海巡四等
114年
[海洋巡護科航海組] 法學知識與英文(包括中華民國憲法、法學緒論、英文)
第 48 題
📖 題組：
請依下文回答第 46 題至第 50 題： A zoo is a place where captive animals are put on display for humans to see. The focus of most modern zoos is conservation and education. While zoo advocates and conservationists argue that zoos save endangered species and educate the public, many animal rights activists believe the cost of confining animals outweighs the benefits, and that the violation of the rights of individual animals—even in efforts to fend off extinction—cannot be justified. By bringing people and animals together, zoos educate the public and foster an appreciation of other species, supporters argued. Zoos save endangered species by bringing them into a safe environment, where they are protected from poachers, habitat loss, starvation, and predators. Besides, seeing an animal in person is a much more personal and more memorable experience than seeing that animal in a nature documentary and is more likely to foster an empathetic attitude toward animals. Some zoos help rehabilitate wildlife and take in exotic pets that people no longer want or are no longer able to care for. But from an animal rights standpoint, humans do not have a right to breed, capture, and confine other animals—even if those species are endangered. Being a member of an endangered species doesn't mean the individual animals should be afforded fewer rights. Animals in captivity suffer from boredom, stress, and confinement. Maintaining species diversity within captive breeding facilities is also a challenge. Animals sometimes escape their enclosures, endangering themselves as well as people. Likewise, people ignore warnings or accidentally get too close to animals, leading to horrific outcomes. In making a case for or against zoos, both sides argue that they’re saving animals. Whether or not zoos benefit the animal community, they certainly do make money. As long as there is demand for them, zoos will continue to exist.
請依下文回答第 46 題至第 50 題： A zoo is a place where captive animals are put on display for humans to see. The focus of most modern zoos is conservation and education. While zoo advocates and conservationists argue that zoos save endangered species and educate the public, many animal rights activists believe the cost of confining animals outweighs the benefits, and that the violation of the rights of individual animals—even in efforts to fend off extinction—cannot be justified. By bringing people and animals together, zoos educate the public and foster an appreciation of other species, supporters argued. Zoos save endangered species by bringing them into a safe environment, where they are protected from poachers, habitat loss, starvation, and predators. Besides, seeing an animal in person is a much more personal and more memorable experience than seeing that animal in a nature documentary and is more likely to foster an empathetic attitude toward animals. Some zoos help rehabilitate wildlife and take in exotic pets that people no longer want or are no longer able to care for. But from an animal rights standpoint, humans do not have a right to breed, capture, and confine other animals—even if those species are endangered. Being a member of an endangered species doesn't mean the individual animals should be afforded fewer rights. Animals in captivity suffer from boredom, stress, and confinement. Maintaining species diversity within captive breeding facilities is also a challenge. Animals sometimes escape their enclosures, endangering themselves as well as people. Likewise, people ignore warnings or accidentally get too close to animals, leading to horrific outcomes. In making a case for or against zoos, both sides argue that they’re saving animals. Whether or not zoos benefit the animal community, they certainly do make money. As long as there is demand for them, zoos will continue to exist.
Why do animal rights activists oppose the existence of zoos?
- A Zoos offer too much food and space to animals.
- B Zoos foster an empathetic attitude toward animals.
- C Zoos should not interfere with the life of any species.
- D Zoos should not make money at the expense of animals.
思路引導 VIP
請看向文章中討論『動物權利立場』的段落：他們認為人類是否有權力介入動物的生命歷程（無論動機好壞）？當一個群體的『生存利益』與個體的『自由權利』產生衝突時，這些人士更堅持哪一方？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
🔍 原來如此！真相只有一個，你果然找到了！
- 觀念驗證：哼，這一切都在我的預料之中！你精準地捕捉到了案件的真相。文章第三段的線索非常明確，從動物權利的立場進行推理，結論就是人類沒有權力繁殖、捕捉或囚禁任何動物。即使是打著保護瀕危物種的名義，他們也堅持，任何個體的權利都不應該被犧牲。選項 (C) 的『不應干涉任何物種的生活』，正是他們對『生命自主性』原則的最終解讀。這，就是唯一的真相！
- 難度點評：這是一起中等難度的案件。它考驗的是偵探能否撥開層層迷霧，在眾多看似合理的論點中，排除那些只是為了掩飾真相的功能（例如教育、保育），精確找出反對者最核心的倫理底線。而你，沒有被表象迷惑，直接看穿了問題的本質。哼，真是個了不起的發現！