This essay will apply various theories from social psychology to the human-animal relationship and argue that speciesism is a form of prejudice. It will conclude by using the findings to develop intervention concepts to reduce speciesism.
Human relationships with non-human animals are complicated. On the one hand, certain animals are valued as pets, loved and given a standard of living that is better than that of humans in poor countries. Archaeologists even found that at one point in human history, dogs were buried with humans for sentimental reasons in some cultures, highlighting the close bond between humans and their companion animals. On the other hand, farm animals are slaughtered so that their bodies provide meat that humans can consume. The term speciesism emerged and in particular parallels other forms of unjustified discrimination such as racism and sexism. Philosophers realised the inconsistency in our treatment of animals a while ago, now it is time for social psychology to bring the human- animal relationship into its theoretical framework, as this relationship is strongly social and intergroup based.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Social Identity, Self-Categorization, Generalized Prejudice and Social Dominance Theory Perspective
3. Terror Management Theory Perspective
4. Stereotype Content Model Perspective
5. Cognitive Dissonance Perspective
6. Conclusion
Target and Topics
This essay explores whether speciesism can be classified as a form of prejudice by applying various social psychological theories to the human-animal relationship and proposes intervention strategies to mitigate it.
- Social Identity and Categorization processes
- Terror Management Theory and death anxiety
- Stereotype Content Model regarding animal perception
- Cognitive Dissonance in meat-eating behaviour
- Intervention strategies to reduce speciesism
Excerpt from the Book
Terror Management Theory Perspective
According to the Terror Management Theory, humans are very sensitive to thoughts of their own mortality as well as animality and therefore invest in both culture and shared worldviews to reduce the fear of death (Solomon et al., 1991). Those created and shared beliefs and cultural worldviews provide individuals with a sense they are valuable member of a meaningful universe. Thus, their self-esteem increases, which lowers the fear of their mortality (Solomon et al., 2000). In addition, humans tend to deny their biological disposition and distance themselves from other animals because they remind them of their own mortality (Becker, 1973). Marino & Mountain (2015) argue that the denial of death results in the exploitative and harmful relationships of humans with other animals. While Terror Management Theory does not always apply, for example when humans consider companion animals to their ingroup, research indicates that the similarity between humans and animals is not enough to underline them in our way of thinking about animals.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter highlights the complex and contradictory nature of human-animal relationships and introduces the core argument that speciesism is a form of prejudice.
2. Social Identity, Self-Categorization, Generalized Prejudice and Social Dominance Theory Perspective: This section discusses how social identity and categorization influence prejudice, suggesting that speciesism shares roots with other forms of discrimination.
3. Terror Management Theory Perspective: This chapter examines how the human fear of death and mortality leads to a denial of animality and contributes to exploitative behaviours toward animals.
4. Stereotype Content Model Perspective: This part investigates how animals are categorized based on dimensions of warmth and competence, similar to human social groups.
5. Cognitive Dissonance Perspective: This section explores the psychological discomfort people face when their meat-eating behaviour conflicts with their moral concern for animal welfare.
6. Conclusion: The final chapter summarizes the arguments and proposes that fostering positive human-animal interactions and avoiding dehumanization are key to reducing speciesism.
Keywords
Speciesism, Prejudice, Social Identity Theory, Terror Management Theory, Stereotype Content Model, Cognitive Dissonance, Human-Animal Relationship, Social Dominance Orientation, Animal Welfare, Discrimination, Categorization, Moral Concern, Meat-eating Behaviour, Intergroup Relations, Psychology.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the main focus of this work?
The work investigates the psychological roots of speciesism and evaluates it as a form of prejudice similar to racism or sexism.
What are the core thematic areas?
The themes include social identity processes, death anxiety, social categorization of animals, and the cognitive conflict between animal care and consumption.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to determine if psychological findings on prejudice can explain speciesism and inform interventions to improve animal welfare.
Which scientific methods are applied?
The essay is a theoretical review that synthesizes empirical studies and frameworks from social psychology.
What does the main body cover?
It covers theoretical perspectives including Social Identity, Terror Management, Stereotype Content, and Cognitive Dissonance theories.
Which keywords characterize this work?
Key terms include speciesism, prejudice, social psychology, human-animal relationship, and moral concern.
How does the "meat paradox" relate to cognitive dissonance?
The meat paradox describes the conflict between caring for animals and the practice of eating them, which causes psychological discomfort that people resolve by denying mental capacities to farm animals.
What role does the "Stereotype Content Model" play in this study?
It provides a framework to show that animals are evaluated on dimensions of warmth and competence, similar to how human groups are perceived, which influences the moral treatment they receive.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Duc Minh Vu (Autor:in), 2021, Speciesism. Discrimination of animals, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1004234
