Ethics and Taxonomy: Hunters and Anti-hunters in the US

(with Wendi Bond)

Previous research in folkbiology hints at the universality of a multipurpose taxonomy of living kinds (humans, animals and plants) (Berlin 1992; Atran 1998). Independent studies in different cultures applying a variety of research designs show that cross cultural agreement, as well as agreement between folk taxonomies and scientific taxonomies are at the level of r= 06 - 0.8). However despite this overall agreement, further research shows the existence if systematic differences (both within and across-cultures). For example, Medin, Ross et al. in press report cultural differences in the ways Menominee Native Americans and Majority Culture fishexperts of rural Wisconsin sort native freshwater fish. These differences seem to be based on different goals and values (Medin, Ross et al. in press). Similarly, Medin et al. (1997) found tree experts in the Chicago area to differ with respect to their taxonomic sorting of trees of the Midwest. Similar as in the cross-cultural study conducted in Wisconsin, the encountered differences in taxonomic sorting seem to be related to differences in goals (maintenance workers versus taxonomists etc.). Both studies show large agreement across groups with systematic differences (submodels).

The proposed study looks at similar issues. It proposes to explore the taxonomic sorting of animals and humans, among both hunters and anti-hunters. Given the mentioned findings we expect that on a general level both groups should apply a similar taxonomic organization. However, the emergence of anti-hunter movements largely focuses on the argument of equality between animals and humans. For example PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) states on their WebSite (peta.org) that “animals deserve the most basic rights—consideration of their own best interests regardless of whether they are useful to humans. Like you, they are capable of suffering and have interests in leading their own lives; therefore, they are not ours to use—for food, clothing, entertainment, or experimentation, or for any other reason.” Obviously, such a standpoint not only moves animals closer to humans but is also strongly opposed to hunting. In fact, asking for the ethical treatment of animals and focusing on the shared aspects between humans and animals makes hunting a moral issue. From this one might conclude that hunting is only a defendable moral act, if it is embedded in a taxonomic system that clearly separates humans from animals. The proposed research targets exactly this question: Do hunters hold a different taxonomic organization for animals and humans than anti-hunters? Specifically, we predict that both hunters and animal rights activists will share a basic taxonomic ordering for animals. However, we expect systematic differences in the direction that hunters will separate humans from animals more clearly then animal rights activists. These predictions are based in the described findings showing that goals (hunting for food or sport) might influence the way we think about the world. Still, the result will also address normative theories in human values and morality as shaped and reorganized by values, activities and cognition.

Methods of data Analysis. We will apply straightforward statistical analyses to 1. estimate within group (hunters and anti-hunters) and 2. cross-group agreement. (Note, only if we find within group agreement are we formally allowed to conduct a cross-group comparison.) The basis for this analysis is a factor analysis (principal component) over the participant agreement matrix. This analysis is known as Cultural Consensus Model (Romeny et al. 1986). 3. if consensus is found we will explore patterns of differences in residual agreement (hunters and anti-hunters). Finally, we will 4. aggregate the data for each group (average) and compare the means for each response (each trial). (Note, that we need to establish a consensus among the members of the group to formally justify aggregating the data). 5. Targeted analyses (ANOVA and T-test) will then be applied to test for the statistical significance of emerging differences. This work includes the comparison of mental models of forest- as well as aquatic ecology across culture and expertise. Comparing expert fishermen as well as expert hunters we look at differences in how members of different cultural groups perceive the environment they use. How people perceive the environment and its functioning and how they evaluate animals & plants as well as nature in general is, of course, part of the bases on which people make their decisions for their actions. The research targets Menominee Native Americans living on their reservation in north-central Wisconsin as well as Majority Culture individuals living just south of the reservation. While the first part of the project focused on the cultural models of each group, we extended our research into looking at stereotyping and conflict over common resources.