Creaturely solidarity: rethinking human-nonhuman relations
This essay examines several recent contributions to the growing literature on animal ethics from Christian perspectives. I categorize the four books under review in one of three ways depending on the scholars' methodological points of departure: (1) a reconstruction of the place of other animal...
| Subtitles: | Book discussion |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic/Print Review |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Wiley
[2014]
|
| In: |
Journal of religious ethics
Year: 2014, Volume: 42, Issue: 4, Pages: 743-768 |
| Review of: | For Love of Animals: Christian Ethics, Consistent Action (Cincinnati, Oh. : Franciscan Media, 2013) (Kao, Grace Y.) On animals ; 1: Systematic theology (London [u.a.] : T&T Clark, 2012) (Kao, Grace Y.) The friends we keep (Waco, Tex. : Baylor University Press, 2010) (Kao, Grace Y.) Animal ethics and theology (New York : Routledge, 2012) (Kao, Grace Y.) |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Protection of animals ethics
/ Christian ethics
|
| RelBib Classification: | NCA Ethics NCG Environmental ethics; Creation ethics |
| Further subjects: | B
Book review
|
| Online Access: |
Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | This essay examines several recent contributions to the growing literature on animal ethics from Christian perspectives. I categorize the four books under review in one of three ways depending on the scholars' methodological points of departure: (1) a reconstruction of the place of other animals in Christian history through a selective retrieval of texts and practices; (2) an identification of a key Christian ethical principle; and (3) a reconsideration of foundational doctrines of systematic theology. On the premise that social ethicists are interested in not only understanding the world, but also changing it, I observe that these authors have offered different answers to the following three questions: (1) whether the theoretical basis for reform is ultimately grounded upon notions of human sameness or difference with other animals; (2) whether scholar-activists should emphasize logic over passion or values over interests (or vice versa) in their calls for transformation; and (3) whether moral motivation for their targeted audiences is best served by reliance upon secular argumentation and interdisciplinary research or upon the distinctive claims of revelation and other tradition-specific norms. I conclude by offering my own thoughts about which approaches might prove more effective than others. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0384-9694 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of religious ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/jore.12080 |