隨著馬克思主義、女性主義、後殖民主義及各種訴求平等權利之思潮的蔓延，約七０年代開始，思想家對於動物權利也逐漸開始重視。此論文試著以動物權利的論述來解讀傑克倫敦（Jack London）膾炙人口的兩本經典小說野性的呼喚以及白牙。
此論文以線性時間的歷史脈絡將動物權利在西方思潮的歷史論述作一簡短的介紹，並選用了當代來動物權利的幾位思想家：彼得辛格（Peter Singer）、湯姆雷根（Tom Regan）、內歐娜汀絲(Nel Noddings)及瑪麗安沃倫的(Mary Ann Warren)的動物權利論述來闡釋傑克倫敦<<野性的呼喚>>及<<白牙中>>的主角巴克（Buck）及白牙(White Fang)與其主人間的特殊情誼。
在研究過程中，我發現並整理出當代動物權利思想家的動物權利，依據大眾可能的接受程度而言，可被大略劃分為幾個層級：內歐娜汀絲提出的關愛以及特殊的情感關係，以自己與動物相處的經驗為出發點，提出與自己曾發展出特別情感關係的動物會讓自己容易有移情作用，將此感情及關愛轉移到其他類似的動物身上，此階段強調愛有等級差別的觀念，易使大眾接受此觀點並實踐。進而瑪麗安沃倫的弱動物權利概念，認為動物普遍都有權利不被任意宰殺或不受痛苦，但動物的權利仍舊無法與人的權利相提並論；個人認為此一觀點又比內歐娜汀絲的觀念更上一層，涵蓋更多、更廣的動物，許多民眾也應該能夠認同此觀點。而湯姆雷根則認為大多數的動物，只要是「生命主體」（subject-of-a-life）的話，都應該毫無疑問地享有跟人類權利同樣重要的動物權利；此觀念已考驗大部分人對動物權利的認可程度，故個人認為層級較高較難達成。最後彼得辛格則認為在談及動物權利時，所有動物都應該享有同等的利益考量，也就是說，動物應享有跟人類一樣的權利，保護其不被殺害、虐待等等，他更提倡我們根本不應該在任何情況下使用動物；此觀點涵蓋的動物層面更廣並要求的權利等級更高，因此我將之視為終極的理想。
此研究發現，傑克倫敦的這兩本小說中，雖然書中不時可見傑克倫敦對於動物權利的重視，但是倘若以上述幾種層級的動物權利論述來做判斷，傑克倫敦的野性的呼喚及白牙，僅能符合前兩者較低層次的動物權利想法。

As we know that English and American literature are tightly linked to Western thoughts, such as Marxism, post-colonialism, feminism, gay, lesbian and queer theories in the modern time; it seems that thinkers nowadays try to break away the berries between differences, care for the minority and seek for equality for all. Like Marxism tries to deal with the class differences, post-colonialism tries to deal with the race differences, feminism tries to seek women’s rights and gay, lesbian, and queer theories remind us to respect whose sexual orientation are different to majority and seek for their rights as well. Around the 70s, there is another new trend that appeals to expand people’s concerns to not only mankind but also other animals. This paper aims to borrow the theories of Animal Rights to read Jack London’s The Call of the Wild and White Fang.
This paper started with the brief introduction of animal rights debates and arguments in Western history, followed by the main approaches, several modern thinkers’ theories of animal rights: Peter Singer’s “equal consideration of interest”, Tom Regan’s “subject-of-a-life”, Nel Noddings’s “caring” and Mary Ann Warren’s “weak animal rights”.
I used those modern thinkers’ approaches to read Jack London’s The Call of the Wild and White Fang, and found that the theories could be regarded as several levels. According to the possible acceptability, we can arrange them from the lowest and the easiest to achieve level to the highest and the most ideal level: Noddings’s “caring”, Warren’s “weak animal rights”, Regan’s “subject-of-a-life” and Singer’s equal consideration of interest. Through reading Jack London’s The Call of the Wild and White Fang and the protagonists Buck’s and White Fang’s relationship and bonding with humans and their masters, I also found that although London’s concerns about animals and their rights could be constantly found in these two stories, the two novels can only achieve the first two basic levels of animal rights theories that I employed in this paper.

Aristotle. “Animals and Slavery.” The Oxford Translation of Aristotle. Trans. Benjamin Jowett. Ed. W. D. Ross. Oxford: Oxford UP, n.d. N. pag. Rpt. in Animal Rights and Human Obligations. Ed. Peter Singer and Tom Regan. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989. 4-5. Print.
---, “Animals are not Political.” The Politics of Aristotle. Trans. William Ellis. London: Dent, 1912. N. pag. Rpt. in Animal Rights: A Historical Anthology. Ed. Andrew Linzey and Paul Barry Clarke. New York: Columbia UP, 2004. 6-7. Print.
Augustine, St. “Rational Domination.” The City of God. Trans. Marcus Dods. Edinburgh: T.T Clark, 1877. 30-2. Rpt. in Animal Rights: A Historical Anthology. Ed. Andrew Linzey and Paul Barry Clarke. New York: Columbia UP, 2004. 59-60. Print.
Aquinas, St Thomas. “Differences between Rational and Other Creatures.” Summa Contra Gentiles. Trans. English Dominican Fathers. Chicago: Benziger Brothers, 1928. N. pag. Rpt. in Animal Rights and Human Obligations. Ed. Peter Singer and Tom Regan. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989. 6-9. Print.
---, “No Friendship with Irrational Creatures.” The Summa Theologica of St Thomas Aquinas . Trans. Fathers of English Dominican Providence. New York: Benziger Brothers, 1918. N. pag. Rpt. in Animal Rights: A Historical Anthology. Ed. Andrew Linzey and Paul Barry Clarke. New York: Columbia UP, 2004. 102-5. Print.
Bentham, Jeremy. “A Utilitarian View.” Animal Rights and Human Obligations. Ed. Peter Singer and Tom Regan. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989. 25-6. Print. Rpt. of “Chapter XVII, Section 1” The Principles of Morals and Legislation. N.p., 1789. N. pag. Print.
DeGrazia, David. Animal Rights: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2002. Print.
Descartes, René. “Animals as Automata.” Animal Rights: A Historical Anthology. Ed. Andrew Linzey and Paul Barry Clarke. New York: Columbia UP, 2004. 14-7. Print. Rpt of “Discourse V.” René Descartes: A Discourse on Method. Trans. John Veitch. London: Dent, 1912.43-6.
Genesis. New International Version. N.p.: Biblica, 1984. Biblos.com. Biblos.com. Web. 16 Oct. 2012. <http://niv.scripturetext.com/genesis/1.htm>.
Hisao, Pai-ju. Identification, Lacan’s Mirror Stage and the Other in Jack London’s The Call of the Wild, White Fang and The Sea-Wolf. Thesis. Huafan University, 2011. New Taipei: Huafan University, 2011. Print.
Hobbes, Thomas. “De Cive: Dominion Chapter V.” De Cive. N.p.: n.p., 1651. N. pag. De Cive: Dominion by Thomas Hobbes. Ketupa.net, GeneralHealthTopics.com, DoctorNutritionist.com and PsychologyNet.org. Web. 16 Oct. 2012. <http://www.thomas-hobbes.com/works/dominion.html>.
Kant, Immanuel. “Of Duties to Animals and Spirits.” Lectures on Ethics. Ed. Peter Lauchlan Heath and J. B. Schneewind. Trans. Peter Heath. First Paperback ed. New York: Cambridge UP, 2011. 212-3. Print.
Liao, Ya-ting. The Study of Relation Bewteen Human Beings and Animals in the Young Adult Novels. Thesis. National Taitung University, 2004. Taitung: Taitung Universtiy, 2004. Print.
Lin, Tai-yuan. The Three Social States in Jack London’s White Fang: Slavery, Incarceration, Liberty. Thesis. National Chung Cheng University, 2010. Chiayi: National Chung Cheng University, 2010. Print.
Locke, John. An Essay concerning Human Understanding. 27th ed. London: Tegg, 1836. 8An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Google. Web. 17 Oct. 2012. <http://
books.google.com.tw/books?id=vjYIAAAAQAAJ >.
---, The Works of John Locke, in Nine Volumes. 12th ed. Vol. 8. London: Printed for C. and J. Rivington etc., 1824. Google Books. Google. Web. 19 Oct. 2012. <http://
books.google.com.tw/books?id=t8WGq6nLcogC>.
London, Jack. The Call of the Wild, White Fang, and Other Stories. Ed. Earle Labor and Robert C. Leitz. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2009. Print.
---, “The Other Animals.” Revolution and Other Essays. N.p.: Macmillan, 1909. N. pag. The Jack London Online Collection. Sonoma State University Library. Web. 09 June 2012. <http://london.sonoma.edu/Writings/Revolution/animals.html>.
Low, Philip. “The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness.” Ed. Jaak Panksepp, Diana Reiss, David Edelman, Bruno Van Swinderen, Philip Low, and Christof Koch. Declaration proclaimed on July 7, 2012. Cambridge: Francis Crick Memorial Conference. PDF file.
Midgley, Mary. Animals and Why They Matter. Athens: University of Georgia, 1984. Print.
Matthews, Christopher. “Livestock a Major Threat to Environment: Remedies Urgently Needed.” FAO Newsroom. FAO, 29 Nov. 2006. Web. 15 Oct. 2012. <http://
www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html>.
Montaigne, Michel E. “Difference does Not Justify Domination.” Animal Rights: A Historical Anthology. Ed. Andrew Linzey and Paul Barry Clarke. New York: Columbia UP, 2004. 64-5. Print. Rpt. of “Apology for Raymond Sebond” Essays of Montaigne. Trans. E.J. Trechman. London: Oxford UP, 1927. 451-2, 460.
---, “Exclusion from Friendship is Not Rational.” Animal Rights: A Historical Anthology. Ed. Andrew Linzey and Paul Barry Clarke. New York: Columbia UP, 2004. 105-12. Print. Rpt. of “Apology for Raymond Sebond” Essays of Montaigne. Trans. E.J. Trechman. London: Oxford UP, 1927. 464-80.
Noddings, Nel. Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics & Moral Education. Berkeley: University of California, 1986. Print.
Qian, Yong-xiang, Huai-dong Peng, and Zhen-deng Chen, trans. The Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Animal Welfare. Ed. Marc Bekoff and Carraon A. Meaney. Xindian: Laureate, 2002. Print.
Regan, Tom. The Case for Animal Rights. London: Routledge, 1988. Print.
Ryder, Richard D. “Dr Richard Ryder.” Dr Richard Ryder. WWW.RICHARDRYDER.CO.UK. Web. 02 Apr. 2012. <http://
www.richardryder.co.uk>.
Singer, Peter. “All Animals Are Equal.” Animal Liberation and Animal Rights and Human Obligation. Ed. Peter Singer and Tom Regan. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989. N. pag. Rpt. in Life and Death: A Reader in Moral Problems. 2nd ed. Belmont: Wadsworth Pub., 2000. 400-10. Print.
---, Animal Liberation: The Definitive Classic of the Animal Movement. Updated ed. New York: HarperCollins, 2009. Print.
---, “Animals.” The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Ed. Ted Honderich. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1995. 35-6. Utilitarian Philosophers. Web. 18 Oct. 2012. <http://www.utilitarian.net/singer/by/1995----04.htm>.
---, One World: The Ethics of Globalization. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale UP, 2004. Print.
Steinfeld, Henning, Pierre Gerber, Tom Wassenaar, Vincent Castel, Mauricio Rosales, and Cees De Haan. Livestock's Long Shadow: Environmental Issues and Options. Rome: FAO of the United Nations, 2006. PDF file.
Warren, Mary Anne. “Difficulties with the Strong Animal Rights Position.” Between the Species 2.4 (1987): 163-73.
Linzey, Andrew, and Paul Barry Clarke, eds. Animal Rights: A Historical Anthology. New York: Columbia UP, 2004. Print.