The Passions and Animal Language, 1540-1700

Serjeantson, Richard

doi:10.2307/3654149

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We find him, for instance, referring to monkeys and horses to defend his position: "if we differ only in Speech, it can be no Bar to their Immortality; however, as to Shape and Sagacity, a Monkey has at least a Claim" (p. 16). This argument was consistent with what Keith Thomas (1983) identified, "an increasing tendency to credit animals with reason, intelligence, language and almost every other human quality" (p. 129, see also Serjeantson, 2001).…”

Section: In An Interconnected World Flesh Eating Exhibits Rank Pride and Haughtiness Of Soulsupporting

confidence: 86%

Robert Morris and a Lost 18th-Century Vegetarian Book

Adams

2005

Organization & Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 1746, Robert Morris, an 18th-century architectural innovator, authored A Reasonable Plea for the Animal Creation. It never entered the vegetarian canon, nor is it listed among his other published works. The bulk of the book is devoted to reprinting nine letters Morris had sent to a friend defending his abstinence from eating meat. He also responds to published arguments that the book of Genesis prohibits eating of blood but permits the eating of animals. I provide an introduction to the book and excerpts from the letters. Morris’s arguments include that in an interconnected world, flesh eating exhibits rank Pride and Haughtiness of Soul, that the Golden Rule guides humans not to prey on animals, that animal confinement causes illness and infections, and that we have no right of property from nature. Morris’s work is a valuable addition to vegetarian history, to discussions of veganism, and to factory farming and animal confinement debates.

show abstract

Section: In An Interconnected World Flesh Eating Exhibits Rank Pride and Haughtiness Of Soulsupporting

confidence: 86%

Robert Morris and a Lost 18th-Century Vegetarian Book

Adams

2005

Organization & Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nonetheless, despite the consensus among early modern scholars that animals do not possess language as humans do, and although attributions of speech or language to animals were sometimes harshly denounced, there were classical authors and also Renaissance writers who admitted that animals were able to express their feelings (generally referred to as 'passions') and to communicate with one another, and even with other species. 69 For example, Porphyry of Tyre, one of the classical authors who were re-discovered by Renaissance humanists, believed that animals had a great variety of ways to express their state of mind, their wishes and their feelings. 70 Michel de Montaigne expounded similar convictions in his Apologie de Raimond Sebond [An Apology for Raymond Sebond] (1585), and argued that the human inability to understand animals was due to human limitations.…”

Section: Girolamo Fabrici and The Language Of Brutesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The beginnings of comparative anatomy and Renaissance reflections on the human–animal divide

Arbel

2017

Renaissance Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay is part of a larger research project on Renaissance attitudes to animals. It considers the extent to which early developments in the new field of comparative anatomy were influenced by Renaissance discussions concerning the nature and capacities of animals, compared to those of humans. It mainly focuses on the writings of Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519), Andreas Vesalius (1514–64), Pierre Belon du Mans (1517–64) and Girolamo Fabrici di Acquapendente (c. 1533–1619), all of whom can be considered as pioneers in the field of comparative anatomy. The insights that they derived from their experience in dissections of animal bodies are examined against the background of changing sensitivities with regard to animals, which have already been observed in other writings of the same period, particularly literary ones. Rather than going into a detailed comparison of anatomical findings, this essay focuses on perceptions that transcended strictly anatomical knowledge, particularly on reflections concerning the animal soul, animal intelligence and animal speech that were expressed in the writings of the above‐mentioned protagonists.

show abstract

“…On quasi-rational animals, cf. Bacon, 1857-61, 1:618-20 (De augmentis 5.2); and see furtherSerjeantson, 2001b; R. Lewis, 2012, 43-54. 42Bacon, 1996-, 11:90: ''Maximum & velut radicale discrimen ingeniorum, quoad Philosophiam & Scientias, illud est; qu od alia ingenia sint fortiora, & aptiora ad notandas rerum differentias; alia, ad notandas rerum similitudines.…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

Francis Bacon and Ingenuity^*

Lewis

2014

Renaiss. Q.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This essay discusses the Latin termingeniumwithin the writings of Francis Bacon (1561–1626). It proposes that althoughingeniumdoes not easily translate into English, Bacon uses the term in a clearly defined range of senses. For the most part, he echoes the discourse of ingenuity and inventiveness common to many sixteenth-century humanists, but differs from them in sharply delimiting the scope and status of ingenious thinking. In particular, he excludes ingenuity from the logical portion of his reformed art of discovery: as the goal of this was demonstrative knowledge, Bacon (like the Aristotelian logicians he aimed to supplant) believed that it had to be the province of the intellect, not ofingenium. A fuller understanding of the ways in which Bacon usesingeniumcasts his methodological thought into illuminating new relief, and draws attention to the manner in which Bacon’s ideas were appropriated, criticized, and misunderstood in the half century after his death — not least by the self-styled Baconians in and around the early Royal Society.

show abstract

The Passions and Animal Language, 1540-1700

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Robert Morris and a Lost 18th-Century Vegetarian Book

Robert Morris and a Lost 18th-Century Vegetarian Book

The beginnings of comparative anatomy and Renaissance reflections on the human–animal divide

Francis Bacon and Ingenuity^*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The Passions and Animal Language, 1540-1700

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Robert Morris and a Lost 18th-Century Vegetarian Book

Robert Morris and a Lost 18th-Century Vegetarian Book

The beginnings of comparative anatomy and Renaissance reflections on the human–animal divide

Francis Bacon and Ingenuity*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Francis Bacon and Ingenuity^*