How the Politics of Inclusion/Exclusion and the Neuroscience of Dehumanization/Rehumanization Can Contribute to Animal Activists' Strategies: Bestia Sacer II

Juxtaposing the continental philosophy of inclusion/exclusion and the cognitive and affective neuroscience of dehumanization, infrahumanization, and rehumanization may inform animal activists’ strategies. Both fields focus upon how we decide who counts and who doesn’t. Decisions over who’s human (or like us) and who isn’t (i.e., who’s an animal, or not like us) are not simply about species membership but involve biopolitical value judgments over who we wish to include or exclude. Posthumanists seek to disrupt the biopolitics of inclusion/exclusion, partly to heal ethical and political relations between human and nonhuman animals. Calarco calls this jamming Agamben’s anthropological machine. Bestia Sacer are those designated as included or excluded, moving among zones of humans, nonhuman animals, and things. Cognitive and affective neuroscience describes how mechanisms of inclusion/exclusion function in dehumanization, infrahumanization, and rehumanization. Humans assign varying degrees of humanity to others according to in-group/out-group status in judgments open to manipulation. Investigating how these mechanisms operate in human perceptions of nonhuman animals may inform activist strategies, transforming ethical and political relations between humans and nonhuman animals and end the exclusion of Bestia Sacer.

[1]  H. Herzog,et al.  Moral Emotions and Social Activism: The Case of Animal Rights , 2009 .

[2]  Susan T. Fiske,et al.  Toward socially inspired social neuroscience , 2006, Brain Research.

[3]  Howard C. Nusbaum,et al.  Neuroimaging as a New Tool in the Toolbox of Psychological Science , 2008 .

[4]  Robin Mackenzie.  Bestia Sacer and Agamben’s Anthropological Machine: Biomedical/legal Taxonomies As Somatechnologies of Human and Nonhuman Animals’ Ethico-political Relations , 2009 .

[5]  Taimie L. Bryant.  Similarity or Difference as a Basis for Justice: Must Animals Be Like Humans To Be Legally Protected From Humans? , 2005 .

[6]  A. Knight.  “Bats, snakes and spiders, Oh my!” How aesthetic and negativistic attitudes, and other concepts predict support for species protection , 2008 .

[7]  Kalliopi Nikolopoulou,et al.  Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life , 1998 .

[8]  The true costs of euthanasia in animal shelters: a comprehensive examination , 2010 .

[9]  David M. Amodio,et al.  The social neuroscience of intergroup relations , 2008 .

[10]  D. Jamieson.  The Rights of Animals and the Demands of Nature , 2008 .

[11]  P. Devine,et al.  Stereotyping and evaluation in implicit race bias: evidence for independent constructs and unique effects on behavior. , 2006, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[12]  A. Podberscek.  Good to Pet and Eat: The Keeping and Consuming of Dogs and Cats in South Korea , 2009 .

[13]  Stuart J. Murray,et al.  No to Biopolitical Tattooing , 2008 .

[14]  R. Beatson,et al.  Humans rule! The effects of creatureliness reminders, mortality salience and self-esteem on attitudes towards animals. , 2007, The British journal of social psychology.

[15]  G. Francione.  Animal Welfare and the Moral Value of Nonhuman Animals , 2010 .

[16]  C. Wolfe.  Before the Law: Animals in a Biopolitical Context , 2010 .

[17]  S. Lavi.  Animal Laws and the Politics of Life: Slaughterhouse Regulation in Germany, 1870-1917 , 2006 .

[18]  N. Haslam,et al.  Attributing and denying humanness to others , 2008 .

[19]  S. Fiske,et al.  Social neuroscience evidence for dehumanised perception , 2009 .

[20]  Deborah L. Wells,et al.  The Effects of Animals on Human Health and Well-Being , 2009 .

[21]  Amy J. C. Cuddy,et al.  Warmth and Competence As Universal Dimensions of Social Perception: The Stereotype Content Model and the BIAS Map , 2008 .

[22]  J. Haidt.  The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. , 2001, Psychological review.

[23]  Steven L. Neuberg,et al.  INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS AND GROUP PROCESSES Different Emotional Reactions to Different Groups : A Sociofunctional Threat-Based Approach to “ Prejudice ” , 2005 .

[24]  M. Fox.  Taking Dogs Seriously? , 2010 .

[25]  R. Mackenzie.  Regulating Reprogenetics: Strategic Sacralisation and Semantic Massage , 2007, Health Care Analysis.

[26]  N. Haslam.  Dehumanization: An Integrative Review , 2006, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[27]  T. Signal,et al.  Pet, Pest, Profit: Isolating Differences in Attitudes towards the Treatment of Animals , 2009 .

[28]  Kyle O’Keefe,et al.  The Igliniit Project: Combining Inuit Knowledge and Geomatics Engineering to Develop a New Observation Tool for Hunters , 2010 .

[29]  J. Serpell,et al.  Anthropomorphism and Anthropomorphic Selection—Beyond the "Cute Response" , 2002 .

[30]  K. Bard,et al.  Science versus Human Welfare? Understanding Attitudes toward Animal Use , 2009 .

[31]  S. Loughnan,et al.  Attitudes toward animals: the effect of priming thoughts of human-animal similarities and mortality salience on the evaluation of companion animals , 2009 .

[32]  C. Croney,et al.  Board-invited review: the ethical and behavioral bases for farm animal welfare legislation. , 2007, Journal of animal science.

[33]  Francesca Cagnacci,et al.  Managing wildlife: A spatial information system for GPS collars data , 2008, Environ. Model. Softw..

[34]  Mahzarin R. Banaji,et al.  The Neural Basis of Implicit Attitudes , 2008 .

[35]  R. Horgan,et al.  The expanding role of animal welfare within EU legislation and beyond , 2006 .

[36]  Susan T. Fiske,et al.  Providing Expert Knowledge in an Adversarial Context: Social Cognitive Science in Employment Discrimination Cases , 2008 .

[37]  N. Haslam,et al.  Animals and Androids , 2007, Psychological science.

[38]  J. Serpell.  Factors influencing human attitudes to animals and their welfare , 2004, Animal Welfare.

[39]  Sarah Batt,et al.  Human attitudes towards animals in relation to species similarity to humans: a multivariate approach , 2009 .

[40]  R. Esposito.  Bios: Biopolitics and Philosophy , 2008 .

[41]  L. Carbone.  What animals want : expertise and advocacy in laboratory animal welfare policy , 2004 .

[42]  A. Hall,et al.  Anthropomorphism, empathy, and perceived communicative ability vary with phylogenetic relatedness to humans. , 2010 .

[43]  R. Haynes.  Animal Welfare: Competing Conceptions And Their Ethical Implications , 2008 .

[44]  M. Bekoff.  Animal Passions and Beastly Virtues: Reflections on Redecorating Nature , 2006 .