Speciesism

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Speciesism (from species (= type) and ism ) denotes the moral discrimination of creatures solely for their species membership. This includes that the life or suffering of a living being is not taken into account or to a lesser extent because it does not belong to a certain species, such as the species of anatomically modern humans ( Homo sapiens ). The term was first used in 1970 by the British psychologist Richard Ryder to express a species or species egoism or centrism derived from anthropocentrism .

As a theoretical concept, it has found its way into part of the animal rights movement and animal ethics . The term is also used occasionally in the natural sciences. For example, the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins refers to the concept. It is assumed that the division into species is a social construct . Speciesism is seen as a form of oppression with parallels to racism or sexism among people. The outspoken opponents of speciesism describe themselves as anti-speciesists.

introduction

According to the antispeciesists, living beings are categorized into species using arbitrary criteria (cf. personal categorization ). This includes in particular the demarcation of humans from the rest of the animal kingdom . Above all, the human-animal dualism, which contrasts the "human" with all other "animals" and proclaims an insurmountable gap between these two poles, is attacked as a construct that legitimizes the exploitation of animals. In order to emphasize that humans are also an animal species, the term non-human animals is often used to delimit them .

According to social psychologist Melanie Joy, mechanisms that are based on an invisible social construct that she calls carnism are the basis for legitimizing, maintaining and promoting this exploitation . The term is sometimes wrongly understood as a competing or alternative definition model and criticized as confusing. Rather, the term designates the ideological framework that enables and maintains speciesist actions.

Veganism is seen as a consequence of the rejection of speciesism .

The term is mostly used by supporters of the animal rights or animal liberation movement, primarily to criticize the way society treats so-called "farm animals", but also to accuse animal rights activists for treating certain animal species preferentially and other species for food. and exploited material extraction (for cultural reasons, for example, the killing and consumption of pigs and cattle is widely accepted in the western world. However, the killing of dogs and cats and the consumption of cat or dog meat are rejected and declared illegal).

Definition according to Peter Singer

According to the Australian philosopher Peter Singer , the essence of the principle of equality is "that in our moral considerations we give equal weight to the similar interests of all those who are affected by our actions". Singer does not understand equality as descriptive equality of states, but as a prescriptive norm for mutual treatment. According to Singer, however, we must not limit this principle of equality to dealing with our fellow human beings. Rather, he emphasizes “that if we have accepted the principle of equality as a reasonable moral basis for our relationships with members of our species, then we are also obliged to accept it as a reasonable moral basis for our relationships with those outside our species. “Just as we are not justified in lowering the existing interests of beings because they belong to a different" race "or of a different sex, just as little are we entitled to lower the existing interests of beings because they belong belong to a different biological genus.

According to Singer, racism and sexism are violations of the principle of equality, because racists and sexists simply take the interests of certain people less seriously because they are assigned a different "race" or a different gender. In analogy to racism and sexism, Singer speaks of speciesism - when living beings are not discriminated on the basis of their race or gender, but on the basis of their species, i.e. on the basis of the biological species to which they belong:

"Speciesism [...] is a prejudice or an attitude of prejudice in favor of the interests of members of one's own species and against the interests of members of other species."

- Peter Singer

Term in the anti-speciesist left / animal liberation movement

For the political animal liberation movement, speciesism is the ideology by which "the exploitation of animals in human society is ideologically justified and veiled". Matthias Rude , author of the book Antispeciesism. The liberation of humans and animals in the animal rights movement and the left , writes, although the development of the productive forces “has meanwhile reached a level that would easily make it possible to forego the animal exploitation traditionally anchored in Western culture and the suffering associated with it , it continues. The relationship of exploitation that has become obsolete is justified with a speciesist ideology. "

The political animal liberation movement rejects moral-philosophical views like those of Singer as "metaphysical" and instead calls for a historical-materialistic view of the human-animal relationship, which is incompatible with moral-philosophical approaches that assume that speciesism is a moral prejudice, which produce certain actions. The opposite is the case: "We do not exploit animals because we consider them to be lower, but we consider animals to be lower because we exploit them."

Instead of modern authors such as Singer or Kaplan, the political animal liberation movement falls back on genuinely left theoretical traditions; here is mainly the Critical Theory to name, as well as on Leonard Nelson and the International Socialist Militant League or Rosa Luxembourg by reference.

In 2007, Susann Witt-Stahl 's book Softening the Stone Heart of Infinity (see “Literature”) was a collection of essays with contributions “on a critical theory for the liberation of animals” by authors such as Moshe Zuckermann and Colin Goldner .

The political animal liberation movement sees itself as a social movement within the left that demands that the traditional left concept of solidarity be expanded to include the complex of comprehensive experiences of suffering: Solidarity with animals should finally become an integral element of socialist programs and practice. The movement thus fights against animal exploitation without losing sight of the liberation of people, and thus exercises a comprehensive "solidarity with the tormentable bodies" ( Theodor W. Adorno ). In 1963, Adorno described the capitalist social structure as a large “stock corporation for the exploitation of nature”, Max Horkheimer spoke in 1934 of a “house whose basement is a slaughterhouse”. In his review of the book "Antispeciesism" by Matthias Rude, Christian Stache writes: "The criticism of speciesism and the political struggle for the liberation of animals from their yoke in the basement of our social building is the core of the anti-speciesist project."

Supporters of anti-speciesism are suspected of committing crimes against fattening farms and animal transporters in the name of their ideology. B. the Constitutional Protection of Lower Saxony .

Speciesism and Language

Similar to the feminist attempts to establish a non-sexist language without using generic masculine, for example , some anti-speciesists point out that general language is speciesist and propagate a non-speciesist use of language.

Examples of speciesist language include the devaluation of animals in the course of insulting other people as “stupid cow”, “stupid goat” or “lazy pig” or the fact that something is called “monkey”. In addition, it is criticized that even where people do not differ from the other animals, i.e. the factually the same processes or conditions are present, linguistic differences are made, for example when "eat" versus "eat", "die" versus "die" or “give birth” versus “throw” is the question. Inscribing the benefit for humans in terms such as “ farm animals ”, “ laying hens ” or “ domestic animals ” is also referred to as speciesistic.

One of the demands in the course of anti-speciesist linguistic usage is the use of the term “non-human animals” to emphasize that humans are also one of many animals. In this sense, the philosopher Jacques Derrida also criticizes the generalizing use of the term animal in the singular. By speaking of "the animal" as a contrast to humans, the diversity of animal life is concealed, since one species "animal" does not exist. Erica Fudge acknowledges Derrida's reference to the homogenizing potential in the term “animal”, but nevertheless suggests a defense. The concept of "the animal" could force people to recognize the violence towards some and affection towards other beings, which all fall under the same concept of "animal", as arbitrary and contradicting.

Sometimes it is also criticized that the term “animal” has a derogatory connotation. For this reason, the term “animal” should be used instead.

Controversy

Speciesism among animals and in hunter-gatherer societies

The charge of speciesism is only made against humans. Other animals that eat omnivorous are not accused of being speciesist. It is not possible to present the carnivorous diet to a shark or lion . Therefore, the concept of speciesism is often accused of double standards: On the one hand, humans should not violate the rights of animals , and on the other hand , some other animal species are generally tolerated as predators.

Tom Regan , however, makes a distinction between those who act morally ( moral agents ) and those who are treated morally ( moral patients ). Leonard Nelson argued in his ethical considerations with a similar division. He distinguished subjects from rights and subjects from duties . According to Nelson, to be a subject of rights it is enough to have interests. Subjects of duties, on the other hand, could only be reasonable beings who have the necessary consciousness. A living being can be a subject of rights without having to be a subject of duties at the same time.

Peter Singer argues that, unlike many animals, most people are sufficiently free to choose their diet and often avoid animal suffering. Whether or how any animal rights violations among animals require intervention is an open question among many animal rights activists, which is generally (intuitively) answered in the negative.

Left anti-speciesism emphasizes when it argues historically and materialistically that speciesism denotes an ideology that is characteristic of a certain phase of bourgeois society and should not be projected back into earlier times or into other forms of society. What we understand today by speciesist ideology emerged only with the bourgeois Enlightenment and presupposed certain ideas associated with it, such as the freedom of the individual. Indigenous hunter-gatherer cultures and animals could therefore not be accused of speciesism.

Criticism of the equation with other -isms

The theologian Ulrich HJ Körtner argues that an ethical equation of speciesism with racism or other chauvinisms is fundamentally wrong, because humans distinguish themselves through moral insight from non-human animals. Responsibility for fellow human beings arises from this fact. One can arbitrarily expand speciesism with the argument of equal treatment, since no fixed boundary between animate and inanimate nature can be drawn. It becomes understandable that ethics must be based on more than formal, utilitarian principles ( equal consideration of interests ) in order to be significant at all.

It is denied that this distinction is actually an anthropological universal. A (not necessarily anti-speciesist) group of anthropologists takes the view that boundary criteria between human and non-human animals are either not anthropologically universally valid or at least apply to some non-human animals.

Another objection is that equal consideration of interests in no way implies equality of interests : objects and plants are not assigned interests in the sense of well-being, as they lack the corresponding organs of perception and awareness. The question to what extent animals have elementary characteristics of consciousness is controversial.

The social scientist Jutta Ditfurth is one of the opponents of anti-speciesism . In her book, she throws him into barbarism. Esotericism, (eco) fascism and biocentrism suggest questioning any humanistic values.

See also

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Richard D. Ryder: Speciesism Again: The original leaflet. Archived from the original on November 14, 2012. In: Critical Society . 1, No. 2, 2010, pp. 1-2. Retrieved December 4, 2011.
  2. ^ R. Dawkins: Gaps in the mind. In: The Great Ape Project. Edited by Paola Cavalieri and Peter Singer. Fourth Estate 1993.
  3. ^ Corey Wrenn: Carnism is Confusing In: The Examiner 2012 . ( German translation (PDF))
  4. (Joy 2010) , “Why we love dogs, eat pigs and raise cows”, compassion media 2013, ISBN 978-3-9814621-7-3 , pp. 30–38
  5. Peter Singer: Practical Ethics . Reclam, Stuttgart 1994, p. 39.
  6. Peter Singer: Practical Ethics . Reclam, Stuttgart 1994, p. 82.
  7. Peter Singer: Practical Ethics . Reclam, Stuttgart 1994, p. 83.
  8. ^ Peter Singer: Animal Liberation. The liberation of the animals . Rowohlt, Reinbek 1996, p. 58.
  9. ^ Peter Singer: Animal Liberation. The liberation of the animals . Rowohlt, Reinbek 1996, p. 35.
  10. ^ Matthias Rude: Antispeciesism. The liberation of humans and animals in the animal rights movement and the left . Butterfly-Verlag, Stuttgart 2013, p. 12.
  11. Ibid., P. 14.
  12. So Marco Maurizi in an interview with the animal rights group Zurich (PDF, 319 kB).
  13. Ibid.
  14. For a short presentation: Susann Witt-Stahl (Tierrechts Aktion Nord): The Frankfurt School: Solidarity with the tormentable bodies
  15. ^ Susann Witt-Stahl (Tierrechts Aktion Nord): Leonard Nelson: Justice for the most defenseless!
  16. Matthias Rude (Antispeciesist Action Tübingen): Experience of suffering and solidarity: The animals of Rosa Luxemburg . (PDF; 213 kB) In: Neues Deutschland , 21./22. May 2011, weekend edition
  17. Cf. also the book by Matthias Rude, in which left traditions of the fight against animal exploitation from the 17th century to the present day are traced.
  18. Christian Stache: "For the liberation of humans and animals"
  19. Attacks on fattening systems - violence in the name of animal welfare is increasing In: Hessische / Niedersächsische Allgemeine dated September 21, 2011
  20. Lukas Häuptlif: Swiss animal rights activists radicalize themselves In: NZZ am Sonntag of March 18, 2017.
  21. Meeting of the Lower Saxony State Parliament on September 16, 2011; Question time 5: radical animal rights activists in the focus of the protection of the constitution
  22. From the monster's dictionary. A consideration by Sina Walden. ( Memento from March 10, 2012 in the Internet Archive )
  23. Joan Dunayer: Animal Equality. Language and Liberation. Derwood, Maryland 2001. Ryce Publishing.
  24. See Jacques Derrida: The Animal That Therefore I Am (original title L'Animal que donc je suis ). New York 2008. page 31.
  25. ^ Closing words in Erica Fudge: Animal  (= Focus on Contemporary Issues). Reaction Books, October 2, 2004, ISBN 1-86189-134-2 .
  26. Chimaira Working Group: An Introduction to Social Human-Animal Relationships and Human-Animal Studies . In: Chimaira - Working Group for Human-Animal Studies (Hrsg.): Human-Animal Studies. About the social nature of human and animal relationships . Bielefeld 2011, pp. 7–42, p. 33.
  27. ^ Regan: The Case for Animal Rights
  28. ^ Leonard Nelson: Lectures on the basics of ethics. Second volume. System of philosophical ethics and pedagogy. Göttingen-Hamburg: Publishing house publ. Life, 1949. pp. 117/118
  29. "In hunter-gatherer societies, there is no speciesism as we know it." - A specter is haunting: The specter of Antispeziesismus , Antispeziesistische action Tübingen of 2010.
  30.  ( page no longer available , search in web archives )@1@ 2Template: Toter Link / www.univie.ac.at
  31. See also special edition of the Journal of Ethics: Animal Minds
  32. Jutta Ditfurth : Relaxed into barbarism. Esotericism, (eco) fascism and biocentrism. Konkret-Literatur-Verlag, Hamburg 1996, ISBN 3-89458-148-4 .