Academic literature on the topic 'Relations homme-animal – Aspect moral'

The existence of resources and production factors is an important component of supporting the business. Aspects of social capital and the availability of money, for cattle farmers are important parts, because cattle breeders must prepare forage forage needs, additional feed and fortifying feed (bran, concentrate) as a means of supporting the success of the livestock business being run. Financial inclusion in this study is defined as easy access to money. The “gaduhan” system (keeping other people's livestock) is often found in all corners of the village, livestock owners other than as animal providers often act as providers of money when people who raise livestock need (borrow) money. Social capital is built because of emotional closeness and financial capital is formed because of a joint effort to system gaduhan cattle. The purpose of the study was to analyze the application of financial inclusion to rowdy cattle farmers in strengthening social capital and financial capital. This type of research is descriptive qualitative by using questionnaires, interviews, FGD instruments to obtain primary data, secondary data sourced from relevant documents, articles. The subjects of the study were rowdy cattle breeders in the Semen District as many as 120 respondents. The results of the study indicate that the implementation of financial inclusion of the cattle rancher model has long been carried out between animal owners and animal keepers. Mutualism symbiosis is realized by mutually benefiting from raising cattle, strengthening social relations and economic income for both parties. Keywords: Financial inclusion, beef cattle breeders, gaduhan system

Sommaire L'histoire de la dernière encyclique, MATER ET MAGISTRA, illustre d'une façon dramatique, dans notre société contemporaine, la division du travail entre les relations publiques et le domaine académique. Dans le monde anglo-saxon au moins cette encyclique est celle qui a connu la plus large diffusion et qui a été la mieux reçue de toutes les encycliques sociales. Par ailleurs, il semble évident que moins qu'à toutes les autres on a apporté un intérêt soutenu. On a pas à chercher bien loin pour trouver la raison de cette indifférence générale. MATER ET MAGISTRA n'est pas seulement un document à l'occasion d'une crise ou, d'un problème. Elle est l'aboutissement de tout un siècle de développements académiques. D'une part, la doctrine sociale est seulement un segment d'une demi-douzaine de champs théologiques revitalisés. D'autre part, le fossé entre les sciences sociales et les champs de pensée plus traditionnels s'est graduellement rétréci. RERUM NOVARUM (1891) a ouvert la théologie à la science politique, QUADRAGESIMO ANNO (1931) a évidemment utilisé les principes économiques modernes et maintenant MATER ET MAGISTRA (1961) utilise la sociologie. Les experts en sciences sociales sont bien conscients de l'intérêt croissant chez leurs collègues depuis plusieurs générations au sujet du bien-être, des valeurs, des lois naturelles, des insuffisances du pragmatisme. Lorsque les dimensions proprement académiques de cette encyclique sont reconnues, il s'en suit immédiatement que cette doctrine nécessite pour son exposition un statut académique approprié. En premier lieu, il ressort de la structure de MATER ET MAGISTRA que l'étudiant de la théologie sociale doit nécessairement s'appuyer sur le spécialiste en sciences sociales. En second lieu, l'étudiant de la théologie sociale doit reconnaître que l'homme moderne désire une philosophie sociale adéquate. C'est une exigence beaucoup plus englobante que celle des encycliques précédentes. Il ne suffit plus maintenant de condamner l'individualisme et le scientisme du XIXe siècle, ou d'encourager davantage l'association — une union par-ici, une coopérative par là. Comme le préconise avec insistence le Pape Jean, une option morale positive de l'organisation ou de la socialisation est nécessaire à tout homme dans la société moderne. Alors qu'il est évident pour celui qui analyse ces questions que tout le pouvoir moral de la religion sera nécessaire afin de dissiper l'ensemble des accréditations religieuses et de la loi naturelle acceptées par l'individualisme de notre société industrielle ou le socialisme des autres traditions, la question présente de nouveaux aspects. Il y a déjà une évidence abondante que les professeurs des matières philosophiques et théologiques traditionnelles ne réaliseront pas la nécessité actuelle d'une philosophie sociale articulée s'ils n'empruntent pas aux spécialistes des sciences sociales la signification et l'importance de la socialisation aujourd'hui. De plus, c'est seulement de l'esprit en sciences sociales que le philosophe social apprendra l'apport réaliste de la remarque du Pape Jean à l'effet que dans le milieu social moderne un certain déterminisme ne cause pas de préjudice à la liberté. La récente étude de Robert A. Brady sur la place des standards dans la civilisation en est un excellent exemple (Organization, Automation, and Society, ch. IV). L'importance croissante de l'étudiant des sciences sociales est aussi un autre indice du rôle croissant de l'apostolat laïc pour l'avenir de la doctrine sociale.

This paper offers a historical contribution for understanding of the relationship between nature and culture, based on an analysis of a highly influential text of the European philosophical tradition, About the Ends of Goods and Evils of Cicero. Human morality has three different roots on the Ciceronian pages: 1) a human can be an animal – a part of the live nature – in the concept of oikeiōsis; 2) a human has obligations as a cosmopolitēs, a part of the cosmos; and 3) social obligations rooted in human rationality, in other words – human being is a part of the society. Analyzing these three roots of the Stoic ethics in a Roman interpretation, we can understand their contradictory consequences. By the analysis of the relevant texts it will be demonstrated that the Stoic philosophers and their interpreters were unconscious of the ambiguity of the roots of human morality offered by them. A tension in our anthropological thinking about the human nature as a natural or a social phenomenon has its roots partly in this ancient ambiguity, hidden and unconscious. The rise of this conceptually confused ambiguity has several consequences in our today thought as well. Santrauka Šiame straipsnyje pateiktas istorinis indėlis suprasti gamtos ir kultūros santykį, pagrįstą labai įtakingo europietiškosios filosofinės tradicijos Cicerono teksto Apie gėrio ir blogio ribas analize. Žmogiškoji moralė Cicerono puslapiuose turi tris skirtingas šaknis: 1) oikeiōsis sampratoje žmogus gali būti gyvūnas – gyvosios gamtos dalis; 2) žmogus kaip cosmopolitēs, kaip kosmo dalis, turi įsipareigojimų; 3) socialiniai įsipareigojimai yra įšaknyti žmogiškajame racionalume, kitais žodžiais tariant, žmogiškoji būtybė yra visuomenės dalis. Analizuodami šias tris stoikų etikos šaknis romėniškojoje interpretacijoje, galime suprasti prieštaringas jų pasekmes. Remdamiesi svarbių tekstų analize parodysime, kad stoikų filosofai ir jų interpretatoriai nesuvokė savo pasiūlytosios žmogiškosios moralės šaknų dviprasmiškumo. Mūsų antropologinio mąstymo apie žmogaus prigimtį kaip gamtinį ar socialinį fenomeną įtampa turi savąsias šaknis iš dalies šiame paslėptame ir nesuvoktame antikiniame dviprasmiškume. Šio konceptualiai painaus dviprasmiškumo iškilimas turi tam tikrų pasekmių taip pat ir mūsų nūdienėje mintyje.

The transition from animal to plant proteins is booming, and the development of meat analogues or alternatives quickly progressing. However, the acceptance of meat analogues by consumers is still limited, mainly due to disappointing organoleptic properties of these foods. The objective of this study was to investigate possible relationships among structure, textural characteristics, consumer acceptance, and sensory evaluation of commercially available meat analogues. The microstructure and texture of 13 chicken analogue pieces and 14 analogue burgers were evaluated with confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) and texture profile analysis (TPA). The moisture of the samples was related to cooking losses and release of liquid upon compression after cooking. Meat products were included as references. A sensory panel (n = 71) evaluated both flavour and texture characteristics. For the chicken analogue pieces, samples with more added fibres had a harder and chewier texture but were less cohesive. No other relations between composition and structure/texture could be found. In the sensory evaluation, lower hardness and chewiness were only seen in products with more fat. A lower sensory hardness was found to be related to the presence of small air pockets. For analogue burgers, there was no clear relation between composition and structure/texture. However, instrumentally measured hardness, chewiness, and cohesiveness correlated well with the corresponding sensory attributes, even though they could not be clearly linked to a structural feature. Next to this, fat content showed a clear correlation to perceived fattiness. CLSM images of burgers with high perceived fattiness showed large areas of fat. Therefore, the release of large fat pools from the meat was most likely responsible for the perception of this attribute. However, perceived fattiness was not related to liking, which was the case also for chicken analogue pieces. For both pieces and burgers, even if some of the measured textural attributes could be linked to the sensory profile, the textural attributes in question could not explain the liking scores. Liking was related to other aspects, such as meaty flavour and juiciness, which were not directly linked to compositional or textural features. Juiciness was not directly related to the moisture loss of the products, indicating that this attribute is rather complex and probably involves a combination of characteristics. These results show that to increase the appreciation of meat analogues by consumers, improving simple texture attributes is not sufficient. Controlling sensory attributes with complex cross-modal perception is probably more important.

he end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twentyfirst century has begun the rapid development of scientific researches in the biological and medical fields. This process is associated with using of fundamentally new methods, which are primarily aimed at the disease prevention, as well as the introduction into the treatment of human diseases with the latest scientific and innovative technologies, methods and techniques of their application. These opportunities in the development of scientific technologies in the field of biology and medicine have led to the emergence of such a direction of scientific activity as "biotechnology". The proposed article notes that using of biomedical technologies has caused a number of new problems in the field of law and ethics. Legal arrangement in the field of the health protection have become much more complicated. Thanks to new opportunities, today these relations regulate rights and responsibilities of a fairly large number of people. Modern relations in the field of medical services and medical care lead to the emergence of new approaches to their regulation by both legal and ethical norms. In the past, relations in the field of the health protection were usually between two subjects, a doctor and a healthcare consumer. Nowadays, in a medical practice, relations in the field of the health protection involve: a health-care consumer, his family members (e.g., in the case of hereditary diseases diagnosis, blood and organ donation etc.) and third parties (e.g., organ donation, reproductive cell donation, surrogacy etc.). In the general doctrinal concept, biotechnology is the industrial use of living organisms or their parts (microorganisms, fungi, algae, plant and animal cells, cellular organs, enzymes etc.) for product producing or modifying, improving plants and animals, and in medical practice - in relation of the individual human organs (or body as a whole) functioning. These circumstances require improving the legal regulation of modern medicine public relations, bringing them into line with emerging realities. Moreover, the specifics of relations in this field determines the specifics of their legal regulation. The application of new medical technologiesin relation to human treatment has given rise to a significant number of moral and ethical problems that could not be solved within the framework of medical ethics and deontology alone. In connection with this, the way out of the current situation could be the consolidation of bioethics as an interdisciplinary field of knowledge, as a science, which makes it possible to explain moral, ethical and legal aspects of the medicine. This, for example, determines the allocation of medical law in an independent branch of law in some Western countries and Ukraine. The article focuses on biomedical ethics, which is a component of the medical activities system regulation. In the context of considering the levels of social regulation of medical activities, bioethics (biomedical ethics) is an interdisciplinary science that studies moral and ethical, social and legal problems of medical activities in the context of human rights protection. Bioethics should create a set of moral principles, norms and rules that are binding on all mankind and delineate the limits of scientific interference in the nature of the human body, the transition through which is unacceptable.

This paper explores the ontological bases for ethical behaviour between human animals and non-human animals drawing on phenomenology and Buddhist philosophy. Alongside Singer and utilitarianism, I argue that ethical behaviour regarding animals is most effectively justified and motivated by considerations of sentience. Nonetheless, utilitarianism misses crucial aspects of sentience. Buddhist ethics is from the beginning focused on all sentient beings, not solely humans. This inclusivity, and refined interrogations of suffering, means it can furnish more nuanced understandings of sentience. For phenomenology, sentience includes the capacities for self-awareness and, I will argue, a plural self-awareness; the ‘I’ belongs to a ‘we’, and the ‘we’ is constitutive of the ‘I’. This ‘primordial we’ provides the basis for rethinking the moral relations between human animals and non-human animals. I contend finally we thus have an ontological basis in ‘interanimality’ to explain why we most often do and should care about all sentient beings.

Cute pictures of animals feature as an inoffensive and adorable background to the contemporary online experience with cute content regularly shared on social media platforms. Indeed the demand for cuteness is so strong in the current cultural milieu that some animals become recognisable animal celebrities in the process (Hepola). However, despite the existence of this professionalisation in some sections of the cute economy, amateurs produce the majority of cute content that circulates online. This is largely because one of the central contributors to this steady stream of cute animal pictures is the subforum Aww, hosted on the online community Reddit. Aww is wholly dedicated to pictures of cute things and allows users to directly submit cute content directly to the site. Aww is one of the default subforums that new Reddit users are automatically subscribed to and is immensely popular, featuring over 4.2 million dedicated subscribers as well as untold casual visits. The section is self-described as: “Things that make you go AWW! -- like puppies, and bunnies, and so on...Feel free to post pictures, videos and stories of cute things” ("The cutest things on the internet!"). Users upload cute animal photos that they have taken and wait for the Reddit community to vote on their favourite pictures. The voting mechanism helps users to acknowledge their favourite posts, with the most popular featured on the front page of Aww (for a detailed critique of this process see van der Nagel 2013). The user-generated model of the site means that instead of visitors being confronted with a formally curated selection of cute animal photos, Aww offers a constantly changing mixture of amateur, semi-pro and professional content. Aww - and Reddit more generally - stand as an emblematic example of participatory culture (Jenkins 2006), with users playing an active role in the production and curation of online content. However, given the commercial nature of many user-generated content sites, this amateur media activity is becoming increasingly subject to intellectual property claims and conflicts (see Burgess; Kennedy). Across the internet there are growing tensions between website operators and amateur producers. As Jenny Kennedy (132) notes, while these platforms promote a public rhetoric of “sharing”, these corporate narratives “downplay their economic power” and imply “that they do not control the practices contained within their sites”. Subsequently, the expectations of users regarding how content is managed and organised can differ substantially from the corporate goals of social media companies. This paper contributes to the growing body of literature interested in the politics of amateur media production (see Hunter and Lastowka; Benkler; Burgess; Kennedy) by exploring the emergence of attribution norms and informal enforcement measures in and around the Aww online community. In contrast to professional content creators, amateurs often have fewer resources on hand to protect their copyrighted work and are also challenged by a pervasive online rhetoric that suggests that popular content essentially “belongs to the Internet” (Douglas). A number of communities on Reddit have questioned the company’s handling of amateur content with users suggesting that Reddit actively seeks to de-contextualise original content and not attribute original creators. By examining how amateur creators and online communities regulate content online, I interrogate the power relations that exist between social media platforms and users and explore how the corporate rhetoric of participatory culture interacts with the legal framework of copyright law. This article also contributes to existing legal scholarship on communities of practice and norms-based intellectual property systems. This literature has explored how social norms effectively regulate the protection of, among other things, recipes (Fauchart and Von Hippel), fashion design (Raustiala and Sprigman) and stand-up comedy routines (Oliar and Sprigman), in situations where copyright law does not function as an effective regulatory mechanism. Often these norms are in line with copyright law protections, but in other cases they diverge from these legal principles. In this paper I suggest that particular sections of Reddit function in a similar way, with their own set of self-governing norms, and that these norms largely align with the philosophical aims of copyright law. The paper begins by outlining a series of recent debates that have occurred between amateur media creators and Reddit, before exploring how norms are regulated on Reddit subforums Aww and Karma Court. I then offer some brief conclusions on the value of paying attention to how social norms structure forms of “sharing” (see Kennedy) and provide a useful way for amateur media producers to protect their content without going through formal legal processes. Introducing Reddit and the Confused Politics of Amateur Content Reddit is a social news site, a vibrant community and one of the most popular websites online. It stands as the most visible iteration of a long-standing tradition of user-generated and managed news, one that goes back to websites like Slashdot, which operated in the mid to late-90s. Founded in 2005 Reddit was launched after only one funding round of venture capital, receiving $100k in seed funding from Y Combinatory (Miller). Despite some early rivalry between Reddit and competitor site Digg, Reddit had enough potential to be purchased by Condé Nast for an estimated $20 million (Carr). Reddit’s audience numbers have grown exponentially in the last few years, with the site currently receiving over 5 billion page views and 114 million unique visitors per month (“About Reddit”). It has also changed focus significantly in the last few years with the site now “as much about posting interesting or funny pictures as it is about news” (Sepponen). Reddit hosts a number of individual subforums (called subreddits), which focus on a particular topic and function essentially like online bulletin boards. The front-page of Reddit showcases the most popular content from across the whole website, and user-generated content features heavily here. Amateur media cannot spread without the structural support of social media platforms, but this support is qualified in particular ways. Reddit stands as a paradigmatic case. Users on Reddit are “incentivized to submit direct links to images, because viewers can get to them more easily” (Douglas) and the website encourages amateur creators to use a preferred content server – Imgur – to host images. The Imgur service provides a direct public link to an image – even bypassing the Reddit discussion page – and with its free hosting and limited ads it has become a popular service and is used by most Reddit users (Slater-Robins). For the majority of Reddit users this is an unproblematic partnership. Imgur is free, effective and fast. However, a vocal minority of Reddit users and amateur creators claim that the partnership between Reddit and Imgur has created the equivalent of an online ghetto (Douglas).As Nick Douglas explains, when using services like Imgur there is no requirement to either provide an external link to a creators website or to attribute the creator, limiting the ability for an amateur creator to gain exposure. It also bypasses existing revenue streams that may have been set up by creators, including ad-supported websites or online stores offering merchandise. As a result creators have little opportunity to benefit either economically or reputationally from this system. This occurs to such an extent that “there are actually warnings against submitting your own [original] work” to particular subforums on Reddit (Douglas). For example, some forum moderators require submissions to either “link directly to a specific image file or to a website with minimal ads” (“Reddit Pics”). It is in this context, that the posting of original content without attribution is not actively policed. There are a number of complaints circulating within the Reddit community about these practices (see “Ok, look people. I know you heart Imgur, but webcomics? Just link to the freaking site”; “The problem with reddit”). Many creators have directly protested against this aspect of Reddit’s structural organisation. Blogger Benjamin Grelle (a.k.a The Frogman) and writer Chris Menning are two notable examples. Grelle’s protest was witty and dramatic. He wrote a blog post featuring a picture of an email he sent to Imgur offering the company a choice: send him a huge novelty check for $10,000 or alternatively, add a proper attribution system that allows artists, photographers and content creators to properly credit their work. Grelle estimates that his work generated around $20,000 in ad revenue for Imgur; however the structure of Reddit and Imgur meant he earned little income from the “viral” success of his content. Grelle claimed he was happy for his work to be shared, but attribution meant that it was more likely a fan would follow the link to his website and provide him with some financial recompense for his work. Unsurprisingly, Grelle didn’t receive a paycheck and so in response has developed a unique way to gain exposure. He has started to insert himself into his work, “[s]o when you see a stolen Frogman piece, you still see Ben Grelle’s face” (Douglas). Chris Menning posted a blog about being banned from Reddit, hoping to bring to light some of the inequalities that persist around Reddit’s current structure. He began by noting that he had received a significant amount of traffic from them in the past. He had responded in kind by looking to create original content for particular subforums, knowing what a particular community would enjoy. However, his habit of providing the link to his own website along with the content he posted saw him get labelled as a spammer and banned by administrators. Menning chose not to fight the ban:It seems that the only way I could avoid [getting banned] is if I were to relinquish any rights to my original content and post it exclusively to Imgur. In effect, reddit punishes the creation of original content, and rewards content theft (Menning). Instead he decided to quit Reddit, claiming that Reddit’s approach would carry long-term consequences as the platform provided little incentive for creators to produce wholly original content. It is worth noting that neither Menning nor Grelle turned to legal avenues in order to gain financial restitution. Considering the nature of the practices they were complaining about, compensation in the form of an injunction or damages would have certainly been possible. In Benjamin’s case, a user had combined a number of his copyrighted works into one image and posted the image to Imgur without attribution --this infringed Grelle’s copyright in his work as well as his moral right to be attributed as the creator of the work. However, the public comments of both creators suggest that despite the possibility of legal success, their issue was not so much to do with their individual cases but rather the broader structural issues at play within Reddit. While they might gain individually from a successful legal challenge, over the long term Reddit would continue to be a fraught place for amateur and semi-professional content creators. Certain parts of the Reddit community appear to be sympathetic to these issues, and the complaints of dissenting users like Menning and Grelle have received active support from some users and moderators on the site. This has led to changes in the way content is being posted and managed on Aww, and has also driven the emergence of a satirical user-run court entitled Karma Court. In these spaces moderators and members establish community norms, regularly police the correct attribution of works and challenge the de-contextualisation of content overtly encouraged by Reddit, Imgur and other subforums. In the following section I will examine both Aww and Karma Court in order to explore how these norms are established and negotiated by both moderators and users alike. reddit.com/r/aww: The Online Hub of Cute Animal Pictures As we have seen, the design of Reddit and Imgur creates a number of problems for amateur creators who wish to protect their intellectual property. To address these shortcomings, the Aww community has created its own informal regulatory systems. Volunteer moderators play a crucial role: they establish informal codes of conduct for the Aww community and enforce various rules about how the site should be used. One of these rules relates to attribution. Users are asked to to “post original content whenever possible or attribute original content creators” ("The cutest things on the internet!"). Due to the volunteer nature of the work and the size of the Aww sub-reddit, moderator enforcement is haphazard. Consequently, responsibility falls on the wider user community to self-police. Despite its informal nature, this process manages to facilitate a fairly consistent standard of attribution. In this way it functions as an informal method of intellectual property protection. It is worth noting however that this commitment to original content is not solely due to the moral character of Aww users. A significant motivation is the distribution of karma points amongst Reddit users. Karma, which represents your good standing within the Reddit community, can be earned through user likes and votes – these push the most popular content to the front page of each subforum. Thus karma stands as a numerical representation of a user’s value to Reddit. This ostensibly democratic system has the paradoxical effect of fuelling intellectual property violations on the site. Users often repost other users’ jpegs, animated gifs, and other content, in order to reap the social and cultural capital that comes with posting a popular picture. In some cases they claim authorship of the content; in other cases they simply re-post content that they feel “belongs to the internet” (Douglas). Some content is so popular or pervasive online (this content that is often described as “viral”) that users feel there is little reason or need to attribute content. This helps to explain the persistence of ownership and attribution conflicts on Reddit. In the eyes of some users and moderators the management of these rights and the correct distribution of karma are seen to be vital to the long-term functioning of site. The karma system offers a numerical representation of each contributor’s value. Re-posting already successful content and claiming it as your own challenges the proper functioning of the karma system and potentially ‘inhibits the innovative potential of contributions (Richterich). On Aww the re-posting of original content is viewed as a taboo act that breaches these norms. The poster is seen to have engaged in deceptive conduct in order to gain karma for their user profile. In addition there is a strong ethic that runs through these comment threads that the original creator deserves attribution. There is a presumption that this attribution is vital in order to increasing the possible marketability of the posted content and to recognise and courage creators within the community. This sort of community-driven regulation contrasts with the aforementioned site design of Reddit and Imgur, which frustrates effective authorship attribution practices. Aww users, in contrast, have shown a willingness to defend what they see as the intellectual property rights of content creators.A series of recent examples outline how this process works in practice. User “moonlikeme123” posted a picture of a cat with its hands on the steering wheel of a car. The picture was entitled “we don’t need to ask for directions, Helen”. During the same day, three separate users had identified the picture as a repost, with one noting that the same picture was already on the front page of Aww. “moonlikeme123” received no karma points for the picture. In a second example, the user “nibblur” posted a photo of a kitten “hunting” a toy mouse. Within a day, one enterprising user had identified the original photographer – “torode”, an amateur photographer – and linked to his Reddit profile (see fig. 2) ("ferocious cat hunting its prey: aww."). One further example: on 15 July 2013 “Cuzacelmare” posted a picture of two dogs comforting each other – an image which had originally been posted by “lauface”. Again, users were quick to point out the lack of attribution and the attempt to claim someone else’s content as their own (“Comforting her sister during a storm: aww). It is worth noting that some Reddit users consider attributing content to be entirely without benefit. Some deride karma as “meaningless” and suggest that as a significant amount of content online is regularly reposted elsewhere, there is little harm done in re-posting what is essentially amateur content destined to be lost in the bowels of the internet. For example, the comments that follow Cuzacelmare’s reflect an ambivalence about reposting, suggesting that users weigh up the benefits of exposure gained by the re-posting against the lack of attribution granted and the increasingly decontextualized nature of the photo itself:Why does everyone get so bitchy about reposts. Not everyone is on ALL the time or has been on Rreddit since it was created. I mean if you've seen it already ignore it. It's just picture you aren't forced to click the link. [sic] (“Comforting her sister during a storm: aww”)We're arguing semantics, but any content that gets attention can benefit the creator, whether it's reddit or Youtube (“Comforting her sister during a storm: aww”) Such discussions are common on comment threads following re-posts by other users. They underline the conflicted status of this ephemeral media and the underlying frictions that are part of these processes. These discussions underline the fact that on Reddit the “sharing” (Kennedy) and “spreading” (Jenkins et al.) of content is not seen as an unquestioned positive but rather as a contestable structural feature that needs to be constantly negotiated and discussed. These informal methods of identification, post-hoc attribution and criticism in comment threads have been the long-standing method used to redress questions of attribution and ownership of content on Reddit. However in recent times, Reddit users have turned to satirical methods of formal adjudication for particularly egregious cases. A sub-reddit, Karma Court, now functions as an informal tribunal in which punishment is meted out for “the abuse of karma and general contemptible actions heretofore identified as wrongdoing” (“Constitution and F.A.Q of the Karma Court”). Due to its double function as both an adjudicator and satire of users overly-invested in online debates, there is no limit to the possible “crimes” a user may be charged with. The following charges are only presented as guidelines and speak to common negative experiences on online: (1). Douchebaggery - When one is being a douche.(2). Defamation - Tarnishing another redditor's [user’s] username.(3). Public Indecency - When a user flexes his or her 'e-peen' with the intent to shame other users.(4). OhShit.exe - Intentional reposting that results in reddit Gold.(5). GrandTheft.jpg - Reposting while claiming credit for the post.(6). Obstruction of Justice - Impeding or interfering with an investigation, such as submitting false screenshots, deleting evidence, or providing false evidence to the court.(7). Other - Literally anything else you want. We like creative names for charges.(“Constitution and F.A.Q of the Karma Court”) In Karma Court, legal representation can be sourced from a list of attorneys and judges, populated by users who volunteer to help adjudicate the case. They are required to have been a Reddit member for over six months. The only punishment is a public shaming. Interestingly Karma Court has developed a fair reposting clause that attempts to manage the complex debates around reposting and attribution. Under the non-binding satirical clause, users are able to repost content if it has not featured on the front page of a sub-reddit for seven or more days, if the re-poster acknowledges in the title or description that they are re-posting or if the original poster has less than 30,000 link karma (which means that the original poster has not substantially contributed to the Reddit community). If a re-poster does not adhere by these rules and claims a re-post as their own original content (or “OC”), they can be charged with “grandtheft.jpg” and brought to trial by another Reddit user. As one of the most popular subforums, a number of cases have emerged from Aww. The aforementioned re-poster “Cuzacelmare” (“I am bringing /U/ Cuzacelmare to trial …”) was “charged” through this process and served with a summons after denying “cute and innocent animals of that subreddit of their much deserved karma”. Similar cases to do with re-posting without attribution on Aww involve “FreshCorio” (“Reddit vs. U/FreshCorio …”) and “ninjacollin” (“People of Reddit vs. /U/ ninjacollin”) who were also brought to karma court. In each case prosecutors were adamant that false authorship claims needed to be punished. With these mock trials run by volunteers it takes time for arguments to be heard and judgment to occur; however “ninjacollin” expedited the legal process by offering a full confession. As a new user, “ninjacollin” was reprimanded severely for his actions and the users on Karma Court underlined the consequences of not identifying original content creators when re-posting content. Ownership and Attribution: Amateur Media, Distribution and Law The practices outlined above offer a number of alternate ways to think about amateur media and how it is distributed. An increasingly complex picture of content attribution and circulation emerges once we take into account the structural operation of Reddit, the intellectual property norms of users, and the various formal and informal systems of regulation that are appearing on the site. Such practices require users to negotiate complex questions of ownership between each other and in relation to corporate bodies. These negotiations often lead to informal agreements around a set of norms to regulate the spread of content within a particular community, suggesting that the lack of a formal legal process in these debates does not mean that there is an absence of regulation. As noted throughout this paper, the spread of online content often involves progressive de-contextualisation. Website design features often support this process in the hopes of encouraging content to spread in a fashion amenable to their corporate goals. Considering this tendency for content to be decontextualized online, the presence of attribution norms on subforums like Aww is significant. Instead of remixing, spreading and re-purposing content indiscriminately, users retain a concept of ownership and attribution that tracks closely to the basic principles of copyright law. Rather than users radically redefining concepts of attribution and ownership, as prefigured in some of the more utopian accounts of participatory media, the dominant norms of the Reddit community extend a discourse of copyright and ownership. As well as providing a greater level of detail to contemporary debates around amateur media and its viral or spreadable nature (Burgess; Jenkins; Jenkins et al), this analysis offers some lessons for copyright law. The emergence of norms in particular Reddit subforums which govern the use of copyrighted content and the use of a mock court structure suggests that online communities have the capacity to engage in forms of redress for amateur creators. These organic forms of copyright management operate adjacent to formal legal structures of copyright law. However, they are more accessible and practical for amateur creators, who do not always have the money to hire lawyers, especially when the market value of their content might be negligible. The informal regulatory systems outlined above may not operate perfectly but they reveal communities who are willing to engage foundational conversations around the importance of attribution and ownership. Following the existing literature (Fauchart and Von Hippel; Raustiala and Sprigman; Schultz; Oliar and Sprigman), I suggest that these online social norms provide a useful form of alternative protection for amateur creators. Acknowledgements Thanks to Ramon Lobato and Emily van der Nagel for comments and productive discussions around these issues. I am also grateful to the two anonymous peer reviewers for their assistance in developing this argument. References “About Reddit.” Reddit, 2014. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.reddit.com/about/›. Benkler, Yochai. The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2006. Burgess, Jean. “YouTube and the Formalisation of Amateur Media.” Amateur Media: Social, Cultural and Legal Perspectives. In Dan Hunter, Ramon Lobato, Megan Richardson, and Julian Thomas, eds. Oxford: Routledge, 2012. Carr, Nicholas. “Left Alone by Its Owner, Reddit Soars.” The New York Times: Business, 2 Sep. 2012. “Comforting Her Sister during a Storm: aww.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 15 July 2013. “Constitution and F.A.Q of the Karma Court.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 2014. Douglas, Nick. “Everything on the Internet Gets Stolen: Here’s How You Should Feel about That.” Slacktory, 8 Sep. 2009. Fauchart, Emmanual, and Eric von Hippel. “Norms-Based Intellectual Property Systems: The Case of French Chefs.” Organization Science 19.2 (2008): 187 - 201 "Ferocious Cat Hunting Its Prey: aww." reddit: the front page of the internet, 4 April 2013. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.rreddit.com/r/aww/comments/1bobcp/ferocious_cat_hunting_its_prey/›. Hepola, Sarah. “The Internet is Made of Kittens.” Salon.com, 11 Feb. 2009. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.salon.com/2009/02/10/cat_internet/›. Hunter, Dan, and Greg Lastowka. “Amateur-to-Amateur.” William & Mary Law Review 46 (2004): 951 - 1030. “I Am Bringing /U/ Cuzacelmare to Trial on the Basis of Being One of the Biggest _______ I’ve Ever Seen, by Reposting Cute Animal Pictures to /R/Awww. Feels.Jpg.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 21 March 2013. Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press, 2006. Jenkins, Henry, Sam Ford, and Joshua Green. Spreadable Media: Creating Value and Meaning in a Networked Culture. New York: New York University Press, 2013. Menning, Chris. "So I Got Banned from Reddit" Modern Primate, 23 Aug. 2012. Miller, Keery. “How Y Combinator Helped Shape Reddit.” Bloomberg Businessweek, 26 Sep. 2007. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2007-09-26/how-y-combinator-helped-shape-redditbusinessweek-business-news-stock-market-and-financial-advice›. “Ok, Look People. I Know You Heart Imgur, But Webcomics? Just Link to the Freaking Site.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 22 Aug. 2011. Oliar, Dotan, and Christopher Sprigman. “There’s No Free Laugh (Anymore): The Emergence of Intellectual Property Norms and the Transformation of Stand-Up Comedy.” Virginia Law Review 94.8 (2009): 1787 – 1867. “People of reddit vs. /U/Ninjacollin for Grandtheft.jpg.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 30 Jan. 2013. Raustiala, Kal, and Christopher Sprigman. “The Piracy Paradox: Innovation and Intellectual Property in Fashion Design”. Virginia Law Review 92.8 (2006): 1687-1777. “Reddit v. U/FreshCorio. User Uploads Popular Repost Picture of R/AWW and Claims It Is His Sister’s Cat. Falsely Claims It Is His Cakeday for Good Measure.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 12 Apr. 2013. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.reddit.com/r/KarmaCourt/comments/1c7vxz/reddit_vs_ufreshcorio_user_uploads_popular_repost/›. “Reddit Pics.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 2014. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.reddit.com/r/pics/›. Richterich, Annika. “’Karma, Precious Karma!’ Karmawhoring on Reddit and the Front Page’s Econometrisation.” Journal of Peer Production 4 (2014). 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://peerproduction.net/issues/issue-4-value-and-currency/peer-reviewed-articles/karma-precious-karma/›. Schultz, Mark. “Fear and Norms and Rock & Roll: What Jambands Can Teach Us about Persuading People to Obey Copyright Law.” Berkley Technology Law Journal 21.2 (2006): 651 – 728. Sepponen, Bemmu. “Why Redditors Gave Imgur a Chance.” Social Media Today, 20 July 2011. Slater-Robins, Max. “From Rags to Riches: The Story of Imgur.” Neowin, 21 Apr. 2013. "The Cutest Things on the Internet!" reddit: the front page of the internet, n.d. “The Problem with reddit.” reddit: the front page of the internet, 23 Aug. 2012. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.rreddit.com/r/technology/comments/ypbe2/the_problem_with_rreddit/›. Van der Nagel, Emily. “Faceless Bodies: Negotiating Technological and Cultural Codes on reddit gonewild.” Scan: Journal of Media Arts Culture 10.2 (2013). "We Don’t Need to Ask for Directions, Helen: aww." reddit: the front page of the internet, 30 June 2013. 29 Apr. 2014 ‹http://www.rreddit.com/r/aww/comments/1heut6/we_dont_need_to_ask_for_directions_helen/›.

Introduction The counterculture that arose during the 1960s and 1970s left lasting social and political reverberations in developed nations. This was a time of increasing affluence and liberalisation which opened up remarkable political opportunities for social change. Within this context, an array of new social movements were a vital ingredient of the ferment that saw existing norms challenged and the establishment of new rights for many oppressed groups. An expanding arena of concerns included the environmental damage caused by 200 years of industrial capitalism. This article examines one aspect of a current environment movement in Australia, the anti-Coal Seam Gas (CSG) movement, and the part played by participants. In particular, the focus is upon one action that emerged during the recent Bentley Blockade, which was a regional mobilisation against proposed unconventional gas mining (UGM) near Lismore, NSW. Over the course of the blockade, the conventional ritual of waving at passers-by was transformed into a mechanism for garnering broad community support. Arguably, this was a crucial factor in the eventual outcome. In this case, we contend that the wave, rather than a countercultural artefact being appropriated by the mainstream, represents an everyday behaviour that builds social solidarity, which is subverted to become an effective part of the repertoire of the movement. At a more general level, this article examines how counterculture and mainstream interact via the subversion of “ordinary” citizens and the role of certain cultural understandings for that purpose. We will begin by examining the nature of the counterculture and its relationship to social movements before discussing the character of the anti-CSG movement in general and the Bentley Blockade in particular, using the personal experience of one of the writers. We will then be able to explore our thesis in detail and make some concluding remarks. The Counterculture and Social Movements In this article, we follow Cox’s understanding of the counterculture as a kind of meta-movement within which specific social movements are situated. For Cox (105), the counterculture that flourished during the 1960s and 1970s was an overarching movement in which existing social relations—in particular the family—were rejected by a younger generation, who succeeded in effectively fusing previously separate political and cultural spheres of dissent into one. Cox (103-04) points out that the precondition for such a phenomenon is “free space”—conditions under which counter-hegemonic activity can occur—for example, being liberated from the constraints of working to subsist, something which the unprecedented prosperity of the post WWII years allowed. Hence, in the 1960s and 1970s, as the counterculture emerged, a wave of activism arose in the western world which later came to be referred to as new social movements. These included the civil rights movement, women’s liberation, pacifism and the anti-nuclear and environment movements. The new movements rejected established power and organisational structures and tended, some scholars argued, to cross class lines, basing their claims on non-material issues. Della Porta and Diani claim this wave of movements is characterised by: a critical ideology in relation to modernism and progress; decentralized and participatory organizational structures; defense of interpersonal solidarity against the great bureaucracies; and the reclamation of autonomous spaces, rather than material advantages. (9) This depiction clearly announces the countercultural nature of the new social movements. As Carter (91) avers, these movements attempted to bypass the state and instead mobilise civil society, employing a range of innovative tactics and strategies—the repertoire of action—which may involve breaking laws. It should be noted that over time, some of these movements did shift towards accommodation of existing power structures and became more reformist in nature, to the point of forming political parties in the case of the Greens. However, inasmuch as the counterculture represented a merging of distinctively non-mainstream ways of life with the practice of actively challenging social arrangements at a political level (Cox 18–19; Grossberg 15–18;), the tactic of mobilising civil society to join social movements demonstrates in fact a reverse direction: large numbers of people are transfigured in radical ways by their involvement in social movements. One important principle underlying much of the repertoire of action of these new movements was non-violence. Again, this signals countercultural norms of the period. As Sharp (583–86) wrote at the time, non-violence is crucial in that it denies the aggressor their rationale for violent repression. This principle is founded on the liberal notion, whose legacy goes back to Locke, that the legitimacy of the government rests upon the consent of the governed—that is, the people can withdraw their consent (Locke in Ball & Dagger 92). Ghandi also relied upon this idea when formulating his non-violent approach to conflict, satyagraha (Sharp 83–84). Thus an idea that upholds the modern state is adopted by the counterculture in order to undermine it (the state), again demonstrating an instance of counterflow from the mainstream. Non-violence does not mean non-resistance. In fact, it usually involves non-compliance with a government or other authority and when practised in large numbers, can be very effective, as Ghandi and those in the civil rights movement showed. The result will be either that the government enters into negotiation with the protestors, or they can engage in violence to suppress them, which generally alienates the wider population, leading to a loss of support (Finley & Soifer 104–105). Tarrow (88) makes the important point that the less threatening an action, the harder it is to repress. As a result, democratic states have generally modified their response towards the “strategic weapon of nonviolent protest and even moved towards accommodation and recognition of this tactic as legitimate” (Tarrow 172). Nevertheless, the potential for state violence remains, and the freedom to protest is proscribed by various laws. One of the key figures to emerge from the new social movements that formed an integral part of the counterculture was Bill Moyer, who, in conjunction with colleagues produced a seminal text for theorising and organising social movements (Moyer et al.). Many contemporary social movements have been significantly influenced by Moyer’s Movement Action Plan (MAP), which describes not only key theoretical concepts but is also a practical guide to movement building and achieving aims. Moyer’s model was utilised in training the Northern Rivers community in the anti-CSG movement in conjunction with the non-violent direct action (NVDA) model developed by the North-East Forest Alliance (NEFA) that resisted logging in the forests of north-eastern NSW during the late 1980s and 1990s (Ricketts 138–40). Indeed, the Northern Rivers region of NSW—dubbed the Rainbow Region—is celebrated, as a “‘meeting place’ of countercultures and for the articulation of social and environmental ideals that challenge mainstream practice” (Ward and van Vuuren 63). As Bible (6–7) outlines, the Northern Rivers’ place in countercultural history is cemented by the holding of the Aquarius Festival in Nimbin in 1973 and the consequent decision of many attendees to stay on and settle in the region. They formed new kinds of communities based on an alternative ethics that eschewed a consumerist, individualist agenda in favour of modes of existence that emphasised living in harmony with the environment. The Terania Creek campaign of the late 1970s made the region famous for its environmental activism, when the new settlers resisted the logging of Nightcap National Park using nonviolent methods (Bible 5). It was also instrumental in developing an array of ingenious actions that were used in subsequent campaigns such as the Franklin Dam blockade in Tasmania in the early 1980s (Kelly 116). Indeed, many of these earlier activists were key figures in the anti-CSG movement that has developed in the Rainbow Region over the last few years. The Anti-CSG Movement Despite opposition to other forms of UGM, such as tight sands and shale oil extraction techniques, the term anti-CSG is used here, as it still seems to attract wide recognition. Unconventional gas extraction usually involves a process called fracking, which is the injection at high pressure of water, sand and a number of highly toxic chemicals underground to release the gas that is trapped in rock formations. Among the risks attributed to fracking are contamination of aquifers, air pollution from fugitive emissions and exposure to radioactive particles with resultant threats to human and animal health, as well as an increased risk of earthquakes (Ellsworth; Hand 13; Sovacool 254–260). Additionally, the vast amount of water that is extracted in the fracking process is saline and may contain residues of the fracking chemicals, heavy metals and radioactive matter. This produced water must either be stored or treated (Howarth 273–73; Sovacool 255). Further, there is potential for accidents and incidents and there are many reports—particularly in the United States where the practice is well established—of adverse events such as compressors exploding, leaks and spills, and water from taps catching fire (Sovacool 255–257). Despite an abundance of anecdotal evidence, until recently authorities and academics believed there was not enough “rigorous evidence” to make a definitive judgment of harm to animal and human health as a result of fracking (Mitka 2135). For example, in Australia, the Queensland Government was unable to find a clear link between fracking and health complaints in the Tara gasfield (Thompson 56), even though it is known that there are fugitive emissions from these gasfields (Tait et al. 3099-103). It is within this context that grassroots opposition to UGM began in Australia. The largest and most sustained challenge has come from the Northern Rivers of New South Wales, where a company called Metgasco has been attempting to engage in UGM for a number of years. Stiff community opposition has developed over this time, with activists training, co-ordinating and organising using the principles of Moyer’s MAP and NEFA’s NVDA. Numerous community and affinity groups opposing UGM sprang up including the Lock the Gate Alliance (LTG), a grassroots organisation opposing coal and gas mining, which formed in 2010 (Lock the Gate Alliance online). The movement put up sustained resistance to Metgasco’s attempts to establish wells at Glenugie, near Grafton and Doubtful Creek, near Kyogle in 2012 and 2013, despite the use of a substantial police presence at both locations. In the event, neither site was used for production despite exploratory wells being sunk (ABC News; Dobney). Metgasco announced it would be withdrawing its operations following new Federal and State government regulations at the time of the Doubtful Creek blockade. However it returned to the fray with a formal announcement in February 2014 (Metgasco), that it would drill at Bentley, 12 kilometres west of Lismore. It was widely believed this would occur with a view to production on an industrial scale should initial exploration prove fruitful. The Bentley Blockade It was known well before the formal announcement that Metgasco planned to drill at Bentley and community actions such as flash mobs, media releases and planning meetings were part of the build-up to direct action at the site. One of the authors of this article was actively involved in the movement and participated in a variety of these actions. By the end of January 2014 it was decided to hold an ongoing vigil at the site, which was still entirely undeveloped. Participants, including one author, volunteered for four-hour shifts which began at 5 a.m. each day and before long, were lasting into the night. The purpose of a vigil is to bear witness, maintain a presence and express a point of view. It thus accords well with the principle of non-violence. Eventually the site mushroomed into a tent village with three gates being blockaded. The main gate, Gate A, sprouted a variety of poles, tripods and other installations together with colourful tents and shelters, peopled by protesters on a 24-hour basis. The vigils persisted on all three gates for the duration of the blockade. As the number of blockaders swelled, popular support grew, lending weight to the notion that countercultural ideas and practices were spreading throughout the community. In response, Metgasco called on the State Government to provide police to coincide with the arrival of equipment. It was rumoured that 200 police would be drafted to defend the site in late April. When alerts were sent out to the community warning of imminent police action, an estimated crowd of 2000 people attended in the early hours of the morning and the police called off their operation (Feliu). As the weeks wore on, training was stepped up, attendees were educated in non-violent resistance and protestors willing to act as police liaison persons were placed on a rotating roster. In May, the State Government was preparing to send up to 800 police and the Riot Squad to break the blockade (NSW Hansard in Buckingham). Local farmers (now a part of the movement) and activist leaders had gone to Sydney in an effort to find a political solution in order to avoid what threatened to be a clash that would involve police violence. A confluence of events, such as: the sudden resignation of the Premier; revelations via the Independent Commission against Corruption about nefarious dealings and undue influence of the coal industry upon the government; a radio interview with locals by a popular broadcaster in Sydney; and the reputed hesitation of the police themselves in engaging with a group of possibly 7,000 to 10,000 protestors, resulted in the Office for Coal Seam Gas suspending Metgasco’s drilling licence on 15 May (NSW Department of Resources & Energy). The grounds were that the company had not adequately fulfilled its obligations to consult with the community. At the date of writing, the suspension still holds. The Wave The repertoire of contention at the Bentley Blockade was expansive, comprising most of the standard actions and strategies developed in earlier environmental struggles. These included direct blocking tactics in addition to the use of more carnivalesque actions like music and theatre, as well as the use of various media to reach a broader public. Non-violence was at the core of all actions, but we would tentatively suggest that Bentley may have provided a novel addition to the repertoire, stemming originally from the vigil, which brought the first protestors to the site. At the beginning of the vigil, which was initially held near the entrance to the proposed drilling site atop a cutting, occupants of passing vehicles below would demonstrate their support by sounding their horns and/or waving to the vigil-keepers, who at first were few in number. There was a precedent for this behaviour in the campaign leading up to the blockade. Activist groups such as the Knitting Nannas against Gas had encouraged vehicles to show support by sounding their horns. So when the motorists tooted spontaneously at Bentley, we waved back. Occupants of other vehicles would show disapproval by means of rude gestures and/or yelling and we would wave to them as well. After some weeks, as a presence began to be established at the site, it became routine for vigil keepers to smile and wave at all passing vehicles. This often elicited a positive response. After the first mass call-out discussed above, a number of us migrated to another gate, where numbers were much sparser and there was a perceived need for a greater presence. At this point, the participating writer had begun to act as a police liaison person, but the practice of waving routinely was continued. Those protecting this gate usually included protestors ready to block access, the police liaison person, a legal observer, vigil-keepers and a passing parade of visitors. Because this location was directly on the road, it was possible to see the drivers of vehicles and make eye contact more easily. Certain vehicles became familiar, passing at regular times, on the way to work or school, for example. As time passed, most of those protecting the gate also joined the waving ritual to the point where it became like a game to try to prise a signal of acknowledgement from the passing motorists, or even to win over a disapprover. Police vehicles, some of which passed at set intervals, were included in this game. Mostly they waved cheerfully. There were some we never managed to win over, but waving and making direct eye contact with regular motorists over time created a sense of community and an acknowledgement of the work we were doing, as they increasingly responded in kind. Motorists could hardly feel threatened when they encountered smiling, waving protestors. By including the disapprovers, we acted inclusively and our determined good humour seemed to de-escalate demonstrated hostility. Locals who did not want drilling to go ahead but who were nevertheless unwilling to join a direct action were thus able to participate in the resistance in a way that may have felt safe for them. Some of them even stopped and visited the site, voicing their support. Standing on the side of the road and waving to passers-by may seem peripheral to the “real” action, even trivial. But we would argue it is a valuable adjunct to a blockade (which is situated near a road) when one of the strategies of the overall campaign is to win popular backing. Hence waving, whilst not a completely new part of the repertoire, constitutes what Tilly (41–45) would call innovation at the margins, something he asserts is necessary to maintain the effectiveness and vitality of contentious action. In this case, it is arguable that the sheer size of community support probably helped to concentrate the minds of the state government politicians in Sydney, particularly as they contemplated initiating a massive, taxpayer-funded police action against the people for the benefit of a commercial operation. Waving is a symbolic gesture indicating acknowledgement and goodwill. It fits well within a repertoire based on the principle of non-violence. Moreover, it is a conventional social norm and everyday behaviour that is so innocuous that it is difficult to see how it could be suppressed by police or other authorities. Therein lies its subversiveness. For in communicating our common humanity in a spirit of friendliness, we drew attention to the fact that we were without rancour and tacitly invited others to join us and to explore our concerns. In this way, the counterculture drew upon a mainstream custom to develop and extend upon a new form of dissent. This constitutes a reversal of the more usual phenomenon of countercultural artefacts—such as “hippie clothing”—being appropriated or co-opted by the prevailing culture (see Reading). But it also fits with the more general phenomenon that we have argued was occurring; that of enticing ordinary residents into joining together in countercultural activity, via the pathway of a social movement. Conclusion The anti-CSG movement in the Northern Rivers was developed and organised by countercultural participants of previous contentious challenges. It was highly effective in building popular support whilst at the same time forging a loose coalition of various activist groups. We have surveyed one practice—the wave—that evolved out of mainstream culture over the course of the Bentley Blockade and suggested it may come to be seen as part of the repertoire of actions that can be beneficially employed under suitable conditions. Waving to passers-by invites them to become part of the movement in a non-threatening and inclusive way. It thus envelops supporters and non-supporters alike, and its very innocuousness makes it difficult to suppress. We have argued that this instance can be referenced to a similar reverse movement at a broader level—that of co-opting liberal notions and involving the general populace in new practices and activities that undermine the status quo. The ability of the counterculture in general and environment movements in particular to innovate in the quest to challenge and change what it perceives as damaging or unethical practices demonstrates its ingenuity and spirit. This movement is testament to its dynamic nature. References ABC News. Metgasco Has No CSG Extraction Plans for Glenugie. 2013. 30 July 2014 ‹http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-22/metgasco-says-no-csg-extraction-planned-for-glenugie/4477652›. Bible, Vanessa. Aquarius Rising: Terania Creek and the Australian Forest Protest Movement. Bachelor of Arts (Honours) Thesis, University of New England, 2010. 4 Nov. 2014 ‹http://www.rainforestinfo.org.au/terania/Vanessa%27s%20Terania%20Thesis2.pdf›. Buckingham, Jeremy. Hansard of Bentley Blockade Motion 15/05/2014. 16 May 2014. 30 July 2014 ‹http://jeremybuckingham.org/2014/05/16/hansard-of-bentley-blockade-motion-moved-by-david-shoebridge-15052014/›. Carter, Neil. The Politics of the Environment: Ideas, Activism, Policy. 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge UP, 2007. Cox, Laurence. Building Counter Culture: The Radical Praxis of Social Movement Milieu. Helsinki: Into-ebooks 2011. 23 July 2014 ‹http://www.into-ebooks.com/book/building_counter_culture/›. Della Porta, Donatella, and Mario Diani. Social Movements: An Introduction. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006. Dobney, Chris. “Drill Rig Heads to Doubtful Creek.” Echo Netdaily Feb. 2013. 30 July 2014 ‹http://www.echo.net.au/2013/02/drill-rig-heads-to-doubtful-creek/›. Ellsworth, William. “Injection-Induced Earthquakes”. Science 341.6142 (2013). DOI: 10.1126/science.1225942. 10 July 2014 ‹http://www.sciencemag.org.ezproxy.scu.edu.au/content/341/6142/1225942.full?sid=b4679ca5-0992-4ad3-aa3e-1ac6356f10da›. Feliu, Luis. “Battle for Bentley: 2,000 Protectors on Site.” Echo Netdaily Mar. 2013. 4 Aug. 2014 ‹http://www.echo.net.au/2014/03/battle-bentley-2000-protectors-site/›. Finley, Mary Lou, and Steven Soifer. “Social Movement Theories and Map.” Doing Democracy: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements. Eds. Bill Moyer, Johann McAllister, Mary Lou Finley, and Steven Soifer. Gabriola Island, Canada: New Society Publishers, 2001. Grossberg, Lawrence. “Some Preliminary Conjunctural Thoughts on Countercultures”. Journal of Gender and Power 1.1 (2014). Hand, Eric. “Injection Wells Blamed in Oklahoma Earthquakes.” Science 345.6192 (2014): 13–14. Howarth, Terry. “Should Fracking Stop?” Nature 477 (2011): 271–73. Kelly, Russell. “The Mediated Forest: Who Speaks for the Trees?” Belonging in the Rainbow Region: Cultural Perspectives on the NSW North Coast. Ed. Helen Wilson. Lismore: Southern Cross UP, 2003. 101–20. Lock the Gate Alliance. 2014. 15 July 2014 ‹http://www.lockthegate.org.au/history›. Locke, John. “Toleration and Government.” Ideals and Ideologies: A Reader. Eds. Terence Ball & Richard Dagger. New York: Pearson Longman, 2004 (1823). 79–93. Metgasco. Rosella E01 Environment Approval Received 2104. 4 Aug. 2014 ‹http://www.metgasco.com.au/asx-announcements/rosella-e01-environment-approval-received›. Mitka, Mike. “Rigorous Evidence Slim for Determining Health Risks from Natural Gas Fracking.” The Journal of the American Medical Association 307.20 (2012): 2135–36. Moyer, Bill. “The Movement Action Plan.” Doing Democracy: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements. Eds. Bill Moyer, Johann McAllister, Mary Lou Finley, and Steven Soifer. Gabriola Island, Canada: New Society Publishers, 2001. NSW Department of Resources & Energy. “Metgasco Drilling Approval Suspended.” Media Release, 15 May 2014. 30 July 2014 ‹http://www.resourcesandenergy.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/516749/Metgasco-Drilling-Approval-Suspended.pdf›. Reading, Tracey. “Hip versus Square: 1960s Advertising and Clothing Industries and the Counterculture”. Research Papers 2013. 15 July 2014 ‹http://opensuic.lib.siu.edu/gs_rp/396›. Ricketts, Aiden. “The North East Forest Alliance’s Old-Growth Forest Campaign.” Belonging in the Rainbow Region: Cultural Perspectives on the NSW North Coast. Ed. Helen Wilson. Lismore: Southern Cross UP. 2003. 121–148. Sharp, Gene. The Politics of Nonviolent Action: Power and Struggle. Boston, Mass.: Porter Sargent, 1973. Sovacool, Benjamin K. “Cornucopia or Curse? Reviewing the Costs and Benefits of Shale Gas Hydraulic Fracturing (Fracking).” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews (2014): 249–64. Tait, Douglas, Isaac Santos, Damien Maher, Tyler Cyronak, and Rachael Davis. “Enrichment of Radon and Carbon Dioxide in the Open Atmosphere of an Australian Coal Seam Gas Field.” Environmental Science & Technology 47 (2013): 3099–3104. Tarrow, Sidney. Power in Movement: Social Movements and Contentious Politics. 3rd ed. New York: Cambridge UP, 2011. Thompson, Chuck. “The Fracking Feud.” Medicus 53.8 (2013): 56–57. Tilly, Charles. Regimes and Repertoires. Chicago: UCP, 2006. Ward, Susan, and Kitty van Vuuren. “Belonging to the Rainbow Region: Place, Local Media, and the Construction of Civil and Moral Identities Strategic to Climate Change Adaptability.” Environmental Communication 7.1 (2013): 63–79.

Nous avons tente, dans le present travail, de definir une ethique des rapports de l'homme vis-a-vis de l'animal, a la lumiere des connaissances d'aujourd'hui. L'analyse des rapports actuels de l'homme et de l'animal -- domestication, jeux sauvages, alimentation carnee. . . . --ainsi que l'analyse de ces rapports dans l'his- -toire et dans les grandes traditions religieuses ou philosophiques, nous ont amene a souligner une emergence progressive de la pensee favorable a l'animal. Un grand probleme restait cependant insoluble, celui pose par l'experimentation sur l'animal vivant, ou le bien-etre de l'homme et celui de l'animal paraissaient s'opposer. La definition du statut meme de l'homme a la lumiere des connaissances actuel- -les a permis d'aboutir a la ngation d'une coupure philosophique entre l'homme et les (autres) animaux et a la definition de deux finalites a notre espece : la scien- -ce et l'ethique. Nous avons defendu le primat de l'ethique sur la science, pres- qu'admis en ce qui concerne l'experimentation sur l'homme, et qui pourrait, avec profit, etre applique a l'animal. Il s'agit la d'une position philosophique zoophi- -le qui inclut (et depasse) la position traditionnelle humaniste. Cette position a trouve sa formulation la plus convaincante dans le mouvement en faveur des droits de l'animal, qui, simultanement, garantit des droits aux ani- -maux et tente de resoudre les conflits de droits entre especes, comme celui qui tou- -che a l'experimentation animale, par une approche pratique qui met en regard scien- -ce et ethique
In the present study, we have attempted to define, in the light of present-day knowledge, the ethics of the relationship of man towards animals. An analysis of the present relationship between man and animals -- domestication, savage games or meat diet-- as well as an analysis of this relationship throughout history and in the great religious or philosophical traditions, have led us to emphasize a gradual emergence of a way of thinking favourable to animals. However a major problem remai- -ned unsolved, the problem of experiments on living animals, in which the well-being of man and that of animals seemed to be completely opposed. The definition of the very status of man, in the light of present-day knowled- -ge, has led us to the negation of a philosophical gap between man and (other) ani- -mals and to the definition of two main finalities for our species : science and ethics. We have defended the primacy of ethics over science, almost accepted as re- -gards experiments on man, and which could be profitably applied to experiments on animals. Such a zoophilist philosophical stance includes (and goes beyond) the tra- -ditional humanist stance. This stance can be best expressed by the movement in favour of animal rights, which guarantees rights to animals and, at the same time, attempts to solve con- -flicts or rights between species-- such as the conflict concerning animal experi- -ments-- through a practical approach confronting science and ethics

Le sens moral de la relation de travail entre hommes et animaux est un enjeu essentiel de la redéfinition des activités d’élevage, plus particulièrement des systèmes industriels de productions animales. Eleveurs et salariés sont confrontés à des attentes sociales en termes d’évitement des souffrances aux animaux et à des interrogations relatives à la légitimité morale des hommes à les tuer pour se nourrir. En systèmes industriels, la destruction d’animaux non rentables économiquement, nommée « euthanasie », fait partie du travail, ce qui pose la question du jugement moral autonome des travailleurs. Contrairement aux théories éthiques très influentes dans le milieu de la protection animale, l’approche scientifique que j’ai retenue donne toute son importance à l’expérience morale subjective d’hommes et de femmes confrontés à l’euthanasie et à la mise à mort alimentaire de leurs animaux. S’appuyant sur les cadres théoriques de la sociologie morale et de la psychodynamique du travail, et à l’appui d’enquêtes réalisées auprès d’éleveurs en France et de salariés au Québec en production porcine, cette thèse démontre que le sens donné à leur relation de travail aux animaux possède une dimension morale, dimension qui s’altère sous l’effet de formes industrielles d’organisation du travail. Pratiquer l’euthanasie exige une disposition morale vertueuse : le courage. Elever des animaux, c’est faire preuve de gratitude par un don de la vie bonne qui est un geste de reconnaissance de la vie qu’ils donnent aux hommes. En systèmes industriels, le courage se dégrade en l’adoption de conduites viriles. L’échange particulier de dons de vie entre hommes et animaux est lui aussi perverti
The moral sense of the working relation between men and animals is an essential stake in the contemporary redefinition of the activities of breeding, more particularly industrial systems of animal production. Breeders and workers are facing new social expectations, such as sparing animals sufferings, and moral interrogations on the legitimacy of the humans to kill animals in order to feed themselves. In industrial systems, the destruction of economically unprofitable animals (referred to as "euthanasia") represents a large part of the workers’ activity, and raise the question of their autonomous moral judgment. But the ethical theories of animal protection that became highly influential do not take a look at the subjective moral experience of men and women facing the killing of their animals, whether for euthanasia or food production. This dissertation leans on the theoretical frames of moral sociology and the French psychodynamics of work, as well as on empirical studies on French breeders and Quebec workers in pig production. It demonstrates that the sense given by these actors to their working relation with animals has a moral dimension, which is precisely deteriorated under the influence of industrial forms of work organization. The practice of the euthanasia requires a virtuous moral disposition: courage. In industrial systems this virtue degrades in the adoption of virile behaviours. Raising animals is showing them gratitude, by giving them “the good life” which recognizes them as beings who give life to human people. In industrial systems this particular exchange of gifts is corrupted

Pourquoi celui qui me fait face est-il un Autre au sens éthique du terme? Pourquoi son statut moral peut-il parfois osciller d’autrui à simple objet? Vivre, pour un humain, c’est être lié à autrui par un lien particulier : un lien éthique. Ce lien se compose de deux termes, moi et l’Autre, et, entre eux, de la distance éthique, qui ne se déploie pas dans un espace euclidien. Cette distance est plutôt une action, que j’appelle « bonne distanciation ». De plus, elle relève en priorité de la conscience pratique et non de la délibération discursive. Que devient le lien éthique quand ce qui me fait face n’est pas humain? Depuis une trentaine d’années, les philosophes travaillent sur la question de la valeur intrinsèque de l’environnement. Leurs réponses se classent en quatre catégories, anthropocentrisme, zoocentrisme, biocentrisme et écocentrisme, que j’ai réexaminées à partir de la bonne distanciation face à l’Autre non humain. Il ressort de cette étude que l’animal représente le point de l’environnement où se concentrent les enjeux de la bonne distanciation face à un non-humain. J’ai donc resserré mon étude sur l’animal. Pour étudier empiriquement l’oscillation du statut moral de l’Autre, j’ai choisi le lien à l’animal familier vendu dans des boutiques d’animaux. J’ai étudié comment l’animalier, chargé de réceptionner, de soigner puis de vendre les animaux dans ces boutiques, fait osciller entre objet et autrui le statut moral de l’animal dont il s’occupe. Combinant observation participante et entretiens semi-structurés, j’ai examiné les éléments saillants et non saillants de la pratique des animaliers, les seconds étant la trame des gestes, des regards et des paroles de l’animalier pour l’animal, sur laquelle se détachent les gestes techniques. L’analyse des données m’a conduite à mettre au jour l’influence de deux logiques d’action, logique marchande et logique de soin, prédominantes dans le travail des animaliers. Les résultats montrent comment la bonne distanciation équivaut à l’arbitrage constant entre ces deux logiques, procédant en priorité de la conscience pratique et non discursive. De plus, plusieurs facteurs organisationnels influencent la bonne distanciation, qui varie aussi selon que l’animalier est anthropocentriste, zoocentriste, biocentriste ou écocentriste.
Pourquoi celui qui me fait face est-il un Autre au sens éthique du terme? Pourquoi son statut moral peut-il parfois osciller d’autrui à simple objet? Vivre, pour un humain, c’est être lié à autrui par un lien particulier : un lien éthique. Ce lien se compose de deux termes, moi et l’Autre, et, entre eux, de la distance éthique, qui ne se déploie pas dans un espace euclidien. Cette distance est plutôt une action, que j’appelle « bonne distanciation ». De plus, elle relève en priorité de la conscience pratique et non de la délibération discursive. Que devient le lien éthique quand ce qui me fait face n’est pas humain? Depuis une trentaine d’années, les philosophes travaillent sur la question de la valeur intrinsèque de l’environnement. Leurs réponses se classent en quatre catégories, anthropocentrisme, zoocentrisme, biocentrisme et écocentrisme, que j’ai réexaminées à partir de la bonne distanciation face à l’Autre non humain. Il ressort de cette étude que l’animal représente le point de l’environnement où se concentrent les enjeux de la bonne distanciation face à un non-humain. J’ai donc resserré mon étude sur l’animal. Pour étudier empiriquement l’oscillation du statut moral de l’Autre, j’ai choisi le lien à l’animal familier vendu dans des boutiques d’animaux. J’ai étudié comment l’animalier, chargé de réceptionner, de soigner puis de vendre les animaux dans ces boutiques, fait osciller entre objet et autrui le statut moral de l’animal dont il s’occupe. Combinant observation participante et entretiens semi-structurés, j’ai examiné les éléments saillants et non saillants de la pratique des animaliers, les seconds étant la trame des gestes, des regards et des paroles de l’animalier pour l’animal, sur laquelle se détachent les gestes techniques. L’analyse des données m’a conduite à mettre au jour l’influence de deux logiques d’action, logique marchande et logique de soin, prédominantes dans le travail des animaliers. Les résultats montrent comment la bonne distanciation équivaut à l’arbitrage constant entre ces deux logiques, procédant en priorité de la conscience pratique et non discursive. De plus, plusieurs facteurs organisationnels influencent la bonne distanciation, qui varie aussi selon que l’animalier est anthropocentriste, zoocentriste, biocentriste ou écocentriste.
This dissertation explores the fact that, depending on circumstances, the moral status of he who faces me may vary from that of an Other, in the ethical sense of the term, to that of an object. For a human being, to live is to be linked to others by a particular link, an ethical one. The distance that lies between me and the other may be better understood as “good distanciation” or the process of deciding how long the link should be, thus making what faces me either an Other or an object. Good distanciation takes place mainly in the sphere of practical consciousness rather than discursive consciousness. Furthermore, we tend to limit otherness to humans. New philosophies are emerging that study value in nature. These works fall into four broad categories, anthropocentrism, zoocentrism, biocentrism, and ecocentrism, which content I re-examine through the notion of good distanciation. It appears that animals represent the most problematic category of environmental elements as regards good distanciation. I have therefore centered my research on animals. The empirical part of the study focuses on the ethical link relating pet shop clerks to animals sold in pet shops. What is the moral status a pet shop clerk ascribes to the animal he takes care of and sells, that of a mere good or that of a companion? During five months of participant observation in 5 pet shops, I observed and assisted a total of 15 clerks. I have studied both codified technical skills that an animal caregiver must demonstrate and other movements, looks, words and sounds the caregiver makes or utters while taking care of an animal. Together, they reveal the work of practical consciousness in good distanciation. Results show that two logics of action, one of market and one of care, prevail in the daily work of a pet shop clerk. Good distanciation amounts to constant arbitration between these two logics and that it occurs mainly in the sphere of practical consciousness rather than in discursive consciousness.
This dissertation explores the fact that, depending on circumstances, the moral status of he who faces me may vary from that of an Other, in the ethical sense of the term, to that of an object. For a human being, to live is to be linked to others by a particular link, an ethical one. The distance that lies between me and the other may be better understood as “good distanciation” or the process of deciding how long the link should be, thus making what faces me either an Other or an object. Good distanciation takes place mainly in the sphere of practical consciousness rather than discursive consciousness. Furthermore, we tend to limit otherness to humans. New philosophies are emerging that study value in nature. These works fall into four broad categories, anthropocentrism, zoocentrism, biocentrism, and ecocentrism, which content I re-examine through the notion of good distanciation. It appears that animals represent the most problematic category of environmental elements as regards good distanciation. I have therefore centered my research on animals. The empirical part of the study focuses on the ethical link relating pet shop clerks to animals sold in pet shops. What is the moral status a pet shop clerk ascribes to the animal he takes care of and sells, that of a mere good or that of a companion? During five months of participant observation in 5 pet shops, I observed and assisted a total of 15 clerks. I have studied both codified technical skills that an animal caregiver must demonstrate and other movements, looks, words and sounds the caregiver makes or utters while taking care of an animal. Together, they reveal the work of practical consciousness in good distanciation. Results show that two logics of action, one of market and one of care, prevail in the daily work of a pet shop clerk. Good distanciation amounts to constant arbitration between these two logics and that it occurs mainly in the sphere of practical consciousness rather than in discursive consciousness.

L'antispécisme est la position intellectuelle qui consiste à lutter contre le « spécisme » ainsi considéré: « le spécisme est à l'espèce ce que le racisme et le sexisme sont à la race et au sexe: la volonté de ne pas prendre en compte les intérêts de certains au bénéfice d'autres, en prétextant des différences réelles ou imaginaires ». . . En pratique le spécisme est sensé justifier « l'exploitation et l'utilisation des animaux par les humains de manières qui ne seraient acceptables si les victimes en étaient les humains. » La lutte contre ces pratiques est la tâche que se donne le mouvement de libération animale, au nom du refus de la souffrance de tous les êtres sensibles. La version française de ce mouvement est fortement politisée, nourrie d'anarchisme et d'individualisme. Elle associe les hommes et les animaux dans sa virulente critique socilae globale
Ethnology of the french antispecisist struggle, which is a struggle for animal equality and human equality. The french movment is close to anarchists circles. It is based on the following principle: the interests of an animal, not to suffer and to live a fulfilling life, is as important as the equivalent interests of a human being. Both of them want the same: to live their life. The animal liberation struggle wants to be seen as a progressist struggle, as a political change in our relationships to other animais and to ourselves. Above ail, the french choice is a complete and a deep criticism of the modem society

La présente étude compare les propositions éthiques de deux mouvements sociaux contemporains : la cause animale et la cause des réfugiés en Europe. D'un côté, les militants et les penseurs animalistes prônent l'insertion de l'animal dans la sphère de considération morale en soulignant que le respect des vies animales nous amènera vers l'abolition de toutes sortes de souffrance et d'exploitation, à savoir celle des animaux et celle des hommes. D'un autre côté, le naufrage des bateaux dans la Méditerranée illustre l'indifférence des dirigeants européens et d'une partie de la société civile envers les réfugiés qui, selon l'esprit des traités internationaux, incarnent l'image de la vulnérabilité humaine. L'indifférence envers ces individus, sans oublier la chasse dont ils sont victimes, leur emprisonnement et la privation de leurs droits fondamentaux, aura comme conséquence leur métamorphose en une figure biopolitiquement ambiguë : l'humanimal. Malgré sa physicalité anthropomorphe, sa parole et son visage humain, l'humanimal est un être vivant dont le statut est plus proche de celui des animaux que celui des hommes. Une proximité qui remet en question la nécessité de politiser la cause animale afin de garantir le respect des animaux, puisque l'exclusion de l'humanimal est précisément basée sur des critères politiques. Plus qu'une critique des propos éthiques des animalistes, ce travail souhaite penser la cause animale à l'aide de l'humanimal et arrêter ainsi la machine anthropogénique qui s'est caractérisée, depuis ses origines, par l'inclusion d'une vie dans la sphère de considération morale conjointe à l'expulsion d'une autre vie. Rapprocher l'humanimal de l'animal représente une opportunité pour penser autrement l'être que l'épistémologie occidentale, depuis l'Antiquité, a jugé comme une possession appartenant seulement à l'homme. La conclusion de ce travail vise à exposer quelques éléments permettant la construction d'une nouvelle perspective éthique où les « différences » ne constitueront pas un motif de discrimination, et surtout un moyen de justifier l'oppression des autres. Dans notre terminologie, il s'agit de s'ouvrir aux autres manières de concevoir l'« être » pour construire une éthique humanimaliste, c'est-à-dire une éthique transcendant toutes les frontières géopolitiques et biopolitiques
This study compares the ethical proposals of two contemporary social movements: the animal cause and the cause of refugees in Europe. On the one hand, activists and animalist thinkers advocate the inclusion of animals in the sphere of moral consideration by emphasizing that respect for animal lives will lead us towards the abolition of all kinds of suffering and exploitation, to wit that of animals and that of men. On the other hand, the sinking of boats in the Mediterranean Sea illustrates the indifference of European leaders and part of civil society towards refugees who, according to the spirit of international treaties, embody the image of human vulnerability. The indifference towards these individuals, without forgetting the hunting of which they are victims, their imprisonment, and the deprivation of their fundamental rights, will result in their metamorphosis into a biopolitically ambiguous figure: the humanimal. Despite its anthropomorphic physicality, its speech, and its human face, the humanimal is a living being whose status is closer to that of animals than that of men. A proximity that calls into question the need to politicize the animal cause to guarantee respect for animals, since the exclusion of the humanimal is precisely based on political criteria.More than a criticism of the ethical statements of animalists thinkers, this work wishes to think the animal cause with the help of the humanimal and thus stop the anthropogenic machine which has been characterized, since its origins, by the inclusion of a life in the sphere of moral consideration together with expulsion of another life. Bringing the humanimal closer to the animal represents an opportunity to think differently the being that Western epistemology, since Antiquity, has considered as a possession belonging only to man. The conclusion of this work aims to expose some elements allowing the construction of a new ethical perspective where “differences” will not constitute a reason for discrimination, above all a means to justify the oppression of the others. In our terminology, it is a question to be open to other ways of conceiving the “being” to build a humanimalist ethics, that is to say an ethics that transcends all geopolitical and biopolitical borders

Le traité De l’abstinence est écrit par Porphyre dans le but de convaincre son ami de revenir à la pratique du végétarisme, qu‟il a récemment abandonnée. Dans ce texte, l‟auteur présente une série d‟arguments anti-végétariens, qu‟il réfutera tout en défendant la pertinence de ce mode de vie pour le philosophe. Parmi les opposants, les stoïciens occupent une place importante, le troisième livre du traité leur étant presque entièrement consacré. En réfutant les arguments anti-végétariens des stoïciens, Porphyre développe ses positions avec un vocabulaire qu‟il leur emprunte. Ce faisant, il teinte son traité de l‟influence stoïcienne. Ce mémoire a pour objectif d‟analyser de quelle manière le dialogue entre Porphyre et les stoïciens influence l‟auteur du De abstinentia. L‟argument anti-végétarien attribué aux stoïciens consiste à dire qu‟il est impossible de demander à ce que les êtres humains épargnent la vie des animaux, puisque ceux-ci ne nous sont pas familiers (oikeion), du fait de leur absence de raison. Or, puisque dans la théorie stoïcienne la justice prend sa source dans les relations de familiarité qui lie les êtres rationnels entre eux, on ne peut considérer que la mise à mort des animaux dans le but de consommer leur chair est un acte injuste, voire impie, comme le soutient Porphyre. Les trois termes de ce débat feront chacun l‟objet d‟un chapitre : oikeiôsis, justice et logos. Ces trois notions permettront d‟approfondir la teneur du désaccord de Porphyre avec les stoïciens et de comprendre de quelle manière ce néoplatonicien se réapproprie le vocabulaire stoïcien pour le pousser à des conclusions qui sont conformes à sa métaphysique. On trouvera que derrière la question du végétarisme, c‟est le thème plus complexe du mode de vie qui anime le débat.
The treatise On Abstinence is written by Porphyry in order to convince his friend to return to the practice of vegetarianism, which he recently abandoned. In this text, a series of anti-vegetarian arguments are presented, which the author refutes while defending the relevance of this way of life for the philosopher. Among the opponents, the Stoics have an important place, the third book of the treaty being almost entirely devoted to them. Refuting the anti-vegetarian arguments of the Stoics, Porphyry develops his positions with a vocabulary borrowed to them. In doing so, he gives his treatise a Stoic flavour. This dissertation aims to analyze how the dialogue between Porphyry and the Stoics influences the author of the De abstinentia. The anti-vegetarian argument attributed to the Stoics says that it is impossible to ask of human to spare the life of animals, since they are not rational and, thus, not appropriate (oikeion) to us. Because, in the Stoic‟s theory, justice is rooted in the relations of appropriation between rational beings, we could not say that killing animals to eat their flesh is unjust, or impious, like Porphyry argues. One chapter will be dedicated to each of the terms of this debate: oikeiôsis, justice and reason. These three notions will allow us to further the analysis of the disagreement of Porphyry towards the Stoics and to understand how this neoplatonic philosopher uses the Stoics vocabulary to pursue his own metaphysical goals. We will find that behind the question of vegetarianism lies the more complex theme of the way of life.

L’objectif de cette thèse est d’interroger la controverse autour de l’élevage et d’en étudier sa dynamique pour analyser le processus par lequel elle aboutit à une transformation des normes sociales. Pour cela, la controverse est abordée par une analyse systémique permettant de rendre compte de la complexité des relations causales entre ses multiples dimensions et ses différentes échelles d’expression. Les techniques de collecte et d’analyse des données reposent sur des méthodes qualitatives et quantitatives pour cerner au plus près les processus sociaux étudiés. Une analyse sociohistorique permet d’ancrer le processus de transformation des normes dans le long terme et montre que, depuis le XIXème siècle, le système productiviste suscite des incertitudes quant à son application dans le domaine agricole, en particulier dans ses conséquences sur les animaux et l’environnement. La description des éléments de la controverse montre qu’elle se structure autour d’incertitudes scientifiques et éthiques auxquelles les parties prenantes de la controverse, que sont le monde de l’élevage et le monde associatif, doivent apporter des réponses. L’analyse de l’audience de la controverse auprès du public permet d’identifier une variété des manières de penser l’élevage, qui s’exprime au sein d’un forum hybride dans lequel une multitude d’acteurs contribuent à donner du sens à l’activité. Les rapports de force entre les acteurs déséquilibrent toutefois les capacités de chacun à influencer cette construction des normes. Globalement, c’est vers une prise de distance avec une forme d’élevage perçue comme industrielle et artificielle qu’évoluent les normes règlementaires, professionnelles et culturelles
The objective of this thesis is to question the controversy about livestock farming and to study its dynamic to then analyse the process by which this controversy results in a transformation of social norms. For that purpose, the controversy is addressed by a systemic analysis that enables to reflect the complexity of causal relations between its various aspects and its different scales of expression. Techniques of data collection and analysis lie on qualitative and quantitative methods in order to understand more precisely the social processes studied. A sociohistorical analysis enables to integrate the process of norms transformation in the long run and to show that, since the 19th century, the productiondriven system creates uncertainty regarding its application in the agricultural area, mainly in its consequences on animals and the environment. The description of the controversy elements shows that the controversy is structured around scientific and ethical uncertainties. Stakeholders of the controversy (the livestock sector and the associative sector) must come up with some answers to these scientific and ethical uncertainties. The analysis of the interest of the public for this controversy enables to identify a variety of ways of thinking the livestock farming that express among a hybrid forum in which a large number of actors contribute to make sense to this activity. However, power relations between the actors unbalance the capacities of each one to influence this norms construction. Globally, regulatory standards, professional and cultural norms are changing towards a distancing with a livestock farming form that is perceived as industrial and artificial

L'accroissement des activites recreatives en zone de montagne a induit des modifications et une forte augmentation des interactions entre l'homme et la faune sauvage. Ces interactions sont-elles une source de derangement et provoquent-elles une diminution de la survie des individus ou meme de l'espece ? le mode de vie de la marmotte alpine (sedentaire, diurne, hibernation) lui impose des contraintes d'utilisation de l'espace et du temps. Ses comportements sont-il modifies par la presence de l'homme a proximite des domaines vitaux ? l'analyse des comportements de marmottes alpines confrontees a des frequentations touristiques differentes montrent qu'elles expriment differents comportements leur permettant de reduire les contraintes induites par la presence de l'homme. L'utilisation de l'espace est modifiee. Les marmottes des groupes situes aux abords des chemins sont plus souvent au centre de leur territoire et utilisent des chemins (coulees) pour se rendre d'un terrier a l'autre. Elles reduisent leurs distances d'alerte, de fuite et les delais de sortie du terrier apres une interaction. Cet ajustement de la distance de fuite s'exprime en fonction de la previsibilite du comportement des promeneurs (sortie du chemin, presence de chien) et permet aux marmottes d'affourager quelle que soit l'heure, tout en evitant les zones peripheriques de leur domaine vital. Certains elements demographiques (fecondite, survie a l'hibernation) nous permettrons de supposer que cette diminution du temps d'affouragement ne met pas l'animal en danger. Nos resultats prouvent que, a l'instar de nombreuses autres especes sauvages, les marmottes sont capables de s'habituer a la frequentation touristique et d'ajuster leur comportement. Cet ajustement montre que les mammiferes peuvent exprimer une plasticite comportementale favorisee par la memorisation des contraintes et l'apprentissage. Nous critiquons donc l'utilisation du terme derangement dans la litterature qui implique des consequences irreversibles sur la survie de l'animal ou de l'espece.

Le développement d’un intérêt sans cesse croissant pour le dauphin, dans les sociétés occidentales, s’observe dès les années 1950. L’image du cétacé est aujourd’hui si répandue, notamment en France, qu’il faut l’analyser en termes de phénomène de société. Cependant, dans un premier mouvement voulu par une socio-anthropologie de l’animal, la relation homme-dauphin doit être envisagée à travers ses différentes manifestations, historiques et culturelles. Ainsi, une étude zoohistorique de nos représentations du mammifère marin révèle-t-elle leur ancrage au sein des cultures minoenne, hellénique puis romaine. Par la suite, après avoir représenté le Christ chez les premiers chrétiens, le dauphin n’apparaît plus qu’en filigrane dans les pages de l’Histoire. D’autre part, la pratique du comparatisme anthropologique met en évidence la spécificité de différents imaginaires socioculturels. Une analyse homologique a révélé la permanence de structures et de grandes images qui fondent tout système symbolique basé sur le dauphin. Le second mouvement de cette étude, fort des résultats précédents, se recentre sur les sociétés postmodernes et sur la France en particulier. Après avoir précisé les étapes contemporaines du phénomène dauphin, nous avons décrit, à travers une approche mythanalytique, l’imaginaire social et les archaïsmes qui ont permis son émergence. Ce phénomène agit comme le promoteur de certaines valeurs. L’opposition structurale dauphin-requin, l’imaginaire évolutionniste, les delphinariums et la delphinothérapie constituent les principaux axes d’une mythologie delphinienne en acte. Cette analyse permet de conclure notamment sur la fonction de révélateur socio-anthropologique dont est porteur cet animal d’élection qu’est le dauphin
Since the 1950’s, the western societies have been observed to develop an ongoing and growing interest for the dolphin. The image of this cetacean is indeed so widely spread, notably in France, that it warrants an analysis in terms of it being a phenomenon of the society. However, in the context of the first part of our research structured around the socio-anthropology of this animal, the man-dolphin relationship would have to be envisaged by means of its different manifestations, both historical and cultural. Thus a zoohistorical study of our representations of this marine mammal reveals their primary connection to the Minoan, Hellenistic and later Roman cultures. At a later stage, after having represented Christ among the early Christians, the dolphin ceases to appear as anything more than simply a distant and random association through the pages of History. On the other hand the application of anthropological comparatism renders evident the specificity of different socio-cultural imaginaries. A homological analysis has unveiled the permanence of structures and grand images which establish in their entirety a system of symbols based on the dolphin. The second part of this thesis, enforced by precedent results, refocuses on the postmodern societies and France in particular. After having identified the contemporary stages of the dolphin phenomenon, we have described, employing a mythanalytical approach, the imaginary and archaisms that have facilitated its emergence. This phenomenon acts as the promoter of certain values. The structural opposition dolphin-shark, the evolutionary imaginary, the existence of dolphinaria and the wide practice of dolphin-therapy, constitute the principal axes of a dolphinian mythology in practice. This analysis enables us to attain certain conclusions notably on the function of a socio-anthropological revealer, the bearer of which is this animal of choice, the dolphin

Cette these s'inscrit dans un recherche generale sur l'histoire du regard de l'homme sur l'animal. Elle se centre sur le regard clerical, porteur d'une conception originale de la creation, et s'etend sur quatre siecles afin d'esquisser le passage de la sensibilite medievale, encore presente aux debuts du xviie siecle, a notre vision moderne. Quatre phases sont evoquees : de 1600 a 1670, le regard clerical se traduit par un fort sentiment de proximite avec l'homme et par une abondante utilisation dans la religion; de 1670 a 1830, l'animal, ravale au rang de machine, expulse de la pensee religieuse, subit une forte devalorisation; de 1830 a 1940, s'effectue une rehabilitation par un retour aux positions du 17e siecle et par l'emergence d'une mentalite zoophile minoritaire; de 1940 a nos jours, alors que cette mentalite se renforce, la majorite du clerge s'engage dans une voie opposee, dans un divorce radical avec le monde animal et la nature. Deux tendances profondes et contraires sont ainsi degagees : un mouvement de sortie de l'homme de la nature, du 17e siecle a nos jours; une reconnaissance de la specificite du monde animal et une volonte croissante de respect, du 19e siecle a nos jours
This thesis fits into research carried out into the history of how man considers animals. It is centred around the viewpoint of the clergy and spreads over four centuries in order to outline the transition fron medieval sensitivity to our modern-day vision. From 1600 to 1670 the point of view of the clergy resulted in a strong sense of nearness to man, making considerable use of him in religion; from 1670 to 1830 the anima. , reduced to the role of a machine and absent from religious considerations, found itself diminished in value; the period from 1830 to 1940 saw a return to the 17th century position and the emergence of a minority animalfriendly mentality; since 1940, whereas this mentality has become much stronger, the majority of clergymen have committed themselves to going in the opposite direction through a radical divorce from the animal world. Two opposing rends have comme out into the open : a movement on the part of man to distinguish himself clearly from nature since the 17th century; a recognition of the specific nature of the animal world as well as an increasing intention towards respect since the 19th century

This chapter first considers the re-emergence of private, personal hunts by the king and his supporters in the 1480s. The second half extends this debate to the moral economy of falconry. Falconry, another form of the private hunt, was woven into the cultural and political landscape of early Korea and Northeast Asia. A body of knowledge on falconry, some inspired from Chinese texts, and more from native Korean practices – shaped by political, geographical and cultural beliefs – helped inform those involved in the sport and circulated even to the Japanese islands. The intricate and intense discussions over falconry at the court, one of the most extravagant forms of the personal, private hunt, illuminate important aspects of national and international politics and identity of the kingship and dynasty vis-à-vis contact with other empires and people around the peninsula. This chapter argues that the beliefs of a martial kingship that early leaders represented – vestiges of Northeast Asian cultural practices that took on new meaning in the Mongol period – survived into the late fifteenth century. For kings, falconry was an extension of royal authority that conflicted with the changing bureaucratic, economic and moral needs of the dynasty.

This chapter explores the concept of natural law, turning first to the Protestant milieu. Alterity—what would in the seventeenth century come to be theorized, and problematized, as “sociability”—is the dominant mood of the humanist and Protestant handling of natural law. It is there even in Thomas Hobbes, whose natural law coincides with moral philosophy and concerns the sphere of one's actions in respect of others. However, the Catholic scholastic tradition presents a very different framing of natural law, one that centers on individual agency and regulates the behavior of individual agents in their aspect as beings of a particular kind. While authors in this tradition grapple equally with the question of animal behavior in relation to law, they do not do so from the social perspective that characterizes Protestant humanist Aristotelians and jurists.