Seinan Gakuin University: Economics in 1995
Before we consider the reasons that are usually given for the survival of zoos, we should see that there is a moral presumption against keeping wild animals in captivity. What this involves, after all, is taking animals out of their native habitats, transporting them great distances and keeping them in alien environments in which their liberty is severely restricted. It is surely true that in being taken from the wild and confined in zoos, animals are deprived of a great many goods. For the most part they are prevented from gathering their own food, developing their own social orders and generally behaving in ways that are natural to them. These activities all require significantly more liberty than most animals are permitted in zoos. If we are justified in keeping animals in zoos, it must be because there are some important benefits that can be obtained only by doing so.
This conclusion follows from most reasonable moral theories. Either we have duties to animals or we do not. If we do not have duties to animals, there are two further possibilities; either we have duties to people that sometimes concern animals, or what we do to animals is utterly without moral significance. The latter view is quite implausible and I shall not consider it further. People who have held the former view, that we have duties to people that concern animals, have sometimes thought that such duties arise because we can "judge the heart of a man by his treatment of animals." as Kant remarked in "Duties to Animals." It is for this reason that he condemns the man who shoots a faithful dog who has become too old to serve. If we accept Kant's premise, it is surely plausible to say that someone who, for no good reason, removes wild animals from their natural habitats and denies them liberty is someone whose heart deserves to be judged harshly. If this is so, then even if we believe that we do not have duties to animals but only duties concerning them, we may still hold that there is a presumption against keeping wild animals in captivity. If this presumption is to be overcome, it must be shown that there are important benefits that can be obtained only by keeping animals in zoos.
本文の内容と合致するものを3つ選びなさい。
イFirst of all we should consider the reasons for having zoos.
ロWe should so what we can for the survival
of zoos.
ハThere is a moral presumption in favor of
transporting animals great distances and
keeping them in alien environments.
ニBy taking wild animals out of the wild
and confining them in zoos, people deprive
them of their liberty to a certain extent.
ホWe should not have zoos unless there are
any important benefits that can be obtained
only by doing so.
ヘSince we do not have duties to animals,
there is no moral significance in what we
do to animals.
トPeople who take liberty from animals without
any justifiable reason should be severely
criticized.
チIt is impossible to maintain that there
is a presumption against keeping wild animals
in captivity.
リWe should keep animals not in their native
habitats but in zoos.
|
