Holmes, Tarquin (Author)
Friese, Carrie (Author)
This paper explores how, at the 1875 Royal Commission on Vivisection, the anaesthetised animal was construed as a boundary object around which “cooperation without consensus” (Star, in: Esterbrook (ed) Computer supported cooperative work: cooperation or conflict? Springer, London, 1993) could form, serving the interests of both scientists and animals. Advocates of anaesthesia presented it as benevolently intervening between the scientific agent and animal patient. Such articulations of ‘ethical’ vivisection through anaesthesia were then mandated in the 1876 Cruelty to Animals Act, and thus have had significant downstream effects on the regulation of laboratory animals in Britain and beyond. Constructing this ‘consensus’ around the anaesthetised animal, however, required first excluding abolitionists and inhumane scientists, and secondly limiting the interests of experimental animals to the avoidance of pain through anaesthesia and euthanasia, thereby circumventing the issue of their possible interest in future life. This consensus also served to secure the interests of vivisecting scientists and to limit the influence of public opinion in the laboratory to administrative procedure and scheduled inspection. The focus on anaesthesia was connected with discussions of what supporting infrastructures were required to ensure proper ethical procedure was carried out by scientists. In contrast to the much studied polarisation in British society between pro- and antivivisectionists after 1876, we understand the 1875 Commission as a conflict amongst scientists themselves, while also being an intra-class conflict amongst the ruling class (French in Antivivisection and medical science in Victorian society, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1975).
...More
Article
Tarquin Holmes;
(2021)
Science, sensitivity and the sociozoological scale: Constituting and complicating the human-animal boundary at the 1875 Royal Commission on Vivisection and beyond
(/isis/citation/CBB079918903/)
Book
Charles Darwin;
Frederick Burkhardt;
James A. Secord;
(2015)
The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, Volume 23: 1875
(/isis/citation/CBB427468341/)
Essay Review
Brinbacher, Dieter;
(2002)
Morality beyond humanity
(/isis/citation/CBB000330461/)
Book
Libell, Monica;
(2001)
Morality Beyond Humanity: Schopenhauer, Grysanowski, and Schweitzer on Animal Ethics
(/isis/citation/CBB000330462/)
Thesis
Shira Dina Shmuely;
(2017)
The Bureaucracy of Empathy: Vivisection and the Question of Animal Pain in Britain, 1876-1912
(/isis/citation/CBB762286081/)
Thesis
Mitch Goldsmith;
(2023)
The Unfinished Business of Anna Kingsford: Science, Enchantment, and Experiments on Animals
(/isis/citation/CBB697646509/)
Article
Tone Druglitrø;
(July 2018)
“Skilled Care” and the Making of Good Science
(/isis/citation/CBB697868030/)
Article
Tone Druglitrø;
(2022)
Procedural Care: Licensing Practices in Animal Research
(/isis/citation/CBB143588294/)
Article
Gail Davies;
Beth Greenhough;
Pru Hobson-West;
Robert G. W. Kirk;
(July 2018)
Science, Culture, and Care in Laboratory Animal Research: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the History and Future of the 3Rs
(/isis/citation/CBB754061622/)
Article
Lene Koch;
Mette N. Svendsen;
(May 2015)
Negotiating Moral Value: A Story of Danish Research Monkeys and Their Humans
(/isis/citation/CBB281898023/)
Article
Yolandi M. Coetser;
(2022)
An African ethical perspective on South Africa's regulatory frameworks governing animals in research
(/isis/citation/CBB859098442/)
Article
Ashley Shew;
Keith Johnson;
(2018)
Companion Animals as Technologies in Biomedical Research
(/isis/citation/CBB234825566/)
Article
Boddice, Rob;
(2011)
Vivisecting Major: A Victorian Gentleman Scientist Defends Animal Experimentation, 1876--1885
(/isis/citation/CBB001034548/)
Article
Preece, Rod;
(2003)
Darwinism, Christianity, and the Great Vivisection Debate
(/isis/citation/CBB000774479/)
Chapter
Marsden, Simon;
(2007)
Dr. Moreau's Crimes: H. G. Wells and the Victorian Vivisection Controversy
(/isis/citation/CBB001035836/)
Article
Carmela Morabito;
(2017)
David Ferrier’s Experimental Localization of Cerebral Functions and the Anti-Vivisection Debate
(/isis/citation/CBB823414183/)
Book
Rob Boddice;
(2022)
Humane Professions: The Defense of Experimental Medicine, 1876–1914
(/isis/citation/CBB789019091/)
Article
Bittel, Carla Jean;
(2005)
Science, Suffrage, and Experimentation: Mary Putnam Jacobi and the Controversy over Vivisection in Late Nineteenth-Century America
(/isis/citation/CBB000800010/)
Chapter
Guerrini, Anita;
(2008)
Animal Experiments and Anitvivisection Debates in the 1820s
(/isis/citation/CBB000760393/)
Article
Shira Shmuely;
(2020)
Curare: The Poisoned Arrow that Entered the Laboratory and Sparked a Moral Debate
(/isis/citation/CBB410699994/)
Be the first to comment!