Awi Usdi, the Little Deer
By Bruchac and Caduto, Cherokee, North Carolina; Fulcrum Publishing
Awi Usdi, the Little Deer is a story about respect and responsibility. Hunters and animals lived in peace until the hunters learned to use weapons. The hunters began to hunt all the animals they wanted. Some animals tried to fight back and failed. Now it is up to Awi Usdi, the Little Deer, to make peace between the animals and the hunters once again. How will Awi Usdi get the hunters to show respect for the animals? Maybe if there are some consequences for the hunters, they will learn to live in peace with the animals once again.
Guidelines for Philosophical Discussion
This story comes from Native American culture. There are many Native American tribes, and each tribe has many stories that have been told since long ago to teach important lessons. Awi Usdi, the Little Deer is a story of Cherokee origin. It explains the importance of reciprocity in relationships between humans and other animals to Cherokee culture, and how it came to be that way. Important issues debated in ethics arise from Little Deer’s challenges. A range of philosophical arguments attempt to address these issues. In this story, animals are in danger of becoming extinct due to excessive hunting. Animals meet in counsel to figure out how to stop the hunters from threatening the continuance of the various species. After attempts by bears and other animals to resist the hunters, Awi Usdi, The Little Deer is their last hope. Awi Usdi speaks to the hunters, giving them an ultimatum: hunt responsibly and respectfully or you will be punished. The hunters agree to hunt only for sustenance and the animals were no longer endangered.
A central theme in the story is animal rights and human responsibility. One argument in ethics claims that animals have the same natural rights to life and non-molestation as humans. From this perspective, it is morally wrong to take the life of an animal for human use, including food. This position contends that there simply is no need for killing or eating animals, and that a view that holds otherwise is an expression of speciesism. Another argument concerning animal rights and human responsibility states that it is all but insulting to attempt to attribute the same rights to animals and humans. This position holds that animals do not have intrinsic value. The claim here is that only beings with intrinsic worth have rights, so non-human animals do not have rights. In fact, some versions of this view claim that the value of some animals is purely in terms of how useful they are to humans, including aesthetically. Yet a third argument debated is one that more closely resembles that apparent in the story than the other two presented herein. This argument claims that it is for the sake of the deer and the diversity of the ecosystem that deer populations ought to be controlled by humans. The premise is that humans are morally obligated to preserve and maintain a diverse ecosystem. If that is the case, this position argues that humans are morally obligated to prevent overpopulation of a single species that can threaten both the diversity at stake and survival of their own species. Awi Usdi provides a middle way by offering an ethic of reciprocity, while considering some points made by differing views compatible.
The final topic in Awi Usdi is human responsibility in terms of non-human species endangerment. The story provides a platform for discussing threats caused by humans to the survival of other species. Some argue that humans are naturally superior to animals in such a way that the natural course is to let animals be subject to humans. Consequently, if animals become endangered as a result of human activity, it is just as it was meant to be. Others argue that it is morally obligatory to maintain ecological equilibrium, so humans must actively promote the survival of non-human animals. From this view, human-generated threats to other species are morally irresponsible. In this sense, it is by virtue of distinctly human characteristics that humans are morally obligated to prevent species endangerment caused by humans. In other words, theories that champion human superiority make the claim that animals don’t have the same rights as humans based on human rationality, technology, and language. Applied to this argument, however, it is these very characteristics that obligate humans to save other species from human-crafted extinction.
Questions for Philosophical Discussion
Necessity vs. Desire
The animals got worried when the hunters started using more than they needed, just because they wanted to: "They began to kill animals when they did not need them for food or clothing"
The animals couldn’t protect themselves against the hunters.
Animal Rights and Human Responsibility
Little Deer and the other animals want the hunters to respect them, not to stop hunting: "Respect us and hunt us only when there is real need."
Human Threats to Ecological Biodiversity
The hunters had weapons that the animals did not have and the animals are afraid they will become extinct.