Advertisement

Animal Studies, Animal Ethics

  • Pauline Delahaye
Chapter
Part of the Biosemiotics book series (BSEM, volume 19)

Abstract

Evaluation sub-question n°1: what are the problematic ethical aspects of animal studies that semiotics can answer?

This chapter is meant to present the different problems one can be confronted with while studying animals, starting with general issues. It will thus tackle the philosophical difficulty represented by the fact of working with living beings, especially the difficulty in trying to understand foreign minds. The question of emergency situations and their handling will also be addressed. It will then examine the issues regarding ethics applied to animal studies directly, such as the problems raised by the study of endangered species, cognitively complex species, or even the question of animal suffering. In the end, we will present solutions that the semiotic methodology brings, both for general issues and for more specifically ethical problems.

Keywords

Animal ethics Endangered species Pain Cognitive abilities Population management 

References

  1. Association Grand Paris Sémiotique. (2019). L’Engagement. Confrontations sémiotiques. To be published.Google Scholar
  2. Béata, C. (Ed.). (2009). Zoopsychiatrie: L’attachement. Marseille: Solal Editeurs.Google Scholar
  3. Béata, C. (2013). Au risque d’aimer. Paris: Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
  4. Bertrand, D., & Darras, B. (2019). In Association Grand Paris Sémiotique, L’Engagement. Confrontations sémiotiques. To be published.Google Scholar
  5. Christen, Y. (2011). L’Animal est-il une personne ? Barcelone: Flammarion.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Waal, F. (2013). Le Bonobo, Dieu et nous. Lonrai: Les Liens qui Libèrent.Google Scholar
  7. De Waal, F., & Robert, M. (2002). De la réconciliation chez les primates. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
  8. Delahaye, P. (2013). Application de la zoosémiotique à l’éthologie: peut-on parler de culture animale ? Paris: Université Paris V René Descartes.Google Scholar
  9. Despret, V. (2009). Il est temps d’en finir avec Harlow. In C. Béata (Ed.), Zoopsychiatrie: L’attachement (p. 13). Marseille: Solal Editeurs.Google Scholar
  10. Eco, U. (1999). Kant et l’ornithorynque. Paris: Grasset.Google Scholar
  11. Estay, V., & Horrein, R. (2019). Reculer pour mieux s’engager ? Sémiotique et Cultural Studies. In Association Grand Paris Sémiotique, L’Engagement. Confrontations sémiotiques. To be published.Google Scholar
  12. Festing, M. F. W. (1998). Reducing the use of laboratory animals in biomedical research: Problems and possible solutions. Alternative to Laboratory Animals, 26, 283–301.Google Scholar
  13. Feynman, R. P. (2000). Le cours de physique de Feynman 5: Mécanique quantique. Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
  14. Flecknell, P. A. (1994). Refinement of animal use – assessment and alleviation of pain and distress. Laboratory Animals, 28, 222–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fossey, D. (1970). Making friends with mountain gorillas. National Geographic, 137, 48–67.Google Scholar
  16. Fouts, R., & Mills, S. T. (1998). L’école des chimpanzés: ce que les chimpanzés nous apprennent sur l’humanité. Paris: J. C. Lattès.Google Scholar
  17. Goodall, J. (1986). The Chimpanzees of Gombe: patterns of behavior. Boston: Bellknap Press of theHarvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Guillaume, A. (2014). Animal: « être sensible » unanimement désensibilisé. Sémiotique du sensible. Revue trimestrielle de la Fondation Droit Animal, Éthique et. Sciences, 81, 35–37.Google Scholar
  19. Hoffmeyer, J. (2008). Biosemiotics. An examination into the signs of life and the life of signs. Scranton: University of Scranton Press.Google Scholar
  20. Kull, K. (1998). On Semiosis, Umwelt, and Semiosphere. Semiotica, 120(3/4), 299–310.Google Scholar
  21. Russell, W. M. S., & Burch, R. L. (1959). The principles of humane experimental technique. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  22. Ryabov, V. A. (2016). The study of acoustic signals and the supposed spoken language of the dolphin. St. Petersburg Polytechnical University Journal: Physics and Mathematics, 2(3), 231–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith, A. (Yankelovich, D.). (1972). Supermoney. New York: Popular Library.Google Scholar
  24. Sueur, C., & Pelé, M. (2016). Social network and decision-making in primates: A report on Franco-Japanese research collaborations. Primates, 57, 327–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tammet, D. (2009). Je suis né un jour bleu (p. 84). Paris: Éditions.Google Scholar
  26. Wechkin, S., Masserman, J. H., & Terris, W. (1964). Shock to a conspecific as an aversive stimulus. Psychonomic Science, 1, 47–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Whiten, A., & Boesch, C. (2001). The cultures of chimpanzees. Scientific American, 284, 60–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pauline Delahaye
    • 1
  1. 1.Paris-Sorbonne UniversityParisFrance

Personalised recommendations