Environmental issues raise a host of difficult ethical questions, including the ancient one of the nature of intrinsic value. Whereas many philosophers in the past have agreed that human experiences have intrinsic value and the utilitarians at least have always accepted that the pleasures and pains of nonhuman animals are of some intrinsic significance, this does not show why it is so bad if dodos become extinct or a rain forest is cut down. Are these things to be regretted only because of the loss to humans or other sentient creatures? Or is there more to it than that? Some philosophers are now prepared to defend the view that trees, rivers, species (considered apart from the individual animals of which they consist), and perhaps ecological systems as a whole have a value independent of the instrumental value they may have for humans or other sentient creatures.
Our concern for the environment also raises the question of our obligations to future generations. How much do we owe to the future? From a social contract view of ethics or for the ethical egoist, the answer would seem to be: nothing. For we can benefit them, but they are unable to reciprocate. Most other ethical theories, however, do give weight to the interests of coming generations. Utilitarians, for one, would not think that the fact that members of future generations do not exist yet is any reason for giving less consideration to their interests than we give to our own, provided only that we are certain that they will exist and will have interests that will be affected by what we do. In the case of, say, the storage of radioactive wastes, it seems clear that what we do will indeed affect the interests of generations to come.
The question becomes much more complex, however, when we consider that we can affect the size of future generations by the population policies we choose and the extent to which we encourage large or small families. Most environmentalists believe that the world is already dangerously overcrowded. This may well be so, but the notion of overpopulation conceals a philosophical issue that is ingeniously explored by Derek Parfit in Reasons and Persons (1984). What is optimum population? Is it that population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible? Or is it the size at which the total amount of welfare—the average multiplied by the number of people—is as great as possible? Both answers lead to counterintuitive outcomes, and the question remains one of the most baffling mysteries in applied ethics.
1. The first paragraph is mainly about( ).
2. We owe nothing to the future generations( ).
3. Population policy we take should be considered( ).
4. According to this passage, optimum population( ).
5. The proper title for this passage should be( ).
问题1选项
A.the intrinsic value of human experiences
B.the intrinsic value of the experiences of nonhuman animals
C.the intrinsic value of ecological system as a whole
D.an ancient ethical question about the nature of intrinsic value
问题2选项
A.in the author’s opinion
B.from a social contract view of ethics
C.for a utilitarian
D.for most environmentalists
问题3选项
A.positive
B.negative
C.complex
D.reasonable
问题4选项
A.refers to the population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible
B.refers to the population size at which the total amount of welfare will be as great as possible
C.is a difficult philosophical issue which remains to be resolved in the future
D.is a difficult philosophical issue which Derek Parfit has successfully settled in Reasons and Persons
问题5选项
A.A Mystery in Applied Ethics
B.Our Obligations to Future Generations
C.Environmental Ethics
D.Environmental issues
第1题:D
第2题:B
第3题:C
第4题:C
第5题:C
1.主旨大意题。题干:第一段主要是关于_______。A选项“人类经历的内在价值”,B选项“非人类动物经历的内在价值”,C选项“生态系统作为一个整体的内在价值”, D选项“一个关于内在价值本质的古老伦理问题”,前三个选项在第一段中都有提到,但并不是主要问题的所在,而第四个选项,在第二句话中就点了出来,前三个选项是第四个选项的展开说明,故D是正确答案。
2.推理判断题。题干:我们不欠后代任何东西________。根据关键词“owe to”“future generations”可以定位到文章第二段第三句话From a social contract view of ethics or for the ethical egoist, the answer would seem to be: nothing.(从伦理学的社会契约观点或道德自我主义者的角度来看,答案似乎是:什么都不亏欠。),可知,B选项“伦理学的社会契约观点”,是正确的。文章并没有提及作者个人观点,所以A选项“在作者的观点看来”排除。从文章第二段第五句话Most other ethical theories, however, do give weight to the interests of coming generations. Utilitarians, for one, would not think that the fact that members of future generations do not exist yet is any reason for giving less consideration to their interests than we give to our own.(然而,其他大多数伦理理论确实考虑到了后代的利益。举例来说,功利主义者不会认为,后代成员还不存在这一事实,是我们对后代利益的考虑少于我们对自己利益考虑的任何理由。),所以C选项“功利主义者”排除。环境保护主义者也认为,我们应该为后代考虑,所以D选线项“环境保护主义者”排除。综上所述,本题的正确答案是B选项。
3.事实细节题。题干:我们采取的人口政策被认为是_______。根据关键词“population policy”可以定位到文章第三段,第一句话明确指出The question becomes much more complex, however(然而,问题会变得越来越复杂),所以本题的正确答案是C选项。
4.细节推理题。题干:根据文章,最适宜的人口数量_________。文章第三段后半部分提出了最合适的人口数量的问题。用两个问句提出对这一问题的两种可能的答案,即Is it that population size at which the average level of welfare will be as high as possible? Or is it the size at which the total amount of welfare—the average multiplied by the number of people—is as great as possible? (是在人口规模上,平均福利水平会尽可能高吗?或者是总福利的规模——平均乘以人口的数量——尽可能大?),并在结尾的最后一句话中指出,and the question remains one of the most baffling mysteries in applied ethics.(这一问题仍是应用伦理学中最令人不解的谜之一。),其意就是仍有待于将来解决,所以C选项“这是一个只能留到将来解决哲学问题”是正确答案。A选项“最适宜的人口数量指平均福利水平尽可能高的人口规模”,B选项“最适宜的人口数量指福利总额最大的人口规模”,A,B选项都是文章提出的问题,未被证实,所以不正确,D选项“最适宜的人口数量是一个困难的哲学问题,德里克•帕菲特在《理性与人》中成功地解决了这个问题”德里克•帕菲特只是在书中提到What is optimum population?但是并没有解决,所以D选项不正确,综上所述,本题的正确答案是C选项。
5.主旨大意题。题干:最适合文章的标题应该是________。本文主要讨论的并不是环境问题,而是由环境问题而引出的道德问题,A选项“应用道德中的谜”是最后一段提到的,B选项是“我们对下一代的责任”是第二段提到的,二者都不足以代表整篇文章的思想内容。所以本题的正确答案应该是C选项“环境伦理”。