human-Animal Interaction in Birds of Prey, Brown Bears, Beavers, and Elk in Prehistoric Europe

Ulrich Schmölcke,Oliver Grimm

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14030417

2024-01-27

Abstract:Humans have developed a special relationship with some animal species throughout history, even though these animals were never domesticated. Based on raptors, bears, beavers, and elks, the question of whether there are similarities between the perception of these animals that triggered a special kind of fascination in humans and how the relationship between humans and these animals changed between Mesolithic age and medieval times is addressed. As we demonstrate, the categorical antagonism between 'animal' and 'human' is a concept that saw different kinds of influence, from the advent of sedentarism and husbandry to Christianity and from philosophical thinking in Classical Antiquity and the Period of Enlightenment. In prehistory and early history, we find different, opposing world views across time, cultures, and periods. Differences between animals and humans have been considered as fluid, and humans have had to engage with animals and their needs. The well-known and famous 'bear ceremonies' attested to different peoples and times were not unique, but were a part of belief systems that also included other animal species. Among the considered animals, certain raptor species attracted the attention of humans who tried to establish contact with them, as companions, whereas bears were almost 'disguised humans' due to all their similarities with humans, but they were also tabooed beings whose real names had to be avoided.
The History of the Use of Animals in Research and the Development of the Animal Welfare Concept

J. E. Goeke

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/10915818709075130

1987-03-01

Journal of the American College of Toxicology

Abstract:The ideological underpinning of the animal welfare/animal rights movement is not a recent development, but rather the result of a revolutionary change in Western man's perception of the natural world between 1500 and 1800. In 1500, these basic perceptions were as follows: (1) the world was created for man's sake and all other species were subordinate to his wishes, (2) man's stance toward other species was essentially that of subjugation or conquest, (3) humans were absolutely unique and separate from the rest of creation. By 1800, these basic perceptions had been fundamentally altered to reflect the following: (1) the world did not exist for nor was it created for man alone, (2) man's stance toward the natural world and especially toward other animals was that of stewardship, and animals were within the sphere of moral concern, (3) man was a superior animal, although the basis for this superiority was not entirely clear, and was related to all other animals through physiologic similarities and the powers of feeling and sensation.
I am Homo Sapien: Perceptions of Evolutionary Theory, Animal Identity, and Human–Animal Relationships Among US Law and Policy Students

Leah J. Widdicombe,Seana Dowling-Guyer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2021.1926706

2021-06-16

Anthrozoös

Abstract:People's perception of the human–animal relationship is complex, as is our regard for animal welfare within law and policy decisions. Little attention has been paid to how political stakeholders utilize culture to identify themselves within the kingdom Animalia or how their identity relates to their political concern for animals. This research provides an overview of the beliefs, identities, and political agendas of law and policy students in the United States through an exploratory, mixed-methods study composed of two concurrent parts: (1) a cross-sectional online survey (n = 231) and (2) in-person, in-depth interviews (n = 21). Part 1 examined (a) cultural beliefs about human origins and political concern for nonhuman animals; (b) when and to what extent participants identify as an animal; and (c) how animal identity relates to their beliefs and political concern for nonhuman animals. Part 2 elaborated on underlying themes, identifying nuances in the perspectives identified in Part 1. Most participants classified humans as animals and their understanding of human origins was predominantly science-based but occasionally referenced religion. Those who stated a belief in human evolution scored significantly higher on the animal identity scale compared with those with purely Creationist beliefs. In turn, identifying more strongly as an animal was significantly associated with placing greater importance on animal issues in law and policy. A structural equation model was fitted and revealed that animal identity mediated the relationship between beliefs about human origins and the ranked importance of animal issues. The most common situations participants recalled feeling like an animal were survival, sexual, physiological, and being outdoors. As the first study to provide a mixed-methods descriptive experience of animal identity, with a focus on cultural understanding of evolutionary theory, these findings describe how the formation of an animal identity might relate to public policy decisions and are particularly relevant to animal activists and identity researchers.
Medicine, Value, and Knowledge in the Veterinary Clinic: Questions for and From Medical Anthropology and the Medical Humanities

Jane Desmond

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2022.780482

IF: 3.471

2022-03-14

Frontiers in Veterinary Science

Abstract:The welcome development of the veterinary humanities, and veterinary anthropology specifically, raises the question of its potential relationship with the now well-established field(s) of the medical humanities, and of medical anthropology. Although there are national variations, the term “medical humanities” generally refers to either the tapping of the humanities to improve medical education by developing, through engagement with the humanities like literature and visual art, skills in empathy, visualization and expressivity, or alternatively, it refers to the application of humanities approaches of cultural critique to the presumptions, practices and institutions of the human medical world to denaturalize the ideologies of knowledge that contemporary human medicine professions depend upon. This article reflects on the potential impact that the development of a veterinary medical humanities could have on the field of (human) medical humanities and vice versa. Could such a development force a re-conception of notions of agency, of consent, and of the position of “patient” when the (human based) medical humanities is expanded to include both human and veterinary medicine? What would the potential usefulness, or limitations, both in conceptual and in applied terms, be of constructing a multi-species notion of “medical humanities?” What can such a comparative approach offer to veterinary medicine, in practice and in terms of the curricula of veterinary training? To reflect on these questions, this article draws on my multiple years of fieldwork in veterinary clinics and classrooms to first lay out the constituent components of the formal practice of contemporary veterinary medicine (at least in the U.S.) in terms of the roles that species specificity and relations to humans play in the delivery of care, and then seeks to center the animal in these practices to ask questions about consent, resistance, veterinary obligation, and the role of finance in comparison with human medicine. These similarities and differences will form the basis for a consideration of the effects of enlarging the medical humanities to encompass more than one species.

veterinary sciences
Early dispersal of domestic horses into the Great Plains and northern Rockies

William Timothy Treal Taylor,Pablo Librado,Chief Joseph American Horse,Carlton Shield Chief Gover,Jimmy Arterberry,Antonia Loretta Afraid of Bear-Cook,Harold Left Heron,Robert Milo Yellow Hair,Mario Gonzalez,Bill Means,Sam High Crane,Wendell W. Yellow Bull,Barbara Dull Knife,Anita Afraid of Bear,Cruz Tecumseh Collin,Chance Ward,Theresa A Pasqual,Lorelei Chauvey,Laure Tonasso-Calviere,Stéphanie Schiavinato,Andaine Seguin-Orlando,Antoine Fages,Naveed Khan,Clio Der Sarkissian,Xuexue Liu,Stefanie Wagner,Beth Ginondidoy Leonard,Bruce L Manzano,Nancy O'Malley,Jennifer A Leonard,Eloísa Bernáldez-Sánchez,Eric Barrey,Léa Charliquart,Emilie Robbe,Thibault Denoblet,Kristian Gregersen,Alisa O Vershinina,Jaco Weinstock,Petra Rajić Šikanjić,Marjan Mashkour,Irina Shingiray,Jean-Marc Aury,Aude Perdereau,Saleh Alquraishi,Ahmed H Alfarhan,Khaled A S Al-Rasheid,Tajana Trbojević Vukičević,Marcel Buric,Eberhard Sauer,Mary Lucas,Joan Brenner-Coltrain,John R Bozell,Cassidee A Thornhill,Victoria Monagle,Angela Perri,Cody Newton,W Eugene Hall,Joshua L Conver,Petrus Le Roux,Sasha G Buckser,Caroline Gabe,Juan Bautista Belardi,Christina I Barrón-Ortiz,Isaac A Hart,Christina Ryder,Matthew Sponheimer,Beth Shapiro,John Southon,Joss Hibbs,Charlotte Faulkner,Alan Outram,Laura Patterson Rosa,Katelyn Palermo,Marina Solé,Alice William,Wayne McCrory,Gabriella Lindgren,Samantha Brooks,Camille Eché,Cécile Donnadieu,Olivier Bouchez,Patrick Wincker,Gregory Hodgins,Sarah Trabert,Brandi Bethke,Patrick Roberts,Emily Lena Jones,Yvette Running Horse Collin,Ludovic Orlando

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adc9691

IF: 56.9

2023-03-31

Science

Abstract:The horse is central to many Indigenous cultures across the American Southwest and the Great Plains. However, when and how horses were first integrated into Indigenous lifeways remain contentious, with extant models derived largely from colonial records. We conducted an interdisciplinary study of an assemblage of historic archaeological horse remains, integrating genomic, isotopic, radiocarbon, and paleopathological evidence. Archaeological and modern North American horses show strong Iberian genetic affinities, with later influx from British sources, but no Viking proximity. Horses rapidly spread from the south into the northern Rockies and central plains by the first half of the 17th century CE, likely through Indigenous exchange networks. They were deeply integrated into Indigenous societies before the arrival of 18th-century European observers, as reflected in herd management, ceremonial practices, and culture.
Meeting Your Ancestors – Sticks, Stones, and Discord in Earth's Outposts

Joel Berger,Naresh Kusi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4656991

IF: 4

2024-04-25

Global Ecology and Conservation

Abstract:An unusual problem at the extreme edges of Earth involves marginalized people and associated livelihoods when their domestic stock is lost to wild ancestors. Animosity to wildlife results due to economic costs, personal injury, and death. Despite IUCN recognition of biodiversity at a policy front, justice and equity for humans have not been well integrated in these realms. In particular, Tibetans, Uyghurs, Changpas, Nepalis, Bhutanese, and Brokpa, as well as Mongolians in the Gobi Desert deal with these realities when the wild progenitors of their livestock attempt to appropriate genetically-related domestic females to biologically propagate. Among the highly endangered ancestors are the likes of wild camels, wild yaks, banteng, and gaur. Beyond Asia, some similarity of issues still thwart African, and South and North American pastoralists and involve species from caribou and bison to wild sheep and goats, and guanacos. Biologically reality has trumped our evolutionary innovation to benefit ourselves through domestication because of the powerful mutual attraction between descendent domestics and their wild ancestors. Conservation biologists and on-the-ground practitioners must engage more with local pastoralists to tackle these complex and infrequently described conflicts on how best to implement protective policies. Sticks and stones are neither the answer for pastoral safety nor for avoiding introgression among these iconic mammals.

biodiversity conservation,ecology
Our Wild Companions: Domestic cats in the Anthropocene

Sarah L Crowley,Martina Cecchetti,Robbie A McDonald

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2020.01.008

Abstract:Cats share a long history with humans but are remarkable among domesticated species in largely retaining behavioural and reproductive independence from people. In many societies, the cat maintains liminal status as both a domestic and a wild animal. An adaptive push-and-pull between wild and domestic traits corresponds with dual roles as companions and pest controllers, and with conflicted treatment in husbandry, management, law, and public discourse. To move forward, we must proceed by understanding that cats are not exclusively pets or pests, but both a central component of human societies and an important, often adverse, influence on ecosystems. Developing a collaborative 'companion animal ecology', in which human-animal domestic relations link to ecological processes, will enable sustainable management of this wild companionship.
Animal ethics and animal welfare science: bridging the two cultures

David Fraser

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-1591(99)00090-8

IF: 2.569

1999-12-01

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

Abstract:Since the 1970s, scientists studying animal welfare and philosophers writing about animal ethics have worked toward the common goal of understanding and articulating our proper relationship to animals of other species. However, the two groups approached this task using such different concepts, assumptions, and vocabulary that they functioned as two distinct “cultures” with little mutual understanding or communication. Some of the best known ethical writing created barriers for scientists because it tended (1) to focus only on the level of the individual rather than making some decisions at the level of the population, ecosystem or species, (2) to advocate single ethical principles rather than balancing conflicting principles, (3) to ignore or dismiss traditional ethics based on care, responsibility, and community with animals, (4) to seek solutions through ethical theory with little recourse to empirical knowledge, (5) to lump diverse taxonomic groups into single moral categories, and (6) to propose wholesale solutions to diverse animal use practices. Meanwhile, some of the scientists alienated the ethicists by taking the view that suffering and other subjective experiences of animals are not amenable to scientific enquiry, and by the claim that science could “measure” animal welfare as if it were a purely empirical concept. However, other (often less well known) work in animal ethics creates links with animal welfare science and looks to empirical research to help resolve animal ethics issues. Some of this work (1) expresses moral concern about animals using concepts that lend themselves to scientific analysis, (2) attaches value to traditional care for and community with animals, (3) recognizes the importance of empirical analysis for discriminating between good and bad animal use practices, and (4) sees different taxonomic groups as meriting different types and levels of ethical concern. At the same time, animal welfare science has grown more compatible with the approaches used by some ethicists. Some scientists have recognized and tried to clarify the interplay of normative and empirical elements in the assessment of animal welfare, and many are attempting to understand ethically relevant subjective experiences of animals. The increasing convergence of the scientific and philosophical approaches may lead to a more integrated field of study and to a greater awareness that neither empirical information nor ethical reflection can, by itself, answer questions about our proper relationship to animals of other species.

agriculture, dairy & animal science,veterinary sciences,behavioral sciences
Animals in Children’s Development

Gail F. Melson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32146-8_10

2020-01-01

Abstract:Recognition of how non-human animals shape children’s development is fairly recent in the field of psychology. Historically, psychologists assumed that formative social ties involved only other humans, reflecting an anthropocentric bias. However, by the closing decades of the twentieth century, studies calling attention to “the human-animal bond” coalesced into a nascent field (c. 1987) and the study of non-human animals in the lives of children has proliferated as part of what is termed “human-animal interaction” (HAI). Practical applications in therapy, enrichment, and education have spawned programs in animal-assisted therapies (AAT), animal-assisted interventions (AAI), and animal-assisted education (AAE). Research has focused on pets and companion animals, encounters with wild and farm animals (in zoos, aquariums, agricultural settings, and backyard activities), and mediated animal contact through visual technologies and games. Yet, while the importance of non-human animals for children’s development is more widely accepted, theoretical frameworks to explain findings and guide inquiry remain lacking.This chapter takes stock of what we do and do not know about the significance of animals in children’s development. Gail F. Melson considers psychological frameworks including ecological systems theory (Bronfenbrenner, The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1979), attachment theory (Bowlby, Attachment. Basic Books, NY, 1969), and social role theory (Biddle, Recent Developments in Role Theory. Annual Review of Sociology 12: 67–92, 1986), and reviews the current empirical literature on the role of animals in children’s cognitive, social, emotional, and moral development. Drawing on contemporary examples, she suggests how insights from psychological literature can inform analysis of literary texts, broadly conceived to include visual and digital media, that address the child’s relationship with animals.
How Dogs Perceive Humans and How Humans Should Treat Their Pet Dogs: Linking Cognition With Ethics

Judith Benz-Schwarzburg,Susana Monsó,Ludwig Huber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.584037

IF: 3.8

2020-12-16

Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract:Humans interact with animals in numerous ways and on numerous levels. We are indeed living in an “animal”s world,’ in the sense that our lives are very much intertwined with the lives of animals. This also means that animals, like those dogs we commonly refer to as our pets, are living in a “human’s world” in the sense that it is us, not them, who, to a large degree, define and manage the interactions we have with them. In this sense, the human-animal relationship is nothing we should romanticize: it comes with clear power relations and thus with a set of responsibilities on the side of those who exercise this power. This holds, despite the fact that we like to think about our dogs as human’s best friend. Dogs have been part of human societies for longer than any other domestic species. Like no other species they exemplify the role of companion animals. Relationships with pet dogs are both very widespread and very intense, often leading to strong attachments between owners or caregivers and animals and to a treatment of these dogs as family members or even children. But how does this relationship look from the dogs’ perspective? How do they perceive the humans they engage with? What responsibilities and duties arise from the kind of mutual understanding, attachment, and the supposedly “special” bonds we form with them? Are there ethical implications, maybe even ethical implications beyond animal welfare? The past decades have seen an upsurge of research from comparative cognition on pet dogs’ cognitive and social skills, especially in comparison with and reference to humans. We will therefore set our discussion about the nature and ethical dimensions of the human–dog relationship against the background of the current empirical knowledge on dog (social) cognition. This allows us to analyze the human–dog relationship by applying an interdisciplinary approach that starts from the perspective of the dog to ultimately inform the perspective of humans. It is our aim to thereby identify ethical dimensions of the human–dog relationship that have been overlooked so far.

psychology, multidisciplinary
Human Relationships with Domestic and Other Animals: One Health, One Welfare, One Biology

Ariel M Tarazona,Maria C Ceballos,Donald M Broom

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10010043

2019-12-24

Abstract:Excessive human population growth, uncontrolled use of natural resources, including deforestation, mining, wasteful systems, biodiversity reduction by agriculture, and damaging climate change affect the existence of all animals, including humans. This discussion is now urgent and people are rethinking their links with the animals we use for clothing, food, work, companionship, entertainment, and research. The concepts of one health, one welfare, and one biology are discussed as a background to driving global change. Nothing should be exploited without considering the ethics of the action and the consequences. This review concerns domesticated animals, including those used for human consumption of meat, eggs, and milk; horses kept for work; and dogs kept for company. Animal welfare includes health, emotional state, and comfort while moving and resting, and is affected by possibilities to show behavior and relationships with others of the same species or with humans. We show some examples of the relations between humans and domesticated animals in the environmental context, including zoonotic diseases, and consider the consequences and the new paradigms resulting from current awareness.
India’s canine conundrum, a case of cognitive dissonance?

Sutirtha Lahiri,Ninad Avinash Mungi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/dcrbg

2020-09-01

Abstract:Free-ranging dogs are among the top global invasive species with major impacts on biodiversity and humans. Academicians in conservation or allied fields are at the forefront of investigating this conflict. But are their opinions impaired by their emotional attachment with dogs? We investigated this question through an online survey that reached 360 academicians across 139 institutions in India. We assessed the respondent's affinity towards dogs and their perception on their impacts, causes of this problem, suggestions on its mitigation and success of the mitigation measures. We found that although affinity towards dogs had no effect on respondent's perceptions of their impacts, their perceptions on the causes and suggested mitigation measures differed. Respondents who liked dogs suggested ineffective measures like reproductive control and mass adoption to mitigate their impacts, while also acknowledging that the suggested mitigation measures would never work due to multiple reasons. Through our results we show that academicians who are presumed to provide evidence-driven solutions opted for value-driven suggestions. This could be due to high consideration given to emotions in animal rights policies in the country. We interpret this contradiction using cognitive dissonance theory and suggest a need of encouraging a scientific temper of evidence-based mitigation measures.
Pet Ownership, Attitude Toward Pets, and Support for Wildlife Management Strategies

Cameron Z. Shuttlewood,Phillip J. Greenwell,V. Tamara Montrose

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2016.1116029

2016-02-08

Human Dimensions of Wildlife

Abstract:Pet ownership affects engagement with animal-related activities and may be related to support of wildlife management. British participants (N = 220) completed an online survey providing information on pet ownership, attitudes toward pets, and support for wildlife management strategies. Within this sample, pet owners and individuals with positive attitudes toward pets were less supportive of strategies that put human needs before the needs of wildlife, more supportive of strategies attempting to avoid species extinctions, and opposed to strategies requiring compromises of individual species. Pet owners’ affectionate attitudes toward animals and opposition to their exploitation may be important in dictating attitudes toward wildlife. Conservation planners could apply these findings when seeking support for management strategies that constrain freedoms of pets and wildlife. Utilizing the sympathetic attitudes of pet owners toward animals by focusing on welfare and survival benefits for wildlife species may help foster support for management strategies.

environmental sciences,biodiversity conservation
Pet and Image in the Greek World: The Use of Domesticated Animals in Human Interaction

Louise Calder

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110545623-004

2017-08-21

Abstract:This paper examines a number of the many ways in which the Greeks positioned themselves socially through their interactions in the medium of pet-keeping and companion animals. Some of these interactions, such as seeking private comfort and reassurance by holding and caressing a pet, might be familiar to us in the present day, and indeed it can be argued that humans have, as a side product of their social makeup, an innate capacity and drive for pet-keeping, and a developing capacity to carry an unproductive ‘other’. However, many of the interactions seem unique to antiquity. Greek human-animal interactions had social complexities well beyond those of the relationship simply between an animal and its owner. This includes the part of pets in individuals’ internal dialogues and how they related to other humans. It also encompasses such practices as including pets as family members, memorialising and treatment of remains, accessorising, socialising outside the home and showing off with pets, competing with pets themselves, pitting pets against each other, love gifts, rewarding and punishing pets, mishandling and abuse, and criticism of pet-keeping by other humans. Images of pets are frequent in the surviving material, particularly on funerary stelae and figured vases. This repeated depiction of pets in particular settings, coupled with ancient literary observations, is used here to demonstrate the extent and variety of human interactions with pets and allude to what might have been driving these.
Animal behaviour: diverse insights across Aotearoa New Zealand and the South Pacific

Kristal E. CainStephanie S. GodfreyChristina J. Paintinga Te Kura Mātauranga Koiora School of Biological Sciences,University of Auckland,Auckland,New Zealandb Te Tari Mātai Kararehe Department of Zoology,University of Otago,Dunedin,New Zealandc Te Aka Mātuatua School of Science,University of Waikato,Hamilton,New Zealand

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03014223.2024.2334413

2024-04-04

New Zealand Journal of Zoology

Abstract:Animal behaviour is an inherently fascinating topic. For many of us, watching animals is what sparked our initial curiosity and eventually led us to become zoologists. Pondering why one animal behaves one way, while another animal behaves differently – is a simple thing to wonder. But at the same time, answering that question is incredibly difficult. Animal behaviour is among the most complex and challenging of the sciences because it is a broad amalgamation of so many different sub-disciplines. Behaviour spans from the responses of individual cells (e.g. detecting light or sensing temperature) to the function of entire ecosystems, and indeed, via animal movement, it connects ecosystems. Consequently, animal behaviour is central to a wide variety of fields including evolution, population and community ecology, disease ecology, genetics, and environmental science, and it plays a critical role in conservation and biosecurity.

zoology
History of Animal Keeping in Ancient India and it’s Socio-Economic, Scientific Applicability in 21st Century

Swarnendu CHAKRABORTY

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32996/pjpsh.2023.3.1.2

2023-04-29

Abstract:The human race is a member of the Mammalian class and the Primate Order. So, a human is also an animal. But what differs from other animal species is human wisdom. It is only humans who can domesticate other animals and use them to fulfill different needs. In hunting/gathering hominid societies, animals were rich sources of meat, skin, and bone. But the artistic and curious human mind kept records of his relationship with the animal world through rock paintings from the Upper Paleolithic era. From different centres of human habitats throughout the Indian Sub-Continent, a huge amount of animal remains have been discovered by Archeologists. Apart from kitchen waste which highlights the on-veg food habit of nomadic people, terracotta animal figurines, day-to-day bone tools, ivory and shell ornaments, artifacts etc., pointed out the importance and use of domesticated animals in human life. Animal domestication and husbandry became synonymous with Indian Proto-Historic and Historic civilizations not only economically / militarily but also with religious and cultural traditions. Sheep and goats were first domesticated by South Indian Neolithic men around 2 thousand and five hundred B.C. as sources of milk, wool, meat, leather and other commodities. Today’s Indian domestic fowl originated from red jungle fowl. Seals of Indus civilization were decorated with humped and hump-less bulls, goats, sheep, elephants, and fowl. Vedic Aryans husbanded horses, dogs, sheep, goats, fowl, elephants, cow-bull etc. During the Mauryan era, buffalo was included in the category of dairy cattle. Domestication of animals is not a new thing in human history. The novelty lies in Indian people’s attention and urge for the wellbeing of domesticated animals. Ancient Indian literature like Vedas, CharakSamhita, SushrutSamhita, HaritaSamhita, Agni Purana, Mastya Purana, Artha-Shastra etc. Provide proper guidance on orientation, construction, and purification of animal houses, besides veterinary Ayurvedic and surgical treatment of numerous diseases. In Vedic literature, Cow was considered as the measuring unit of wealth. Cow received the status of “Aghnya” [Not to be killed]. Priests were the first veterinarians of ancient India. Prominent among them were Shalihotra [Earliest expert in Horse medicine and author of “Haya Ayurveda”], Palakapya [Author of “Hasty- Ayurveda”] etc. 6th Century B.C. Indian rulers of Sravasti, Kousambi, and Lichabi kingdoms issued humped bull/cow inscribed coins. During the Indian invasion of Alexander the Great [326 B.C.], a Prince from Punjab presented Cock with engraved silver coins as a form of tribute. Arthashastra mentioned the King’s duty of ensuring enough pasture land near every village. Gopa was accountable for keeping a record of this land. Horses and Elephants were the two main war animals of the Mauryan army. Proper care was given to them. Hurting/killing of any of these species resulted in the death penalty. The third Mauryan Monarch, Asoka, after his conversion to Buddhism, established veterinary hospitals throughout his domain. Ancient Indians were aware of the technique of animal husbandry as well. In short ancient Indian Veterinary Ayurvedic and surgical treatments are effective in curing dysentery, cough, wound, infertility, and different infections besides psychological stress still in the Twenty-First Century. Besides terrestrial animals’ ancient Indian people were aware of the existence of fish, shells, and turtles. It is my aim in this essay to analyze customs, technologies and history of the domestication of animals by ancient Indian people and its socio-economic-scientific applicability in the scenario of the Twenty-First Century. I will utilize both primary and secondary sources to endure this goal.
British Colonialism, Australian Nationalism and the Law: Hierarchies of Wild Animal Protection

Steven White

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26180/5db80295d83ff

2013-01-01

Abstract:A combination of animal welfare law and nature conservation law establishes a hierarchy of protection for wild animals, with rare, threatened or endangered native animals receiving the highest levels of protection, plentiful native animals lying in the middle - sometimes wellprotected, sometimes not - and introduced wild animals at the bottom. In reading beyond the accounts of contemporary law, especially in sociology and environmental history, a plausible argument can be made for the proposition that this prevailing general schema of protection reflects an early 20th century assertion of a distinctive Australian identity, combined with the emergence of a conservation ethic and the decline of attempts to acclimatise British wild animals in Australia. Prior to federation the legal protection of wild animals was quite different, with native animals receiving little protection until the late 19th century. Introduced wild animals were initially protected to allow their flourishing, but by the late 19th century were increasingly being characterised as 'pests' and their protection wound back. This article explores how and why attitudes to native wild animals and introduced wild animals in Australia have changed over time, and how this continues to be reflected in Australian law.
Learning Ethics From Our Relationships with Animals: Moral Imagination

Maurice Hamington

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/IJAP200822214

2008-10-01

Abstract:The majority of animal advocacy discourse is unidirectional: Humans are regarded as stewards of animal welfare, and humans control the bestowal of rights and protections upon animals. This article offers a reversal of the typical moral reflection used in animal advocacy. I suggest that our relationship with animals participates in the development of moral faculties requisite for ethical behavior. In other words, we have a lot to learn from animals, not in this instance by documenting their behavior, but from having meaningful relationships with particular animals. Quality interactions with animals can stimulate the imaginative basis for the care and empathy that are crucial for social morality. To accomplish this task, I describe "embodied care" as an extension of feminist care ethics that addresses the body's role in morality, and argue that our relationships with animals can provide the imaginative foundation for improving human-to-human morality.

Environmental Science,Sociology,Philosophy
The Place and Effect of Animals in Families

Antoine Doré,Jérôme Michalon,Teresa Líbano Monteiro,Valentina Baslyk

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1064506ar

2019-09-13

Abstract:Research Framework : The general challenge and originality of this thematic issue of the journal Enfances Familles Générations consists in jointly exploring two major social transformations brought about by the integration of animals into families : the first transformation being in human families and the second in human-animal relationships. Objectives : The purpose of this introduction to the thematic issue "The Place and Impact of Animals in Families" is to present the current state of knowledge on the subject, by characterizing the approaches taken and identifying blind spots and how to address them. Methodology : The article is based on a review of the literature and an analysis of approximately 100 English- and French-language publications in the social sciences and humanities that focus on the place and effect of animals in families. Results : The first part of the article is devoted to an analytical presentation of the literature. Three principal methods of integrating animals into families can be identified in the works studied : integration, assimilation and substitution. In addition, two types of approaches have been favoured to date on how to understand the family in its relationship with animals : "fixist" and flexible. The second part of the article develops a critical analysis of this research. We show that, taken as a whole, these studies generate a naturalization effect of the very specific zoological, sociological and spatio-temporal realities studied. We show that this naturalization is linked to the ill-considered use of certain semantic categories ("companion animal," "family pet" or simply "pet") 1 . It is also linked to particular systems for the production of sociological knowledge on the place of animals in families (based in part on data provided by key players in the pet industry, or created on a pointedly moral foundation). Conclusions : The article underlines the need to develop and implement a genuine sociology of family/animal relationships that, on the one hand, more candidly assumes the implicit biases that have guided research to date (a clear positioning in relation to the three methods of integrating animals into families), and on the other hand seeks to denaturalize the categories it uses while questioning the knowledge systems within which it is embedded. Contribution : Beyond a critical and problematized interpretation of the literature, this article outlines several lines of research that aim to complete and rebalance the particular image that the current literature on the dynamics of integrating animals into the family provides. Five lines are identified : (1) the symbolic construction of the integration of animals into the family (artistic and media representations, construction of categories) ; (2) the physical conditions of this integration (role of technical objects, markets) ; (3) the role of animals in the construction of the identity and socialization of families ; (4) the uses of learned and secular discourses on animal families to define and legitimize a model of human families ; (5) a sociological redefinition of the family, taking into account the different types of animal integration.
Support for the 'Pets as Ambassadors' hypothesis in men: Higher animal empathy in Australian pet-owners vs non-owners and farmers

Georgia Anne Frampton,Jessica Lee Oliva

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/awf.2024.25

2024-05-03

Abstract:Human empathy towards non-human animals (Animal Empathy; AE) has shown a strong gender bias, with women demonstrating higher levels than men. This study aimed to investigate the influence of animal experiences on AE in a male-only sample. It was hypothesised that there would be different levels of AE between men with experiences caring for pets, men with experience in animal agriculture, and men with limited animal experiences. Ninety-one Australian men (18yrs+) completed an online survey evaluating their level of AE using the Animal Empathy Scale (AES). Additionally, they were asked what in their experience they think has influenced their beliefs about how animals think and feel. As expected, AE levels differed significantly between groups, with those in the pet ownership experience group demonstrating higher AE levels than the other two groups. All three groups displayed high endorsement for direct interactions with animals in adulthood as being most influential in shaping their beliefs about how animals think and feel. However, our quantitative results support the idea that not all experiences are worth the same, with the responsibility and sacrifice involved in pet caring appearing to be most influential to the development of AE. These findings have implications for the importance of human-animal interactions in understanding animal sentience and the development of AE in males.

How our love of pets grew from a clash of world views

A Special Relationship-Aspects of Human-Animal Interaction in Birds of Prey, Brown Bears, Beavers, and Elk in Prehistoric Europe

The History of the Use of Animals in Research and the Development of the Animal Welfare Concept

I am Homo Sapien: Perceptions of Evolutionary Theory, Animal Identity, and Human–Animal Relationships Among US Law and Policy Students

Medicine, Value, and Knowledge in the Veterinary Clinic: Questions for and From Medical Anthropology and the Medical Humanities

Early dispersal of domestic horses into the Great Plains and northern Rockies

Meeting Your Ancestors – Sticks, Stones, and Discord in Earth's Outposts

Our Wild Companions: Domestic cats in the Anthropocene

Animal ethics and animal welfare science: bridging the two cultures

Animals in Children’s Development

How Dogs Perceive Humans and How Humans Should Treat Their Pet Dogs: Linking Cognition With Ethics

Human Relationships with Domestic and Other Animals: One Health, One Welfare, One Biology

India’s canine conundrum, a case of cognitive dissonance?

Pet Ownership, Attitude Toward Pets, and Support for Wildlife Management Strategies

Pet and Image in the Greek World: The Use of Domesticated Animals in Human Interaction

Animal behaviour: diverse insights across Aotearoa New Zealand and the South Pacific

History of Animal Keeping in Ancient India and it’s Socio-Economic, Scientific Applicability in 21st Century

British Colonialism, Australian Nationalism and the Law: Hierarchies of Wild Animal Protection

Learning Ethics From Our Relationships with Animals: Moral Imagination

The Place and Effect of Animals in Families

Support for the 'Pets as Ambassadors' hypothesis in men: Higher animal empathy in Australian pet-owners vs non-owners and farmers