超越人类与野生动物的冲突。通过术语研讨会改善人类/非人类动物关系

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Gabriel Yahya Haage
{"title":"超越人类与野生动物的冲突。通过术语研讨会改善人类/非人类动物关系","authors":"Gabriel Yahya Haage","doi":"10.7358/rela-2023-01-yahg","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Human-Wildlife Conflicts (HWCs) occur when nonhuman animals’ needs clash with those of humans. One recent effort regards shifting HWCs into Human-Human Social Conflicts, where conflicts are about humans disagreeing on how to deal with nonhuman animals. This method can help reduce guilt placed on nonhuman animals, but also robs them of their agency. Conversely, some in the field of biology seek to increase animal agency and their moral status, even making them key stakeholders. A helpful relationship may seek both aspects. Fourteen workshops (147 participants, 40 subgroups), with relevant stakeholders, were run on this topic. Participants were involved in biology and/or environmentalism and/or sustainability. They sought to develop terminology diminishing guilt in HWCs, while maintaining agency. Common themes were then brought out. Eight subgroups argued for more inclusive terms, like “sentient beings” and 21 argued for diminishing human/nature dichotomies. Both fit well with increasing agency, and giving nonhumans greater moral status, by narrowing human/nonhuman animal gaps. Participants also discussed nonhuman animals as “icons”, which 26/30 subgroups saw as, at least potentially, problematic, arguing it conceptually “freezes” species, ignoring their dynamism. In sum, the workshops aid in framing healthier relationships with the natural world.","PeriodicalId":37628,"journal":{"name":"Relations","volume":"70 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beyond Human-Wildlife Conflicts. Ameliorating Human/Nonhuman Animal Relationships through Workshops on Terminology\",\"authors\":\"Gabriel Yahya Haage\",\"doi\":\"10.7358/rela-2023-01-yahg\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Human-Wildlife Conflicts (HWCs) occur when nonhuman animals’ needs clash with those of humans. One recent effort regards shifting HWCs into Human-Human Social Conflicts, where conflicts are about humans disagreeing on how to deal with nonhuman animals. This method can help reduce guilt placed on nonhuman animals, but also robs them of their agency. Conversely, some in the field of biology seek to increase animal agency and their moral status, even making them key stakeholders. A helpful relationship may seek both aspects. Fourteen workshops (147 participants, 40 subgroups), with relevant stakeholders, were run on this topic. Participants were involved in biology and/or environmentalism and/or sustainability. They sought to develop terminology diminishing guilt in HWCs, while maintaining agency. Common themes were then brought out. Eight subgroups argued for more inclusive terms, like “sentient beings” and 21 argued for diminishing human/nature dichotomies. Both fit well with increasing agency, and giving nonhumans greater moral status, by narrowing human/nonhuman animal gaps. Participants also discussed nonhuman animals as “icons”, which 26/30 subgroups saw as, at least potentially, problematic, arguing it conceptually “freezes” species, ignoring their dynamism. In sum, the workshops aid in framing healthier relationships with the natural world.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37628,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Relations\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7358/rela-2023-01-yahg\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7358/rela-2023-01-yahg","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

当非人类动物的需求与人类的需求发生冲突时,就会发生人类与野生动物的冲突。最近的一项努力是将hwc转变为人类社会冲突,其中冲突是关于人类对如何处理非人类动物的意见分歧。这种方法可以帮助减少对非人类动物的负罪感,但也剥夺了它们的能动性。相反,生物学领域的一些人试图提高动物的能动性和道德地位,甚至让它们成为关键的利益相关者。一段有益的关系可以同时兼顾这两个方面。围绕这一主题举办了14个讲习班(147名参与者,40个小组),有相关利益攸关方参加。参与者涉及生物学和/或环境保护主义和/或可持续性。他们试图开发一种术语,在保持能动性的同时减少hwc的负罪感。然后提出了共同的主题。8个小组主张使用更具包容性的术语,如“众生”,21个小组主张减少人与自然的二分法。两者都很适合增加能动性,并通过缩小人类/非人类动物的差距,赋予非人类更高的道德地位。与会者还讨论了非人类动物作为“图标”的问题,其中有26/30的小组认为,这至少有潜在的问题,认为这在概念上“冻结”了物种,忽视了它们的活力。总而言之,这些研讨会有助于建立与自然世界更健康的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Beyond Human-Wildlife Conflicts. Ameliorating Human/Nonhuman Animal Relationships through Workshops on Terminology
Human-Wildlife Conflicts (HWCs) occur when nonhuman animals’ needs clash with those of humans. One recent effort regards shifting HWCs into Human-Human Social Conflicts, where conflicts are about humans disagreeing on how to deal with nonhuman animals. This method can help reduce guilt placed on nonhuman animals, but also robs them of their agency. Conversely, some in the field of biology seek to increase animal agency and their moral status, even making them key stakeholders. A helpful relationship may seek both aspects. Fourteen workshops (147 participants, 40 subgroups), with relevant stakeholders, were run on this topic. Participants were involved in biology and/or environmentalism and/or sustainability. They sought to develop terminology diminishing guilt in HWCs, while maintaining agency. Common themes were then brought out. Eight subgroups argued for more inclusive terms, like “sentient beings” and 21 argued for diminishing human/nature dichotomies. Both fit well with increasing agency, and giving nonhumans greater moral status, by narrowing human/nonhuman animal gaps. Participants also discussed nonhuman animals as “icons”, which 26/30 subgroups saw as, at least potentially, problematic, arguing it conceptually “freezes” species, ignoring their dynamism. In sum, the workshops aid in framing healthier relationships with the natural world.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Relations
Relations Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism is a peer-refereed open access journal of trans-anthropocentric ethics and related inquires. The main aim of the journal is to create a professional interdisciplinary forum in Europe to discuss moral and scientific issues that concern the increasing need of going beyond narrow anthropocentric paradigms in all fields of knowledge. The journal accepts submissions on all topics which promote European research adopting a non-anthropocentric ethical perspective on both interspecific and intraspecific relationships between all life species – humans included – and between these and the abiotic environment. We welcome papers, comments, debates, interviews, book and movie reviews, as well as presentations, reports, and other news concerning relevant activities and events. We envision inter- and trans-disciplinary contributions and dialogue from a wide variety of approaches: humanities (e.g. philosophy, literature, arts, law, and religious studies), life sciences (e.g. biology, ecology, ethology, medicine), and social sciences (e.g. economics, politics, anthropology, sociology, psychology). We especially encourage collaborative submissions from different disciplinary approaches, from both senior and junior scholars (including graduate students). All suitable submissions should address both academic and lay audiences as well as relevant stakeholders. Since the journal refers to an international readership of people from different disciplines, both inside and outside the academic community, contributors should keep in mind this heterogeneity of provenances and areas of expertise when writing.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信