![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.simorgh.de\/objects\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/11\/aas_1b.png\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
[\u2026] Sociology does not question the social interaction between humans and nonhuman animals. They don\u2019t scrutinize that relation from their viewpoint, because the view held on the human relation towards animals is already set in its core by the natural sciences.<\/p>\n
The hierarchical empire built by the natural sciences though [\u2026] rules out every need for any further examination and consideration of this relationship. We do not see the direct relation between humans and nonhuman animals.<\/p>\n
A most typical exemplification of that inability to relate on a basic and fundamental level of \u2018common sense\u2019 can be pinpointed in the difference between relating to nonhuman animals in terms of \u201cjoy\u201d versus \u201clove\u201d: as in \u201canimals equally feel joy\u201d or \u201cwe can both love\u201d, and \u201cpain\u201d versus \u201cviolence\u201d: as in: \u201canimals can equally feel pain\u201d or \u201cwe can both experience violence\u201d. Love is an intermittent sentiment, violence also bases on social interactivity (though in that negative sense), whereas \u201cjoy\u201d is located only in the subject we attribute the feeling to, and the same goes for \u201cpain\u201d. We \u2013 nonhuman animals and humans \u2013 understand the questions of LOVE and VIOLENCE. Whereby \u201cjoy\u201d and \u201cpain\u201d are reductionary names for the \u201csame\u201d thing. [\u2026]<\/strong><\/p>\n Antispeciesist<\/strong> Animal Sociology<\/strong><\/p>\n From: Edition Farangis: Animal Autonomy E-Reader 1<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.simorgh.de\/objects\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/11\/antispeciesist_sociology_quote_1b.png\")
<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.simorgh.de\/objects\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/11\/animal_autonomy_e-reader_2018_1_1a.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"