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

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  anthropomorphism,
help Sort By:

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

Umysły zwierząt: między naiwnym antropomorfizmem a dogmatycznym antroponegacjonizmem

100%
Wróblewski Z.
Zoophilologica. Polish Journal of Animal Studies
|
2016
|
issue 2
83-95
EN
The research on animal cognitive capacities is mostly determined by two contrasting methodological attitudes: naive anthropomorphism and dogmatic anthropodenial. The former is defined as fallacious (naive) projecting cognitive, emotional and linguistic capacities of humans on animal world; the latter is denying essential similarities between human being and animals in order to emphasize qualitative differences between these two worlds. Between those attitudes there is some space for putting forward intermediate viewpoints, which include the heuristic value of critical anthropomorphism and indicate those similarities and differences between humans and animals, which deter- mine proanimal moral actions.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Jak to jest być nietoperzem? Refleksje przy lekturze eseju Thomasa Nagela

75%
Wężowicz-Ziółkowska D.
Zoophilologica. Polish Journal of Animal Studies
|
2015
|
issue 1
83-94
EN
The article asks questions about the human cognitive abilities – how it is to be an animal of a species different from one’s own. Using as a basis the doubts of the philosopher Thomas Nagel, the author proceeds to discuss the standpoint of  ethnologists Frans de Waal and Konrad Lorenz, who accept the limitations of the human cognitive apparatus and language, with the help of which we describe what we call the “animal.” The author suggests that the problem of contemporary humanities and animal studies lies not  in anthropodenial, but in anthropomorphism, rooted in the centrism typicalof our species, which seems impossible to overcome. The author also proposes a thesis that the wayto overcome this issue is for people to gain knowledge about these limitations. This knowledge, supported by interspeciesempathy, developed in the process of coevolution of animal species (humans being one of them), is the most effective tool of heuristics.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Próba podejścia transdyscyplinarnego do żałoby zwierząt

71%
Lange Ł.
Zoophilologica. Polish Journal of Animal Studies
|
2019
|
issue 5
153-165
RU
Целью данной статьи является представление дилеммы, с которой могут столкнуться исследователи, соединяя в себе более чем одну перспективу исследования. Итак, мы начи- наем с социологических или этнологических исследований, которые сосредоточиваются на историях людей, ухаживающих за животным, после того, как животное скорбит, по- теряв хозяина. Они антропоморфны и близки к городским легендам. Хотя они правильны с точки зрения социальных исследований, они не учитывают биологический и психоло- гический контекст. Исследование опыта скорби животных требует позволить высказаться тем, кто не наделен речью. Однако, имея более широкую перспективу и пытаясь прово- дить междисциплинарные исследования, ученые обязаны учитывать даже такие знания, которые будут противоречить текущим результатам исследований. Очередная проблема возникает при попытке объединить эти точки зрения так, чтобы не оттолкнуть участ- ников исследований или исследователей, и в то же время получить наиболее вероятную версию реальности.
EN
The aim of the article is to present the dilemmas that researchers may face, combining more than one research perspective. We are starting from sociological or ethnological research that focus on the stories of animals’ caregivers after the animal experiencing death of a companion. They are anthropomorphic and close to the urban legends. Although correct from the point of view of social research, they do not take into account the biological and psychological context. Examining the experience of mourning animals other than human requires giving a voice to those who will not answer researchers’ questions. However, having a wider perspective and trying to do transdisciplinary science, it becomes a duty to take into account even such knowledge, which will be inconsistent with the current research results. Another problem arises when trying to combine these points of view in such a way as not to alienate the respondents or researchers and at the same time get the most probable version of reality.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

оопоэтика И.С. Шмелёва: образы животных в малой прозе писателя

63%
Smirnowa A.
Zoophilologica. Polish Journal of Animal Studies
|
2016
|
issue 2
13-21
PL
W artykule omówiono specyfikę zoopoetyki I.S. Szmielowa we wczesnych utworach pisarza – Mój Mars (Мой Марс), Świetlista karta (Светлая страница), Mary (Мэри), a obrazy zwierząt prze- analizowano w kontekście literatury rosyjskiej przełomu XIX i XX wieku (Bystronogi L.N. Tołstoja, Kasztanka A.P. Czechowa, Biały pudel, Szmaragd A.I. Kuprina, Sny Czanga I.A. Bunina). Zoopo- etyka Szmielowa opiera się na filozofii życia i śmierci, wolności i niewoli, związku świata przyrody ze światem dzieciństwa oraz wyraża się poprzez antropomorficzne wyobrażenie pojawiających się na kartach utworów pisarza licznych zwierząt (psychologizm, uduchowienie, wykorzystanie aparatu pojęciowego „dusza”, „fatum”, „miłość”, „moralność”, „litość”). Zwierzęta w prozie pisarza pełnią rolę swoistego papierka lakmusowego, ponieważ poprzez stosunek do nich poznaje się innych bohaterów utworów – dorosłych i dzieci.
EN
Features of Shmelev’s zoopoetics are described in the article on the basis of the early stories, such as My Mares, Light Page, and Mary, in which images of animals are analysed in the context of Russian literature of the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Strider by Lev Tolstoy, Kashtanka by Anton Chekhov, The White Poodle and Emerald by Alexander Kuprin, and Dreams of Chang by Ivan Bunin). Shmelev’s zoopoetics is based on the philosophy of life and death, freedom and captivity, and the connection between the natural world and the world of childhood, and is actualized in anthropomorphic images of animals manifested in the texts of the writer in many ways (psychologism, spirituality, and the use of the concepts of “soul”, “destiny”, “love” “morality” and “compassion”). Animals in the stories appear as a certain indicator, because the correlation with them and the attitude to them reveal the other characters – both adults and children. 
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.