Victorious Declarations of Knowledge Study Guide #2 ISS-210 (002/007/022/028) Fall 2019 – Dr. Seven Exam 2 - 100 pts To succeed on the upcoming Victorious Declaration of Knowledge, please review the readings: Ishmael - Ch. 8 – 13 (the end), Hurn - Ch. 5, 7, 11, and Patterson, Francine and Wendy Gordon. 1998. “The case for the personhood of gorillas.” Next, review the TopHat PowerPoint Lectures and your course notes (Weeks 6-9). Pay particular attention to the terms and concepts listed on this study guide. If a word is listed below, you will want to know the definition. If a further question is noted under that word, answer it to the best of your ability. Please complete before the study session so you have time to ask questions! Remember you also have your PAL as a resource, as well as office hours. We’re all here to help you succeed! � Domestication � What is the old theory of how humans domesticated animals? � Common story that humans decided to domesticate and, thus, stole wolf cubs (or other animal) and raised them and bred them � Problem with this theory: � No agency for the animals � No mutuality between human and animal � We saw this control-based, domination of domesticated animals due to the frame of social evolutionism and because of our current relationship with domesticated animals in our lives � Do non-human animals have agency? Is it mutualistic? � � They don’t have agency. Not mutualistic What is the current theory of how humans domesticated animals? � Symboisis � Do non-human animals have agency? Is it mutualistic? � They do have agency. Mututalistic. � Social evolutionism � What is this and how did it influence our initial theories of domestication? � Social evolutionism divided human cultures into evolutionary stages ranging from primitive to civilized — with the wealthiest Europeans and Americans on top — 1 9th-20th century widespread belief � Also known as Social Darwinism and Cultural Evolutionism � Took the notion of natural selection and survival of the fittest and attempted to apply it to social and cultural aspects of humanity — based on cultural aspects like technology use, kinship structures, etc. � Based on eugenics, racist ideology, and our old friend, ethnocentrism � Perceptions of the transition from Hunter-Gathering to Farming and Domestication biased due to Social Evolutionism � If society is set up from primitive and barbaric to civilized — adopting technology like European civilization is viewed as more advanced (despite need/adaptation/etc.) � We saw this control-based, domination of domesticated animals due to the frame of social evolutionism and because of our current relationship with domesticated animals in our lives � Symbiosis � Please describe the current domestication theory � interaction between two different organisms living in close physical association, typically to the advantage of both. � � Self-domestication, co-evolution � Mutual process — both benefit Know examples of how we came to understand how domestication works (e.g. cats, the fox experiment, the Sami – read Hurn and review notes) � Examples - � Dogs as self-domesticating wolves; � Saami and Reindeer herds � Cats and rodents in early farms � Domestication Animal Contract � What are the basic traits of the Domestication Animal Contract? � tophat question � in class example - pet example � we provide for a pet and they give loyalty and companionship � Wild, Tame, and Commensal � Know the differences between these � Wild: non-domesticated, full agency of self � Tame: not dangerous to people, nor frightened of people � Commensal: 2 organisms living in the same space as one another but they’re not helping or hurting one another so they just coexist. � cat e.g. � Post-domesticity � What are the key traits of a post-domestic society? � Removal of most consumers from the reality of intensive livestock production � Close, anthropomorphic relationship with pets � Suppressed guilt about industrialized farming practices � Rise of vegetarianism, veganism, and "ethical" animal product choices � Does Richard Bulliet think Industrial Animal Agriculture (e.g. Confined Animal Feeding Operations) is mutualistic? � we are living in a time where attitudes towards animals are shaped by peoples' removal from them in their everyday life. � Chickens video in warehouse - animals are crammed b/c of mass production � not mutualistic � Okja, and how it relates to: � � Personhood � Exam 1 � personhood: another object has agency and is a person � Okja and Mija relationship Agency � The superpigs were a lab made product for consumerism, and they didn’t have agency � � Okja had agency back home with Mija Post-domesticity � definition: � How is Okja a product of a post-domestic society? � Post-domestic society is based on animal treatment, and it can be seen how badly the superpigs are treated as they are made in masses... � Sahlins’ ‘model of edibility” � idea that animals close to us physically and emotionally are not edible � animals are categorized according to classic structuralist oppositions. He argued that, as a rule, humans eat animals who are far removed from their culturally constructed notion of humanity. � a series of concentric circles with humans and the animals they hold dear to them (and whose flesh is therefore taboo) in the centre. � E.g. - horses are considered taboo to eat � Cultural Materialism � Materialism contends that the physical world impacts and sets constraints on human behavior. � We make decisions on what to eat based on our material constraints and needs � e.g. - desert in middle east prevents pig farming � Why do some cultures not eat pigs? � Mary Douglas perspective � Pigs are considered impure, as they have hooves but do not chew cud - they go against the law of creation � � they viewed them as dirty Marvin Harris perspective � cultural materialistic vid � cultures from mid east not eating pig so it’s not economical to eat pigs because there’s no access to them � inefficient to eat pigs cus in desert � how physical world sets constraints on human behavior � How do we learn what/who counts as food and what/who does not? � Enculturation is the main idea � Ethics � Culture � Health � Religion � Environmental � Cognitive dissonance � What kind of cognitive dissonance occurs in post-domestic societies? � The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change. � Cognitive dissonance regarding killing animals is more common in post-domestic societies, where animals are killed far from the general population. � The Absent Referant � Referencing the living being who was killed in order to produce animal products tends to make consumers uncomfortable — thus, in postdomestic societies we serve and name and produce food in a way that does not resemble the living being it once was. � A vegetarian/vegan at a dinner table can bring the absent referent to the meal (even without saying anything) — causing defensiveness and discomfort on the part of the consumers � Making Animals Killable � What does it mean to make animals killable? � process that justifies lack of remorse for consuming animal products � killing represents by far the most common form of human interaction with animals. � Humans kill animals for food, for pleasure, to wear, and as religious acts, yet despite the ubiquity of this killing, analyzing the practice has generally remained the exclusive purview of animal rights advocates � How does distance from the production of animal products help make the animals killable? � When you have limited to no contact with a group of people or animals, it is easier to attribute traits to them – these can be fears, idealizations (e.g. noble savage), narratives, etc. � E.g. One of the roots of xenophobia is the lack of interaction with people different from yourself � � e.g. pets vs livestock � no distance makes it easier to make them killable How do we make animals killable? � Killing another living beings for consumption occurs across time and cultures � For this to occur, we need to make animals killable � Though not often acknowledged openly, killing represents by far the most common form of human interaction with animals. � Humans kill animals for food, for pleasure, to wear, and as religious acts, yet despite the ubiquity of this killing, analyzing the practice has generally remained the exclusive purview of animal rights advocates � Enter Anthrozoology for a less biased, academic look into killing animals across cultures � What worldview makes animals killable in American culture? � distance - close to pets � no connection with livestock � Anthropocentrism � Industrialization of Animal Production � Why and when did this begin? � Huge shift to mass production beginning alongside other technology in the late 19th century, and booming in the 1940s and 50s � Refrigerated railcars, increased population, increased wealth, etc. � Consumption of animal products - meat especially - began to steadily rise � b/c meat is highly cultural & it’s associated with wealth - having meat on the table is associated with being okay � Technological, biological and pharmaceutical advances to aid mass production � How did chickens’ bodies change over time? � humans could enhance chickens to be bigger to produce more meat � 1940s and 50s - Steps taken to mass produce chicken: � Adding vitamin A and D to food led to the ability to raise chickens entirely indoors � Early Problems: � Disease was rampant in these crowded, poorly ventilated spaces and birds pecked themselves and each other out of stress from the unnatural conditions � Solutions: � Pharmaceutical companies used antibiotics to feed � Beaks removed to prevent loss from pecking � 'Chicken of Tomorrow' contest to find a strain of chicken that could produce a broad-breasted carcass at low feed cost � What is the role of technology in industrial animal production? � Huge shift to mass production beginning alongside other technology in the late 19th century, and booming in the 1940s and 50s � Refrigerated railcars, increased population, increased wealth, etc. � Technological, biological and pharmaceutical advances to aid mass production � Blind Chickens � Who are they? Why do they pose such an interesting question? � There's a strain of chickens that are blind, and this was not produced through biotechnology. It was actually an accident that got developed into a particular strain of chickens. Now blind chickens, it turns out, don't mind being crowded together so much as normal chickens do. � And so one suggestion is that, `Well, we ought to shift over to all blind chickens as a solution to our animal welfare problems that are associated with crowding in the poultry industry.' Is this permissible on animal welfare grounds? � Here, we have what I think is a real philosophical conundrum. If you think that it's the welfare of the individual animal that really matters here, how the animals are doing, then it would be more humane to have these blind chickens. On the other hand, almost everybody that you ask thinks that this is an absolutely horrendous thing to do. � Reality Check � Blind chickens: real –not currently in use � Kinder gentler chickens, pigs –under serious development � Enviropig – awaiting approval � Beak trimming, tail docking –widely used � So why not blind chickens? � Externalities � What are the key externalities of industrial animal production? � an externality is the cost or benefit that affects a party who did not choose to incur that cost or benefit. � The price you pay does not always reflect how much a product is worth � E.g. � Waste pits � Antibiotics � Water use � Land use � Feed � Fossil Fuels � Air pollution � Labor � Health effects � Subsidies � Definition: a sum of money granted by the government or a public body to assist an industry or business so that the price of a commodity or service may remain low or competitive. � What are these and why do we have them? � Began with the New Deal during the Great Depression � Cultural aspect – meat at every meal is traditionally associated with wealth in American culture � Continues on today � Reduces risk - e.g. risk of the farm industry collapsing if the gov gives money Ishmael (Ch. 8-13) � What are the three things Takers do that are never done in the rest of the community? (Ch. 8) � extermine their competitors � systematically destroy their competitors’ food sources in order to make room for its own food. � deny their competitors access to food � In the wild, species protect only their own food supply, and do not bother with those of their competitors � What is the peace-keeping law? (Ch. 8) � The peacekeeping law describes the way of how we ought to live. � Benefits: � No population will go extinct � everyone will live in harmony � lions and zebras e.g. - lions eat zebras but the zebras wouldn’t resent the lions because they accept it and understand the natural order � and no competition within the environment � Promotes order thus diversity → Diversity is a survival factor for the community itself. gg � Compete to the full extent � Why is diversity a survival factor for the community as a whole? (Ch. 8) � Diversity is a survival factor for the community itself. A community of a hundred million species can survive almost anything short of total global catastrophe. But a community of a hundred species or a thousand species has almost no survival value at all. � plane - each animal represents piece of plane - screws fall out so then plane falls apart- the more screws (animals), better off you’ll be because it’s harder to wipe everything out that way � According to Ishmael, why does the human population keep growing? (Ch. 8) � higher birthrate = higher production = better economy = higher production = higher birthrate. And the circle is round. � human activities lead to more reproduction � What does Mother Culture say about population control? � Mother culture supports population growth � she thinks people can get the issues of excess population � What happens to Mother Culture if we cease listening to her? (Ch. 8) � if we ignore it, we’ll adopt different beliefs and mother culture will die out � leaver culture is against mother culture � According to Ishmael, when did the agricultural revolution end? (Ch. 9) � There is no specific end to the Agricultural Revolution, Ishmael concludes. It’s still spreading all over the world. � What is the knowledge Takers have that Leavers do not? (Ch. 9) � Ishmael notes that Takers believe that they possess the most fundamental knowledge of all, knowledge indispensable to those who want to rule the world. Accordingly, the Takers believe that the Leavers lack this “knowledge” � Is the story of Adam eating from the Tree of Knowledge a story from the Takers or Leavers’ point of view, according to Ishmael? (Ch. 9) � How can we tell? � The gods decided to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and in doing so gain the knowledge of who should live and who should die. this was from the perspective of the leavers � takers see tree of knowledge � leavers eat from the tree of life � ishmael thinks adam should’ve been content without eating the apple � making takers look bad � For Ishmael, what does the story of Cain and Abel represent? (Ch. 9) � Cain represents the takers who must kill the leavers in order to expand agricultural expansion. Abel represents the leavers. Since takers are agriculturalist and need land, they take other people’s land � Why do the Takers discard past knowledge? (Ch. 10) � if the takers discard leaver knowledge, the takers can take over � What information was saved? � � things that were important to taker culture � they kept mother culture How is this different from Leaver memory? � mother culture promotes taker culture � leaver memory stay the same - pass on same knowledge � The Takers accumulate knowledge for what works well for…? (Ch. 10) � Takers accumulate knowledge about what works well for things, while the Leavers accumulate knowledge about what works well for people. Even though Leavers only worry about knowledge that works well for their particular cultures, their form of knowledge is what is known as "wisdom" � What this means is that every time the Takers destroy a Leaver culture, a certain age-old wisdom is lost. � The Leavers accumulate knowledge for what works well for…? � people � driving-knowledge of things, � modern examples - taker culture � getting food-people knowledge � hunter gatherer examples - people knowledge � Ishmael study questions � Cain and Abel - What does this story mean to Ishmael? � Cain represents the takers who must kill the leavers in order to expand agricultural expansion. Abel represents the leavers. Since takers are agriculturalist and need land, they take other people’s land � The tree of knowledge - what does this story mean to Ishmael? � The gods decided to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and in doing so gain the knowledge of who should live and who should die. this was from the perspective of the leavers. � Discuss four differences between leaver culture and taker culture � 1. Taker culture will run out of things to kill and will die � 2. Leaver culture sustains itself through the law of limited competition � 3. Leaver culture involves a close and emotional relationship with animals. � 4. Takers think that the world belongs to man, while leavers think man belongs to the world � The Takers accumulate knowledge that works well for _, but the Leavers accumulate knowledge that works well for . � � A. Things; Animals � B. People; Things � C. Things; People � D. Animals; Environment � AN: C. According to Ishmael, why do Takers not follow the peace-keeping law? � A: They want control � in the hands of the gods � “The takers are those who know god & evil & the leavers are those who live in the hands of the gods” � � what does this mean? � would u want to live in the hands of the gods? Premise � � What happens to mother culture if we cease listening to her � � what is the premise of we act out our culture daily - language, clothing, food, what does mother culture say about population control � if we have food, then we can have kids � enculturation - helps determine what to eat & what not to eat � firile - know meaning
