The elephant stopped, having lost sight of me. While at times I did think that the authors were reading an emotional motive where there was none, I always stopped to reflect on the fact that 1 they almost always use tentative language—could, maybe, perhaps, etc. The early goal of psychoanalysis to make the unconscious conscious was directed toward bringing feelings into awareness, raising submerged emotions to the surface. Granted, I didn't read the whole book, but the part I did read repeated itself over and over. Chapters on love, joy, anger, fear, shame, compassion, and loneliness are framed by a provocative re-evaluation of how we treat animals, from hunting and eating them to scientific experimentation.
The book however was very easy to relate to because they use specific social interactions of animals in order to establish connections with readers. To me, there is a much needed confrontation of the dismissive attitudes of many scientists regarding animal emotion. On the one hand he often makes generalizations which are not always fair his attacks on an While I agree with the principles in this book, that's all I agree with. Other words like romantic, friendship, and love emphasize the significance of the animal emotions. If he could offer proof that mongooses only do so in the presence of family that would be stronger but he doesn't. Much of this is visual observati This is a book about common sense. Consider how long psychoanalysts denied the reality of child sexual abuse.
My inner dialog was so loud and persistent I had to take notes on paper to help myself focus more clearly on what I was reading; it felt good to be so actively interactive with a book! Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows names and explains this phenomenon and offers it up for examination. I get it-animals experience emotions. So this book is about common sense and intuition rather than about things that are absolutely provable. People still regularly cast doubt on the fundamental humanity of entire societies. Spine creases, wear to binding and pages from reading. The most overwhelming criticism I am seeing is that the authors criticize scientists to the point of hostility and denigration. Please a cat, it purrs and rubs itself against you.
Also, anything about Alex the grey parrot. Possible ex library copy, thatâ ll have the markings and stickers associated from the library. The authors include research from educated scientists and their Andrew Sarr I disliked the book When Elephants Weep, because when the book explains how animals could have emotions based on their behavior and actions, the book has bias towards animals having emotions and the book presents information in a very boring way. Weaving history, literature, science, and his own vivid experiences observing pigs, cows, sheep, goats, and chickens, Masson bears witness to the emotions and intelligence of these remarkable animals, each unique with distinct qualities. One example is a story he gives about a boy saved from a venemous snake by a mongoose. This could easily be a five star book, as I believe it can change the life ofmany people who do not give enough credit to animals. The authors note instances of compassion among animals, such as when a herd of elephants wait for a female who is trailing behind carrying a dead calf.
That means evidence based on what we can sense. After a mile or so we came across a herd of about ten elephants, including small calves, peacefully grazing. He is equally able to bring to light the tendency of humanity to denigrate and devalue the emotive qualities animals often display. The book is actually a polemic fueled by Mr. But is this book what they would actually say? It is true that the tone does border on the antagonistic when it comes to certain dismissals of animal emotion, or in cruelty to animals justified by science. I don't agree with some of the reviewers of this book who say the author does not make his point.
Given that humans can't even read other humans' thoughts from a look most of the time, his cross-species mind-reading skills are truly impressive. Who was your favorite character and why? I don't have to resort to trying to read this. Culture can also play a role in how we read these events but Mr. This engaging and authoritative portrait of animals' emotional lives is as groundbreaking as Darwin's Origin of Species in the facts and insights it presents about the animal kingdom. This made me question what constitutes certain emotions and distinguishes them from others. Most people believe, therefore, that animals can be unhappy and also that they have such primal feelings as happiness, anger, and fear.
That means evidence based on what we can sense. The reoccurring idea in this book consists of the evaluation of expression of feelings such as joy, anger, fear, and compassion, offering proof of the existence of these emotions within all animals. Nevertheless, it is true that our fundamental ignorance of the exact inner workings of any given animal's personal thoughts prevent us from establishing proof beyond a shadow of a doubt. It deserves to be free to hunt and to choose its own prey; to look for and find its own mate; to fight for and hold its own territory; and to die where it was born--in the wild. I don't know if such research exists for mongooses but there is compelling evidence in ground squirrels. The spine may show signs of wear. I liked how connections are established between animals and humans because the author wants to humanize different species in order to make the readers feel sympathy for them.
Dust jacket quality is not guaranteed. Instead, it reads like an essay arguing that ethologists are all wrong because they don't ascribe animals' actions to emotional causes. I can appreciate this to a large extent, animals have been and are still used in experiments which are horrible. Interesting anecdotes about animals; I enjoyed it. The authors propose that the attitude of scientists may have developed with the advent of laboratory studies on animals in the 1960s. I turned and ran wildly.