In a message dated 11/17/98 8:01:32 PM, you wrote:

<<We have no way of communicating with plants or animals and therefore we can
never know except through ovservation of phenomena what an animal does -
thinks - in making a deliberation, we can only make "strong inferences"
based on some weighing of the evidence which is never based on any symbolic
representation such as language [except for chimpanzees]. Our knowledge is
always anthropocentric and there lies the predicament and our ethical dilemna.

Isn't it possible to communicate-based on an ability to "articulate", as Donna
Haraway has suggested- the needs, thoughts, desires, and emotions of other
beings that do not employ symbolic communication? Bernard Rollins and others
suggest that we use our common sense in assuming that animals may have similar
needs to our own, and are therefore worthy as moral candidates. I would also
like to suggest that this argument might be supported by authors such as Vicki
Hearne, especially in Adam's Task, that communication/articulation is
accomplished through a shared discourse between humans and animals, such as
learning (training). I think there is much to be explored in the area of the
human/companion animal bond that could add to these theories of
"communication" across species boundaries. Why not look at those animals we
live with and talk to everyday for some of these answers?

"A wolf pack on the other hand would not ever consider avoiding moose as a
result of the belief that life is sacred, obviously. The human experience
includes a different dimension which some call the symbolic.>>

I certainly don't believe this, and I am not Ernest Thompson Seton or
Elizabeth Marshall Thomas. Perhaps our concept of "sacred" has dimensions
animals are not capable of, but through learning, i.e. communication, we can
teach animals that certain animals are not to be eaten or mounted. I am not
suggesting they learn this through avoidance therapy or by instilling fear in
the animal either. I think it is possible to acculturate animals to respect
the lives of other animals- look at multi-animal households for instance,
where dogs, cats, birds, mice can co- habitate peacefully. Perhaps this
example stretches the concept of telos, because it is in a way a violation of
an animal's telos to first domesticate it, then spay and neuter it, and then
finally to teach it to avoid eating its "natural" prey.  This is actually the
place where I have a huge conflict with the idea of "telos" and companion
animals anyway.  Desmond Morris has suggested that it is "cruel" and a
violation of an animal's telos to spay it, but I have yet to see him come up
with any alternatives to pet overpopulation. 
 
Now, as far as a wolf pack viewing an individual animal as "sacred" or one
which should not be eaten... I would have to say I think we should wait for a
verdict on that one. I am not yet convinced that animals, even wild animals,
aren't capable of this type of thinking. Would I call it moralizing?
Hmmmmmmm........What would E.O. say about that?

Tami (a "girl" animal)



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%