Darwinism, Christianity, and the Great Vivisection Debate

, The reputation of the Christian tradition has fared poorly in the literature on the history of attitudes to nonhuman animals. This is more a consequence of secularist prejudice than objective scholarship. The idea of "dominion" and the understanding of animal souls are almost universally...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Preece, Rod (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: University of Pennsylvania Press 2003
In: Journal of the history of ideas
Year: 2003, Volume: 64, Issue: 3, Pages: 399-419
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1826558713
003 DE-627
005 20231013160333.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 221208s2003 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1353/jhi.2003.0040  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1826558713 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1826558713 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 0  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Preece, Rod  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Darwinism, Christianity, and the Great Vivisection Debate 
264 1 |c 2003 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a , The reputation of the Christian tradition has fared poorly in the literature on the history of attitudes to nonhuman animals. This is more a consequence of secularist prejudice than objective scholarship. The idea of "dominion" and the understanding of animal souls are almost universally misrepresented. There has been no firmer conclusion than that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution had a profoundly beneficial impact on the recognition of our similarities to, kinship with, and consequent moral obligations to, other species. In reality, Darwinism had no such effect. That there was an essential kinship with, and homologies between, humans and other species had been attested to for centuries. In the first major ethical issue that arose after the publication of Darwin's The Descent of Man -- legislation to restrict vivisection -- Darwin and Huxley stood on the side of more or less unrestricted vivisection while many major explicitly Christian voices -- from Cardinal Manning to Lord Chief Justice Coleridge to the Earl of Shaftesbury -- demanded the most severe restrictions, in many cases abolition. The customary tale of how Christianity hindered the development of sensibilities to animals and how Darwinism occasioned a revolution in animal ethics needs to be rethought and retold. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of the history of ideas  |d Philadelphia, Pa. : University of Pennsylvania Press, 1940  |g 64(2003), 3, Seite 399-419  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)300186193  |w (DE-600)1481685-4  |w (DE-576)09444921X  |x 1086-3222  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:64  |g year:2003  |g number:3  |g pages:399-419 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/3654233  |x JSTOR 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1353/jhi.2003.0040  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/47662  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4228379389 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1826558713 
LOK |0 005 20231013160333 
LOK |0 008 221208||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-12-01#5AD4D75B2BC8455F1D80BC3122F1DD5785E38A81 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/3654233 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
SUB |a REL