Phyllis Young

Animals in Human Thought

Melissa Vaccaro

D’Youville College

Animals in Human Thought

The famous biologist Edward Wilson once wrote that animals are “agents of nature translated into symbols of culture” (qtd. DeMello, 283). Basically, it is true that animals are actually given proxies of nature, deciphered into the respective cyphers of nation in the society. In regard to this, there occurs a perceptive rift amid the hominids and animals. For example, the humans possess the floodlight cognition that enhances the capability to put at work, the thinking process. Animals on the other hand, encompass a lesser beam in thinking capacity. Regarding this, This blog post paper focuses more on the perception and representation of animals in human thoughts (DeMello, 2013). [What in the world does this opening paragraph mean? You can’t possibly be quoting. State your object clearly. ]

The first basis is the question - What is The Spair-Whorf hypothesis? Established by Benjamin L. Whorf collectively with Edward Sapir, it is a theory that denotes on the edifice of a language, has a willpower that encourages the approaches of thoughts and conduct characteristic of the selective culture whereby it is enunciated. In most of the occasions, it is often referred to as the Whorfian hypothesis. [WOW. This is what we call “word salad”: I think you are falling into the trap of writing with as many large words as possible, regardless of their meaning. At the moment, most of the sentences above don’t make sense. Return to DeMello and look at her definition of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. You might say something like this: According to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, language “helps define the world-view of a people, and thus the culture, of its speakers” (DeMello 284). Language is a guide to our reality, structuring our thoughts. It provides the framework through which we make sense of the world. To put this more simply, language both mirrors and creates the world. Since language is so powerful, it can provoke strong, emotional responses and shape how people think about morally and socially important issues.]

Regardless of the importance of words in shaping up hominid’s understanding of the animals, to a given point, there occur insinuations of calling people by animal’s appellations. There occur several implications mostly when the given names are pejorative. To a certain degree, the use of animal names implies a form of insult to a particular person who the reference is being made to. [Work on writing simply and clearly. For example, you might begin this paragraph by saying this: In “Animals and Human Thought,” DeMello explores some of the far-ranging implications of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Noting that humans often use animals to “make sense of human realities,” she wonders what the effects of referring to humans in animal terms – e.g., bitch, sow – are on humans and on the animals. Let’s consider the Taking an example is the use of the word ‘Ass’. The word literally refers to a donkey. However, when humans use the word to describe another human, they do so to demean the human and, simultaneously, to assert our superiority to the animal. It comes from the word ‘Asses” that also refers to the donkeys. Therefore, Calling a person an ‘Ass” implies that the given person is relatively an imprudent, adamant or pertinacious individual (DeMello, 2013). Regarding this, the implication is that it acts as an insult to a given individual hence creates some forms of fury. Another example is Similarly, the use of the animal word ‘Badger,’ the name of a nocturnal mammal of the weasel family, may also be used as a verb to describe aggressive or harassing behavior in a human. [Now develop this argument. How does language affect our treatment of animals?] Literally, badgers are known to be creatures who are more of shy in nature. It is therefore an implication of harassment as referring to somebody would mean harassing an individual.

[Transition needed.]

What is a symbol? According to the Free Dictionary, a symbol is “something that represents something else by association, resemblance, or convention, especially a material object used to represent something invisible.” A symbol may also be culturally inflected and polyvocalic, that is, “they can signify multiple, abstract concepts all at once” (DeMello, 287). A symbol is an element used for the purposes of acting as a representation of another entity. In most of the cases, the use of symbols encompasses the use of materials signifying an insignia or a token. In most of the times, there are certain circumstances that make a symbol polyvocalic. The term polyvocalic denotes to the occurrence of numerous voices. Literally, to a symbol, it means the actual happening of various discourses regarding a particular symbol. Regarding this, circumstances that makes a logo to become polyvocalic is the array of different meanings, from various persons, on a selective symbol. For example, one individual’s perception on a given symbol, stand a chance of being distinct from another person’s perception (Few et al., 2013). {Above you have some more “word salad.” Instead of complicating matters by turning to another source, stick with DeMello and see if you can decode what she is saying about symbols.] [no new paragraph] From the above description, it raises the question; what are some of the reasons that Animals are so commonly used as symbols. The use of animals as symbols in most of the occasions is due to their stereotypes nature. Indeed, we can find evidence of human’s symbolic use of animals stretching back for millennia. Since the ancient times, given norms and attributes of animals are evident instantly. It means that a norm of animal can be easily identified, in reference to that of the humans. However, with time, behavioral transition of human kind definitely reflects that of animals. For example, a camel is an animal that can survive for longer period of time minus water. When a person is referred to as ‘a camel’, it epitomizes the pro of teetotalism and patience (Few et al., 2013). [???]

[Transition?]

In many African cultures, we can find symbolic affiliations beween humans and animals. In relevance to African Art, it is of importance to many tribes to portray the affiliation amid man and wildlife. It is for this reason that there occurs an array of sculptures of wildlife and humans in Africa. An For example, is the Baule-Yaure tribe in Cote d’Ivoire. They represent elephants as animals of superlative political prominence. It is due to the distinctive features that encompasses from the possession of the their gigantic trunks and ears. [Develop.]

[Conclusion?]

References

DeMello, M. (2012). Animals and society: An introduction to human-animal studies. New York: Columbia University Press.

Few, M., & Tortorici, Z. (2013). Centering animals in Latin American history.

Hi Melissa,

I’m not sure what happened here, but I’m quite concerned. It seems to me that you were really struggling to articulate the challenging and abstract concepts presented in DeMello’s chapter. The end result was a blog that is quite incomprehensible and that never quite gets to a significant point. There are several things you can do in these circumstances. First, go back and re-read the materials in DeMello, taking notes as you go. Second, look at the discussion questions and see which ones you can answer and which ones you feel uncertain about. Third. email me with questions about concepts you don’t quite grasp. And fourth, work with a tutor at the writing lab to help translate your ideas into clear prose.

I want to make sure this problem doesn’t affect your final research portfolio. Please tell me a little bit more about how you approached this response. I don’t think is representative of your work.

Warmly,

Marta

6/10