问答题
Do animals have rights? This is how the question is
usually put. It sounds like a useful, ground -clearing way to start. {{U}}
{{U}} 1 {{/U}} {{/U}}{{U}}Actually, it isn't, because it assumes that
there is an agreed account of human rights, which is something the world does
not have. {{/U}} On one view of Tights, to be sure, it
necessarily follows that animals have none. {{U}} {{U}} 2
{{/U}} {{/U}}{{U}}Some philosophers argue that rights exist only within a social
contract, as part of an exchange of duties and entitlements. {{/U}}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 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
somebody who says I don't like this contract? The point is
this: without agreement on the fights of people, arguing about the rights of
animals is fruitless. {{U}} {{U}} 3 {{/U}} {{/U}}{{U}}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. {{/U}}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. {{U}} {{U}} 4 {{/U}}
{{/U}}{{U}}Arguing from the view that humans are different from animals in every
relevant respect, extremists of this kind think that animals lay outside the
area of moral choice. {{/U}}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. {{U}} {{U}}
5 {{/U}} {{/U}}{{U}}When that happen, 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 {{/U}}.
【答案解析】[解析] Actually，it isn't，because it assumes that there is an agreed account of human rights，which is something the world does not have．
句子分析：
一、句子可以拆分为三段：Actually，it isn't，because it assumes/that there is an agreed account of human rights，/which is something the world does not have．
二、句子主干结构是主从复合句。
1)because 引导原因状语从句；
2)that 引导宾语从句，从句中是存在句结构：there is an agreed account of human fights；
3)which 从句的先行词是human rights，something 后面是定语从句the world does not have。
三、词的处理：
Actually 事实上；
it 主语代词，根据上下文意思可译为“这种问法，这种说法”，isn't 后面省略的词应该是so或 true；
an agreed account 约定的看法，共同的认识；
human rights 人的权利，人权；
【正确答案】有些哲学家论证说，权利只存在社会契约中，是责任与利益相交换的一部分。
【答案解析】[解析] Some philosophers argue that fights exist only within a social contract，as part of an exchange of duties and entitlements．
句子分析：
一、句子可以拆分为三段：Some philosophers argue/that rights exist only within a social con- tract，/as part of an exchange of duties and entitlements．
二、句子的结构：
1)主干结构是主从复合句：Some philosophers argue that；
2)that 引导的是宾语从句；
3)as part of．．．是宾语从句中的rights 的主语补足语。
三、词的处理：
argue 论证；
a social contract 社会契约；
as part of 作为(是)……的一部分；
entitlements 利益，权利；
【答案解析】[解析] 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．
句子分析：
—、句子可以拆分为三段：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．
二、句子的结构是：
1)it invites you to think that．．．后面是宾语从句。
2)animals should be treated either with．．．，or with．．．要么……要么……，是表示选择的方
式状语。
3)the consideration 后面的humans extend to other humans 是定语。
三、词的处理：
leads．．．to extremes 引向极端；
at the outset 从一开始；
invites you to think 使人们认为；
consideration 关切，体谅；
humans extend to other humans 人对待人；
【正确答案】这类人持极端看法，认为人与动物在各相关方面都不相同，对待动物无须考虑道德问题。
【答案解析】[解析] 这类人持极端看法，认为人与动物在各相关方面都不相同，对待动物无须考虑道德问题。
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．
句子分析：
一、句子可以拆分为三段：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．
二、句子的结构：
1)主干结构是现在分词短语状语，主语+谓语+宾语从句。Arguing from．．．现在分词短语作状语。
2)the view 和后面的从句 that．．．是同位语关系
3)that．．．引导宾语从句。
三、词的处理：
Arguing from the view 从……观点看，持……观点；
different from．．．与……不同；
in every relevant respect 在各相关方面；
extremists 极端主义者，持极端观点的人；
lie outside the area of moral choice 不在道德问题范围，与道德取舍无关；
【答案解析】[解析] 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．
句子分析：
一、句子可以拆分为三段：When that happens，it is not a mistake：/it is mankind's instinct for moral reasoning in action，/an instinct that should he encouraged rather than laughed at．
二、句子主干结构是两个复合句：
1)When．．．是前一个复合句的时间状语；
2)instinct 后面的介词短语for moral reasoning in action 是它的定语；
3)that…是定语从句，修饰先行词an instinct，从句中是被动语态结构，表示选择。
三、词的处理：
that(代词作主语)联系上下文译为“这种反应”；
mankind's instruct for moral reasoning 人类道德观念推理的本能；
in action 起作用；
rather than 而不；