Defined
dis·sect (d
-s
kt
, d
-, dskt
)tr.v. dis·sect·ed, dis·sect·ing, dis·sects 1. To cut apart or separate (tissue), especially for anatomical study.
2. To examine, analyze, or criticize in minute detail.The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
"dissect." The Free Dictionary. Farlex. Accessed 9/29/10.
Quotations
"The more I consider this mighty tail, the more do I deplore my inability to express it. At times there are gestures in it, which, though they would well grace the hand of man, remain wholly inexplicable. In an extensive herd, so remarkable, occasionally, are these mystic gestures, that I have heard hunters who have declared them akin to Free-Mason signs and symbols; that the whale, indeed, by these methods intelligently conversed with the world. Nor are there wanting other motions of the whale in his general body, full of strangeness, and unaccountable to his most experienced assailant. Dissect him how I may, then, I but go skin deep; I know him not, and never will."
"dissect." The Free Dictionary. Farlex. Accessed 9/29/10.
Quotations
"The more I consider this mighty tail, the more do I deplore my inability to express it. At times there are gestures in it, which, though they would well grace the hand of man, remain wholly inexplicable. In an extensive herd, so remarkable, occasionally, are these mystic gestures, that I have heard hunters who have declared them akin to Free-Mason signs and symbols; that the whale, indeed, by these methods intelligently conversed with the world. Nor are there wanting other motions of the whale in his general body, full of strangeness, and unaccountable to his most experienced assailant. Dissect him how I may, then, I but go skin deep; I know him not, and never will."
Melville, Herman. "Moby Dick: The Tail" 1851. Free Library by Farlex. Accessed 9/29/10 <>
Herman Melville Moby Dick 1851
"Open up a few corpses: you will dissipate at once the darkness that observation alone could not dissipate."
Herman Melville Moby Dick 1851"Open up a few corpses: you will dissipate at once the darkness that observation alone could not dissipate."
Anatomie générale appliquée à la physiologie à la médecine (1801), avant-propos, xic.
"Dissection Quotes" Today in Science History. Accessed 9/29/10 <>
"Dissection Quotes" Today in Science History. Accessed 9/29/10 <>
"Human sciences dissect everything to comprehend it, and kill everything to examine it."
Tolstoy, Leo. "War and Peace" 1869. Free Library by Farlex. Accessed 9/29/10 <>
Annotated Bibliography
De Villiers, Rian, and Martin Monk. "The first cut is the deepest: reflections on the state of animal dissection in biology education." Journal of Curriculum Studies 37.5 (2005): 583-600. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 30 Sept. 2010.
In this essay, De Villiers examines the issues of animal dissection in education and explains, in a neutral way, both sides of the argument surrounding the practice. He points at rapidly evolving societies as catalysts to the argument for alternative methods of scientific education, using South Africa as an example. De Villiers targets the country's turbulent societal history and rapid modern democratic steps to explain the increased opinions on "many of the old assumptions about what should be taught, to whom, at what stage, and how..." In South Africa issues of scientific dissection "have been under sharper scrutiny than in other countries where change has been a less radical." I think taking the argument out of the purely ethical realm and applying it as a consequence of social dynamic is a very interesting one. De Villiers begins to question the democracy allowed for animals, in a dimension not solely devoted to ethics and cruelty. He is almost beginning to propose anthropomorphism in social structure and within a civil rights dimension.
In another section of De Villiers' essay, he contrasts the ethical dilemma of animal dissection to an argument of evolutionary consequence.
"The justification of the ethics is transcendent rather than personal. God supplies the wrongness. However, somewhat surprisingly, a justification may also call upon biology itself for its arguments. Burkett (2000) asked the following important questions: Do humans, as a species, have a ‘right’ to dominion over animals? Do humans, as a species, have a superior place in the biosphere? If so, does that superior position grant a privilege to kill animals for learning activities? The post-Darwinian biologist is driven by an evolutionary perspective to respond to these questions with the answer of ‘No’. Ethical opposition to dissection can make for strange bedfellows."
I find this argument fascinating as well as it pertains to dissection and its resulting upset in natural evolution. Humans exhibiting this "dominion" in this sense is unnatural due to its lack of basic instinctual necessities. Opponents to dissection argue for alternative scientific discovery through photographs, interactive learning, etc, which also poses the issue authenticity because the experience is no longer that of a "natural" dissection.
Relates
This topic relates to my work in a variety of ways, the most obvious of which, is the visual imagery. I have been working with dissecting images to form sequential redefinitions, or disfigured forms. The idea of dissection involves my work on a conceptual basis as well, as I am creating a moments of inter-species awareness and transcendent discovery without boundaries normally drawn around such discoveries, but in place of new ones, such as negative photographic space. Dissection is, by definition, used to study. Whether it be studying a literal specimen, or scrutinizing an issue, dissection involves disassembling in order to enhance understanding in some way. In an abstract way, which is not by any means meant to be didactic, I am striving for this sense of "understanding" or heightened instinctual awareness, with the subjects as well as viewers, via the dissections I make in my work
De Villiers, Rian, and Martin Monk. "The first cut is the deepest: reflections on the state of animal dissection in biology education." Journal of Curriculum Studies 37.5 (2005): 583-600. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 30 Sept. 2010.
In this essay, De Villiers examines the issues of animal dissection in education and explains, in a neutral way, both sides of the argument surrounding the practice. He points at rapidly evolving societies as catalysts to the argument for alternative methods of scientific education, using South Africa as an example. De Villiers targets the country's turbulent societal history and rapid modern democratic steps to explain the increased opinions on "many of the old assumptions about what should be taught, to whom, at what stage, and how..." In South Africa issues of scientific dissection "have been under sharper scrutiny than in other countries where change has been a less radical." I think taking the argument out of the purely ethical realm and applying it as a consequence of social dynamic is a very interesting one. De Villiers begins to question the democracy allowed for animals, in a dimension not solely devoted to ethics and cruelty. He is almost beginning to propose anthropomorphism in social structure and within a civil rights dimension.
In another section of De Villiers' essay, he contrasts the ethical dilemma of animal dissection to an argument of evolutionary consequence.
"The justification of the ethics is transcendent rather than personal. God supplies the wrongness. However, somewhat surprisingly, a justification may also call upon biology itself for its arguments. Burkett (2000) asked the following important questions: Do humans, as a species, have a ‘right’ to dominion over animals? Do humans, as a species, have a superior place in the biosphere? If so, does that superior position grant a privilege to kill animals for learning activities? The post-Darwinian biologist is driven by an evolutionary perspective to respond to these questions with the answer of ‘No’. Ethical opposition to dissection can make for strange bedfellows."
I find this argument fascinating as well as it pertains to dissection and its resulting upset in natural evolution. Humans exhibiting this "dominion" in this sense is unnatural due to its lack of basic instinctual necessities. Opponents to dissection argue for alternative scientific discovery through photographs, interactive learning, etc, which also poses the issue authenticity because the experience is no longer that of a "natural" dissection.
Relates
This topic relates to my work in a variety of ways, the most obvious of which, is the visual imagery. I have been working with dissecting images to form sequential redefinitions, or disfigured forms. The idea of dissection involves my work on a conceptual basis as well, as I am creating a moments of inter-species awareness and transcendent discovery without boundaries normally drawn around such discoveries, but in place of new ones, such as negative photographic space. Dissection is, by definition, used to study. Whether it be studying a literal specimen, or scrutinizing an issue, dissection involves disassembling in order to enhance understanding in some way. In an abstract way, which is not by any means meant to be didactic, I am striving for this sense of "understanding" or heightened instinctual awareness, with the subjects as well as viewers, via the dissections I make in my work
