Postmodernism for animal scientists

Journal of Animal Science

Volumn 81, Issue 12, 2003, Pages 2989-2994

  Schillo, K K ^a,c   Thompson, P B ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c 807 Garrigus Building ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Politics; Research; Scientists; Society

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA;

ANIMAL; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ARTICLE; DOMESTIC ANIMAL; METHODOLOGY; PHILOSOPHY; POLITICS; RESEARCH; TRANSGENIC ANIMAL;

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ANIMALS; ANIMALS, DOMESTIC; ANIMALS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; POLITICS; POSTMODERNISM; RESEARCH;

EID: 2142705292     PISSN: 00218812     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2527/2003.81122989x     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (22)

1. Bauer, H. J. 1994. Scientific Literacy and the Myth of the Scientific Method. University of Illinois, Urbana and Chicago.
2. Beck, U. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. M. Ritter, trans. Sage Publications, London.
3. Beck, U. 1997. The Reinvention of Politics: Rethinking Modernity in the Global Social Order. M. Ritter, trans. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK.
4. Borlaug, N. E. 2000. Ending world hunger: The promise of biotechnology and the threat of anti-science zealotry. Plant Phys. 123:487-490.
5. Castle, E. N. 1995. Overview. The Changing American Countryside: Rural People and Places. E. N. Castle, ed. University Press of Kansas.
6. Cheeke, P. R. 1999. Shrinking membership in the American Society of Animal Science: does the discipline of poultry science give us some clues? J. Anim. Sci. 77:2031-2038.
7. Cheney, L. V. 1995. Telling the Truth. Simon and Schuster, New York.
8. Gross, P. R., and N. Levitt. 1994. Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science. Johns Hopkins U. Press, Baltimore.
9. Hart, J. F. 1995. "Rural" and "farm" no longer mean the same. The Changing American Countryside: Rural People and Places. E. N. Castle ed. University Press of Kansas.
10. Harvey, D. 1989. The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Blackwell, Oxford, UK.
11. Ihde, D. 1998. Exapanding Hermeutics: Visualism in Science. Northwestern U. Press, Evanston, IL.
12. Irving, J. 1999. The Cider House Rules. Random House, Inc., New York.
13. Kunkel, H. O. 2000. Human Issues in Animal Agriculture. Texas A& M University Press, College Station, TX.
14. Kunkel, H. O., and G. R. Hagevoort. 1994. Construction of science for animal agriculture. J. Anim. Sci. 72:247-253.
15. Merchant, C. The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology and the Scientific Revolution. Harper San Francisco, San Francisco, CA.
16. McCormick, W. 2001. Deconstructing the election: Foucault, Derrida and GOP strategy. The Nation, March 26.
17. Rabinow, P. 1984. The Foucault Reader. Pantheon Books, New York.
18. Schillo, K. K. 1998. Toward a pluralistic animal science: postliberal feminist perspectives. J. Anim. Sci. 76:2763-2770.
19. Schillo, K. K. 1999. An appropriate role for ethics in teaching contemporary issues. J. Anim. Sci. 77:154-162.
20. Thompson, P. B. 1999. From a philosopher's perspective, how should animal scientists meet the challenges of contentious issues? J. Anim. Sci. 77:372-377.
21. Thompson, P. B. 2001. Animal welfare and livestock production in a postindustrial milieu. J. Appl. Anim. Wel. Sci. 4:191-205.
22. Trachtman, L. E. and R. Perrucci. 2000. Science Under Seige: Interest Groups and the Science Wars. Lanham, MD, Rowman and Littlefield.