Do animals have rights？ This is how the question is usually put. It sounds like a useful, ground-clearing way to start. (1)Actually, it isn’t, because it assumes that there is an agreed account of human rights, which is something the world does not ha
如搜索结果不匹配，请 联系老师 获取答案
更多“Do animals have rights？ This i…”相关的问题
第1题
On one view of rights, to be sure, it necessarily follows that animals have none. Some philosophers argue that rights exist only within a social contract, as part of an exchange of duties and entitlements. Therefore, animals cannot have rights. The idea of punishing a tiger that kills somebody is absurd, for exactly the same reason, so is the idea that tigers have fights. However, this is only one account, and by no means an uncontested one. It defiles tights not only to animals but also to some people—for instance, to infants, the mentally incapable and future generations, In addition, it is unclear what force a contract can have for people who never consented to it: how do you reply to some body who says" I don't like this contract"？
The point is this: without agreement on the rights of people, arguing about the rights of animals is fruitless. It leads the discussion to extremes at the outset: it invites you to think that animals should be treated either with the consideration humans extend to other humans, or with no consideration at all. This is a false choice. Better to start with another, more fundamental question: is the way we treat animals a moral issue at all？
Many deny it. Arguing from the view that humans are different from animals in every relevant respect, extremists of this kind think that animals lie outside the area of moral choice. Any regard for the suffering of animals is seen as a mistake—a sentimental displacement of feeling that should properly be directed to other humans.
This view, which holds that torturing a monkey is morally equivalent to chopping wood, may seem bravely "logical". In fact it is simply shallow: the confused center is right to reject it. The most elementary form. of moral reasoning—the ethical equivalent of learning to crawl—is to weigh others' interests against one's own. This in turn requires sympathy and imagination: without which there is no capacity for moral thought. To see an animal in pain is enough, for most, to engage sympathy. When that happens, it is not a mistake: it is man kind's instinct for moral reasoning in action, an instinct that should be encouraged rather than laughed at.
According to the passage, the discussion on the rights of animals ______.
A．is useful and ground-clearing
B．should be based upon an agreed account of human rights
C．is easy to carry on
D．should be the same as that of human rights
第2题
Why do some philosophers hold the view that animals cannot have rights？
A．Because the idea of punishing a tiger that kills somebody is absurd.
B．Because it denies fights not only to animals but also to some people.
C．Because people are always objected to social contracts.
D．Because rights exist only within a social contract, as part of an exchange of duties and entitlements.
第3题
Part C
Directions: Read the following text carefully and then translate the underlined segments into Chinese. Your translation should be written clearly on ANSWER SHEET II. (10 points)
Do animals have rights.'？ This is how the question is usually put. It sounds like a useful, ground clearing way to start. 46) Actually, it isn't, because it assumes that there is an agreed account of human rights, which is something the world does not have.
On one view of rights, to be sure, it necessarily follows that animals have none. 47) Some philosophers argue that rights exist only within a social contract, as part of an exchange of duties and entitlements. Therefore, animals cannot have rights. The idea of punishing a tiger that kills somebody is absurd, for exactly the same reason, so is the idea that tigers have rights. However, this is only one account, and by no means an uncontested one. It denies rights not only to animals but also to some people—4or instance to infants, the mentally incapable and future generations.
In addition, it is unclear what force a contract can have for people who never consented to it, how do you reply to somebody who says "I don' t like this contract" ？
The point is this: without agreement on the rights of people, arguing about the rights of animals is fruitless. 48 ) It leads the discussion to extremes at the outset: it invites you to think that animals should be treated either with the consider- ation humans extend to other humans, or with no consideration at all. This is a false choice. Better to start with another, more fundamental, question: is the way we treat animals a moral issue at all？
Many deny it. 49) Arguing from the view that humans are different from animals in every relevant respect, extremists of this kind think that animals lie outside the area of moral choice.
Any regard for the suffering of animals is seen as a mistake—a sentimental displacement of feeling that should properly be directed to other humans.
This view which holds that torturing a monkey is morally equivalent to chopping wood, may seem bravely "logical". In fact it is simply shallow: the confused center is right to reject it. The most elementary form. of moral reasoning—the ethical equivalent of learning to crawl—is to weigh others' interests against one's own. This in turn requires sympathy and imagination: without there is no capacity for moral thought. To see an animal in pain is enough, for most, to engage sympathy. 50)When that happens, it is not a mistake: it is mankind' s instinct for moral reasoning in action, an instinct that should be encouraged rather than laughed at.
46.____________________
第4题
I have so much work to do that a holiday for me this year is ______.
A．without question
B．in question
C．beyond question
D．out of the question
第5题
Rhetorical question is used in ________.
A、“It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done …”
B、How much harder will it be to eliminate the prejudice against women？
C、Why are women thought of as secretaries, not administrators？ Librarians and teachers, but not doctors and lawyers？
D、I
为了保护您的账号安全，请在“赏学吧”公众号进行验证，点击“官网服务”-“账号验证”后输入验证码“”完成验证，验证成功后方可继续查看答案！
微信搜一搜
赏学吧
微信搜一搜
赏学吧
