Animal EthosPub Date : 2018-11-06DOI: 10.1525/california/9780520299245.003.0104
L. Sharp
{"title":"The Lives and Deaths of Laboratory Animals","authors":"L. Sharp","doi":"10.1525/california/9780520299245.003.0104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520299245.003.0104","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 3 is the sole chapter of part 2, “Sacrifice,” an interlude in the center of the book. In this chapter, I pause to consider the moral implications and responses to the inescapability of animal death as part of lab research. This chapter arose from the unprompted propensity among interviewees to raise animal death and killing or their euthanization (sacrifice in lab parlance) as central to shaping their thoughts and actions in moral terms, a trend I reference as animal “death talk.” Animal death is often predetermined by standardized research protocols. Set against this inescapable reality, I consider the moral significance of “sacrifice” as a trope of animal lab research and established analyses that ground sacrifice in ritualized and sacred understandings of life and death. I propose to broaden the analytical field by considering the affective consequences of interspecies intimacy and how such consequences shape thinking about and responding to animals’ deaths. I outline a history of how we celebrate working animals in order to consider contrasting public outreach campaigns offered by research science and by animal activism, which both rely on an animal generics that contributes to the erasure of individual creatures. I then return to lab settings to consider the surprising ways that individual personnel respond to the deaths of lab creatures they have known.","PeriodicalId":290980,"journal":{"name":"Animal Ethos","volume":"130 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122498910","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Animal EthosPub Date : 2018-11-06DOI: 10.1525/california/9780520299245.003.0005
L. Sharp
{"title":"The Animal Commons","authors":"L. Sharp","doi":"10.1525/california/9780520299245.003.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520299245.003.0005","url":null,"abstract":"As demonstrated in chapter 4, animal caretakers may engage in rescue work of live animals and engage in memorial practices for deceased ones. In this chapter, I consider the still other responses I encountered among researchers who seek to reduce the numbers of animals culled and killed for science. Associated practices arise most often in contexts marked by scarcity (for instance, of research materials or infrastructure, funding, or animals). As demonstrated by an ethics case study that opens the chapter, the sharing of animals is widely condemned by regulatory bodies that oversee lab animal welfare. Nevertheless, I have found that animal sharing occurs in labs, and it is framed as a moral practice that takes animal worth into account. I consider such moral reasoning as offering evidence of yet another form of specialized rescue work that fosters an emergent “animal commons,” where associated practices are reminiscent of open-source data sharing in genetics and still other research domains of science.","PeriodicalId":290980,"journal":{"name":"Animal Ethos","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121812047","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Animal EthosPub Date : 2018-11-06DOI: 10.1525/california/9780520299245.003.0006
L. Sharp
{"title":"Conclusion","authors":"L. Sharp","doi":"10.1525/california/9780520299245.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/california/9780520299245.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"As noted in the introduction, throughout this book I have focused nearly exclusively on mammalian species, a decision driven by the assumption that they most readily inspire affective responses in humans who work in labs. Here I consider the affective potentialities of “the other animal,” employing zebrafish as an analytical foil. In so doing, I reconsider my own assumptions about the boundaries of interspecies empathy, asking why a ferret or dog is presumed so widely in science to matter more than nonmammalian creatures. Zebrafish are especially pertinent here because of a recent upsurge of concern for their welfare and care, set against emergent assumptions that fish can suffer, too. This example foregrounds the shifting, dialectical nature of human perceptions of animal value and hierarchies of the affective power of certain species over others. I conclude by offering a set of principles or what I flag as “moral proclamations” designed to inspire future moral thought and action in and about lab animal science among readers.","PeriodicalId":290980,"journal":{"name":"Animal Ethos","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117311564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Animal EthosPub Date : 2018-11-06DOI: 10.1525/CALIFORNIA/9780520299245.003.0003
L. Sharp
{"title":"Why Do Monkeys Watch TV?","authors":"L. Sharp","doi":"10.1525/CALIFORNIA/9780520299245.003.0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1525/CALIFORNIA/9780520299245.003.0003","url":null,"abstract":"A curious—albeit longstanding—lab practice involves the paired use of television and video screens as both research tools and forms of animal welfare (otherwise known as “enrichment”) in work conducted with non-human primates (NHPs). This chapter interrogates the history and logic of the use of television in primate labs. NHPs, by virtue of their evolutionary and cognitive proximity to humans, stand out as exceptional creatures whose use in research generates a host of moral quandaries. For instance, primates have long served as barometers within debates over animal welfare (both within labs among research personnel and outside among activists). Macaques, who have been a primate of choice for lab research, figure especially prominently throughout this chapter as offering an important example of television’s use. By tracking how, and the logic of why, monkeys watch television enables one to uncover and decipher a specialized moral logic of animal care, one that defines the worth of the monkey and the human in the lab.","PeriodicalId":290980,"journal":{"name":"Animal Ethos","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126277298","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：