Perspectives on Human-Animal Communication

Plec, Emily

doi:10.4324/9780203082935

Cited by 47 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We confine our discussion in this section to a review of the emerging literature in Environmental Communication on what we will call internatural communication (see Plec, 2013), but which may just as well be termed human-animal or interspecies communication. This literature challenges the conception of non-human animals as voiceless, or as participating in political processes only through implicit claims (Milstein, 2012).…”

Section: Internatural Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To Donovan (1996), this is an essential channel in grounding an ethic of care than can convert -in our preferred language -relation into practice by including animals outside of our immediate circle of interaction. Through paying emotional attention and taking seriously what animals are telling us-through mechanisms of kinesthetic empathy (Shapiro, 1990), sensuous empathy (Stein, 1966), corporeal dialogism (Plec, 2013;Peltola and Heikkilä, 2015), affectual and contingent practices (Brown and Dilley, 2012) close observation of body language and repeated interactions with individuals-we can cultivate an understanding of their needs and develop an appropriate ethical response through this communication. The dialogic approach to animal ethics, then, is to Donovan (2006) "…not a matter of behaving like the deer or modeling human ethics on the deer's behavior; rather it is a matter of incorporating the deer's position and wishes dialogically in the human ethical-decision-making process."…”

Section: Discursive Monopoly Of Humansmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beyond the inclusion of animal, difference theorists see openness to plural ways of listening to non-dominant actors and formalizing their voice in "the production of meaning, policy and material conditions" (Meijer, 2013) as an essential democratic project that that helps us develop relationships with the subaltern (Eckersley, 2004;Plec, 2013). Feminist care theory similarly avers the importance of restoring 'absent referents' to our shared discourse, inviting the potential for dialogue across species lines (Adams, 1991) To some, the tools are already largely in place for achieving solidarity as relation with animals through communication-including a 'special ability' on the part of humans to communicate with other forms of life (Deloria Jr, 1991); adequate knowledge of most animal interests and welfare (Smith, 2012); and semiotic analysis for decoding the diverse channels in which animals communicate with humans (Lind, 2012).…”

Section: Internatural Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Solidarity Between Human and Non-Human Animals: Representing Animal Voices in Policy Deliberations

Essen

Allen

2017

Environmental Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we discuss the bridging potential of "interspecies" solidarity between the often incommensurable ethics of care and justice. Indeed, we show that the Environmental Communication literature emphasizes feelings of care and compassion as vectors of responsibility taking for animals. But we also show that a growing field of Political AnimalRights suggest that such responsibility taking should instead be grounded in universalizable terms of justice. Our argument is that a dual conception of solidarity can bridge this divide: On the one hand, solidarity as a pre-political relation with animals and, on the other hand, as a political practice based on open public deliberation of universalizable claims to justice; that is, claims to justice advanced by human proxy representatives of vulnerable non-humans. Such a dual conception can both challenge and validate NGOs' claims to "speak on behalf of animals" in policy following the Aarhus Convention, indeed underwriting the Convention by insights from internatural communication in solidarity as relation, and by subjecting it to rational scrutiny in mini-publics in solidary as practice.KEYWORDS: Solidarity, internatural communication, discourse ethics, proxy representation, mini-publics Pre-production version of manuscript published in Journal of Environmental Communication http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10. 1080/17524032.2016.1269820 2 Solidarity between Human and Non-Human Animals: Representing Animal Voices in Policy DeliberationsWhile perhaps equally important in defining our relationships to vulnerable others, the concepts of care and justice are often presented as in profound tension with one another (Noddings, 1984;Gilligan, 1987;Okin, 1989). On the one hand, it is thought that such relationships must be based on feelings of care and empathetic understanding of the needs andinterests of the vulnerable who cannot, for one reason or another, rationally formulate or articulate their own good (Goodin, 1986;Donovan, 1996;Fineman, 2008). On the other hand, it is thought that our relationship and responsibility-taking for vulnerable others must be based on universalizable claims to justice; claims that gain validity through rational argumentative defenses against skeptical challenges concerning what the vulnerable need and what they are properly owed (Regan, 1995;Garner, 2012). Indeed, the rational universalizability of claims to rights and justice proves essential to the task of giving public justification to policy decisions concerning vulnerable members of the shared political community (Goodin, 1996). Here, the tension between the concepts of care and justice derives from a difference in emphasis regarding the basis of moral responsibility (Buchanan, 2013). This is the difference between developing feelings of being responsible for vulnerable others and defending before a universal audience of all those who are purportedly placed under an obligation that they should to take responsibility.Such a tension between care and justice is by no mean limited ...

show abstract

Section: Internatural Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discursive Monopoly Of Humansmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Internatural Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Solidarity Between Human and Non-Human Animals: Representing Animal Voices in Policy Deliberations

Essen

Allen

2017

Environmental Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7 I follow Johnston's arguments that this scene pulls together a variety of mythical motifs that are only alluded to here (Johnston 1992). Most importantly, she reconstructs a heroic pattern of Hera 3 For this general concept, see (Plec 2013); for the ancient debate about animal rationality in general, see (Sorabji 1993;Horky 2017); and on the role of talking birds in this ancient debate, see (Sorabji 1993, pp. 80-85) and (Newmeyer 2017, pp.…”

Section: Houyhnhnmic Prophecymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The "animal turn" in contemporary literary studies seeks to take the role of animals in literature more seriously, based, in part, on the modern realization that animal (and even plant) communication is far more complicated than had previously been realized (McDonell 2014;DeMello 2013;Plec 2013;Karban 2015;Radick 2007;Diamond 1992;Herman 2016). Yet efforts to study animal narrators constantly bump up against the limits of this project.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eloquent Alogia: Animal Narrators in Ancient Greek Literature

Hawkins

2017

Humanities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Classical Greek literature presents a variety of speaking animals. These are not, of course, the actual voices of animals but human projections. In a culture that aligns verbal mastery with social standing, verbal animals present a conundrum that speaks to an anxiety about human communication. I argue that the earliest examples of speaking animals, in Homer, Hesiod and Archilochus, show a fundamental connection with Golden Age tales. Later authors, such as Plutarch and Lucian, look back on such cases from a perspective that does not easily accept notions of divine causation that would permit such fanciful modes of communication. I argue that Plutarch uses a talking pig to challenge philosophical categories, and that Lucian transforms a sham-philosopher of a talking-cock to undermine the very pretense of philosophical virtue.

show abstract

Complicity Theory

McPhail¹

2017

The International Encyclopedia of Intercultural Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complicity theory offers an approach to the critical consideration of difference and identity that highlights the ways in which agents are implicated in social and symbolic systems of oppression and domination. Originally conceived of as a “theory of negative difference,” it has evolved to consider how the adaptive impulses of power and privilege limit the transformative potential of discourse. The theory continues to offer a unique and provocative lens through which to analyze and understand difference, identity, and domination.

show abstract

Perspectives on Human-Animal Communication

Cited by 47 publications

References 0 publications

Solidarity Between Human and Non-Human Animals: Representing Animal Voices in Policy Deliberations

Solidarity Between Human and Non-Human Animals: Representing Animal Voices in Policy Deliberations

Eloquent Alogia: Animal Narrators in Ancient Greek Literature

Complicity Theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About