Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 11

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Weganizm a reduktarianizm

100%
EN
This paper attempts to show several aspects of relations between veganism and reducetarianism. It analyses current definitions of both practices with particular emphasis on the evolution of a definition of reducetarianism – from the practice of a reduction of meat's consumption to the practice of a reduction of consumption of animal products in general. Then, on a basis of reducetarian's publications, the depiction of vegans and veganism is analyzed. The article ends with a presentation of arguments for maintaining a two-element classification of dietary practices with regard to animal products: reducetarianism (a reduction of animal products without an intention of their exclusion) and veganism (a reduction with an intention of such an exclusion).  
PL
W artykule analizowana jest, głównie na podstawie materiałów The Reducetarian Foundation, ewolucja i różnorodność definicji i opisu reduktarianizmu, a także klasyczna definicja weganizmu przygotowana przez The Vegan Society. Badane są relacje pomiędzy dwoma postawami, zarówno w aspekcie formalnym opartym na zestawieniu definicji, jak i osobistym, na podstawie opinii poszczególnych osób. Przeprowadzone analizy prowadzą do próby znalezienia odpowiedzi na pytanie czy weganizm jest i/lub powinien być uznany za formę reduktarianizmu.
EN
The article presents the reflections on the Animal Question, considered in various aspects: philosophical, ethical, economical and cultural. Author brings up the problem of language, that humans use speaking about animals, which is clearly involved into structure of power. One of the most striking problems is variety and diversification of beings that word ‘Animal’ apply to, which enhance anthropocentric opposition between human and non-human animals. Being aware that language is actually a conceptualization of animality, Dariusz Gzyra reveals how our everyday reality involves problem of animals especially when it comes to social institutions. One of the main thesis is the one that shows connection between discourse (the way we perceive animals) and social practice (the way we treat them). That is why objectification (animal as a peace of meat) or infantilisation (conceptualization of animality in cartoons) are deeply connected with animal farms, industry of pets or animal spectacles like circus. In this article Dariusz Gzyra deals with different aspects of speciesism. Through references to Rosi Braidotti’s, Donna Haraway’s and Monika Bakke’s works author of these thesis shows inner complicity of speciesism, which infects deeply on human perception of animals, environment and ourselves.
EN
The interests of nonhuman animals within political philosophy have been and are still overlooked and underestimated. Recognition by modern science, and – increasingly – ethics, of the subjectivity and vulnerability of many animals does not extend to recognizing them as anything more than a secondary object of politics. In recent years, however, new concepts have emerged emphasizing the subjectivity and political agency of nonhuman animals. One of them is the concept of zoopolis by Sue Donaldson and Will Kymlicka. It postulates the use of political and legal categories that previously defined only men: citizenship, denizenship and sovereignty. Through citing earlier attempts at politicization of the animal detriment issue, the article presents the major hypothesis of the zoopolis concept and discusses some examples of its previous criticism.
PL
Artykuł jest szkicowym ujęciem wybranych stanowisk filozoficznych związanych z etycznym problemem odbierania życia. Na podstawie prac i wypowiedzi Johna Sanbonmatsu, Petera Singera, Toma Regana i Elizabeth Harman, zostaje poddane analizie związek pomiędzy określeniem wartości życia a kwestią ciągłości w czasie indywidualnej tożsamości psychofizycznej jednostki (zwierzęcia, w tym człowieka) oraz zależność przyjmowania określonego stanowiska w kwestii dopuszczania zabijania od jego relacji do potocznych, powszechnych intuicji.
EN
The paper consists of considerations about the harm of killing sentient animals and is inspired by the John Sanbonmatsu’s criticism of Peter Singer’s views, as well as elements of Tom Regan’s animal rights theory and Elizabeth Harman’s concept of animal stages. Selected criteria relevant to considerations about the acceptability of killing are analyzed, such as having a preference to live and a psychophysical identity over time, as well as the compatibility of philosophical views with the common intuition regarding the harm of taking life.
EN
Intersubjectivity, understood as a relationship between different perspectives, that creates a common space, accessible to more than one cognizing subject, is the basic trait of our presence in the world. The realization of our capability potential for intersubjective relations is related to the realization of a similar potential of the other subject of such relationships. We recognize the subjectivity of others through the reference to ourselves – out of necessity. This process is connected with the recognition of similarities and differences. In the article I am analyzing the nature of this process and the risks associated with possible underestimation and overestimation of the value of the other. The principle of seeking sufficient similarity apparently results in the automatic exclusion of a certain scope of dissimilarity – for example, of what is too different for the creation of subjective, intersubjective relations. I am trying to show that the recognition of the dissimilarities of the others does not have to involve their devaluation. On the contrary, it presents a challenge to the ethical imagination and is an indispensable component of intersubjectivity. I am pointing out that effective interspecific communication, which takes into account the importance of the affective component and the meeting of the diverse experiencing corporeality, is also an important aspect of the described relationships. I am also pointing out that the question about the subjectivity occurring in relationships is also an ethical and political problem of great importance.
6
100%
EN
Dariusz Gzyra's note on Zoopolis: A Political Theory of  Animal Rights by Sue Donaldson, and Will Kymlicka (in Polish)
EN
The article analyzes the position of Tom Regan (the author of a theory of animal rights) toward the admissibility of the use of force in defense of animals. The key issue here is the definitional dispute about the legitimacy of violent actions directed towards things and defining the criteria that justify such violence. Regan’s conclusion is presented in the context of different forms of violence as well as its definition, the contemporary realities of animal exploitation, and the history of direct action in defense of animals.
RU
Питер Сингер - один из самых влиятельных ныне живущих философов. С середины семидесятых годов прошлого века его размышления на темы этики, касающиеся отношений человека с другими разумными животными, стали чрезвычайно важным ориентиром для дискуссий, причем не только научных. Однако за десятилетия деятельности философа изменились социальные условия и статус некоторых практик, в том числе веганства, к которым относится книга Сингера Why Vegan? Eating Ethically. Ни в одной из публикаций на сегодняшний день философ не дал подробного и исчерпывающего анализа теории и практики веганства, поэтому на книгу Why Vegan? возлагались большие ожидания. К сожалению, анализ этого издания выявляет его недочеты и недостатки.
EN
Peter Singer is one of the most influential philosophers alive. Since the mid-1970s, his ethical considerations related to the relationship between man and other sentient animals have been an extremely important point of reference for discussions, academic and otherwise. Over the several decades of Singer’s philosophical activity, however, the social conditions and status of some practices have changed. This is also the case of the practice of veganism, a topic to which Singer’s book Why Vegan? Eating Ethically seems to be devoted. In none of his previous publications has Singer analyzed in an in-depth and exhaustive way the theory and practice of veganism, a fact which had raised the public’s expectations for Why Vegan? Unfortunately, the analysis of this book reveals its shortcomings and deficiencies.
PL
Peter Singer jest jednym z najbardziej wpływowych żyjących filozofów. Od połowy lat siedemdziesiątych ubiegłego wieku jego rozważania etyczne związane z relacjami człowieka z innymi czującymi zwierzętami stanowią niezwykle istotny punkt odniesienia dyskusji, nie tylko akademickich. W ciągu dziesięcioleci aktywności filozofa zmieniły się jednak warunki społeczne i status niektórych praktyk, choćby weganizmu, któremu z pozoru jest poświęcona książka Singera Why Vegan? Eating Ethically. Filozof w żadnej z dotychczasowych publikacji nie analizował w sposób pogłębiony i wyczerpujący teorii i praktyki weganizmu. Tym większe były oczekiwania wobec Why Vegan? Niestety, analiza tej publikacji odsłania jej niedociągnięcia i braki.
EN
Miles Olson is the author of two books: The Compassionate Hunter’s Guidebook: Hunting from the Heart and Unlearn, Rewild: Earth Skills, Ideas and Inspiration for the Future Primitive. The paper consists of a critical analysis and an ethical evaluation of Olson’s particular version of anarcho-primitivism and ideological assumptions of his concept of “rewilding”. The question of hunting and the motives for Olson’s rejection of veganism are analyzed in detail.
RU
Книга британского специалиста в области философии политики и этики Аласдера Кокрейна Should Animals Have Political Rights? была опубликована издательством Polityka Press в 2019 году в серии «Political Theory Today». Эта публикация вписывается в рамки современного течения теоретизирования, касающегося нормативных аспектов отношений человека с другими животными – это течение иногда называют политическим поворотом в этике животных. В рецензии обсуждается структура книги и прослеживается мысль Кокрейна, которая оценивает – в контексте постулата защиты животных и межвидовой справедливости – существующие институты, структуры и политические процессы, предлагая интересные модификации и дополнения. 
EN
A book by British political philosopher and ethicist Alasdair Cochrane entitled Should Animals Have Political Rights? was published in 2019 by Polity Press in the Political Theory Today series. This book fits into the contemporary trend of theorizing the normative aspects of the relationship between man and other animals, which is sometimes referred to as the political turn. In his review, Dariusz Gzyra discusses the book’s structure and traces the trajectory of Cochrane’s thought, which evaluates – in the context of the postulate of Animal protection and interspecies justice – the existing institutions, structures and political processes and proposes interesting changes and developments. 
PL
Książka brytyjskiego filozofa polityki i etyka Alasdaira Cochrane’a zatytułowana Should Animals Have Political Rights? została wydana w roku 2019 w serii Political Theory Today przez wydawnictwo Polity Press. Jest to pozycja wpisująca się we współczesny nurt teoretyzowania na temat normatywnych aspektów relacji człowieka z innymi zwierzętami, który bywa określany mianem tak zwanego zwrotu politycznego. W recenzji omówiono strukturę książki i prześledzono Cochrane’owską myśl, która ewaluuje – w kontekście postulatu ochrony zwierząt i międzygatunkowej sprawiedliwości – istniejące instytucje, struktury i procesy polityczne, proponując interesujące ich modyfikacje i uzupełnienia. 
11
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Wprowadzenie

63%
PL
"W ostatnich latach ze wzmożoną siłą podejmuje się w Polsce rozważania i dyskusje dotyczące podmiotowości prawnej oraz moralnej zwierząt. Być może ów problem doczeka się wreszcie naukowego uściślenia oraz terminologicznego doprecyzowania. Nie będzie to zadanie łatwe, ponieważ zagadnienie podmiotowości, tak ludzi, jak i zwierząt, jest niezwykle złożone. Jest jednym z podstawowych pojęć wielu różnych obszarów teoretyzowania, będąc przy tym stałym obiektem sporów. Wobec zwierząt proponuje się „koncepcję podmiotowości szczególnej, tj. podmiotowości funkcjonalnej ustanowionej w interesie zwierząt” (za Janem Białocerkiewiczem).ę
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.