MARC Record from harvard_bibliographic_metadata

LEADER: 03452cam a22003374a 4500
001 010247637-3
005 20140731171328.0
008 061218s2007 enk b 001 0 eng
010 $a 2006102304
020 $a0199282064 (hbk. : alk. paper)
020 $a9780199282067 (hbk. : alk. paper)
035 0 $aocm77572849
040 $aDLC$cDLC$dBAKER$dYDXCP$dBWKUK$dBTCTA
050 00 $aHV4708$b.O73 2007
082 00 $a179/.3$222
100 1 $aRowett, Catherine.
245 10 $aDumb beasts and dead philosophers :$bhumanity and the humane in ancient philosophy and literature /$cCatherine Osborne.
260 $aOxford :$bClarendon Press ; New York : Oxford University Press,$c2007.
300 $a262 p. ;$c25 cm.
504 $aIncludes bibliographical references (p. [243]-248) and indexes.
505 0 $aPart I. Constructing divisions -- Introduction : on William Blake, nature, and mortality -- On nature and providence : readings in Herodotus, Protagoras, and Democritus -- Part II. Perceiving continuities -- On the transmigration of souls : reincarnation into animal bodies in Pythagoras, Empedocles, and Plato -- On language, concepts, and automata : rational and irrational animals in Aristotle and Descartes -- On the disadvantages of being a complex organism : Aristotle and the scala naturae -- Part III. Being realistic -- On the vice of sentimentality : Androcles and the lion and some extraordinary adventures in the Desert Fathers -- On the notion of natural rights : defending the voiceless and oppressed in the tragedies of Sophocles -- On self-defence and utilitarian calculations : Democritus of Abdera and Hermarchus of Mytilene -- On eating animals : Porphyry's dietary rules for philosophers.
520 $aAnimal rights do not feature explicitly in ancient thought. Indeed the notion of natural rights in general is not obviously present in the classical world. Plato and Aristotle are typically read as racist and elitist thinkers who barely recognise the humanity of their fellow humans. Surely they would be the last to show up as models of the humane view of other kinds? In this unusual philosophy book, Catherine Osborne asks the reader to think again. She shows that Plato's views on reincarnation and Aristotle's views on the souls of plants and animals reveal a continuous thread of life in which humans are not morally superior to beasts; Greek tragedy turns up thoughts that mirror the claims of rights activists when they speak for the voiceless; the Desert Fathers teach us to admire the natural perceptiveness of animals rather than the corrupt ways of urban man; the long tradition of arguments for vegetarianism in antiquity highlights how mankind's abuse of other animals is the more offensive the more it is for indulgent ends. What, then, is the humane attitude, and why is it better? How does the humane differ from the sentimental? Is there a truth about how we should treat animals? By reflecting on the work of the ancient poets and philosophers, Osborne argues, we can see when and how we lost touch with the natural intelligence of dumb animals.--Book jacket.
650 0 $aAnimal welfare$xPhilosophy$xHistory.
650 0 $aPhilosophy, Ancient.
650 0 $aAnimals in literature.
650 0 $aLiterature, Ancient$xHistory and criticism.
650 0 $aAnimals and civilization.
655 7 $aCriticism, interpretation, etc.$2fast
655 7 $aHistory.$2fast
988 $a20070301
906 $0DLC