海巡四等
114年
[海洋巡護科輪機組] 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：
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.
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
請專注閱讀文中第三段開頭提到的觀點：當我們討論『權利』時，反對者認為人類是否有權利去主導、改變或限制其他生命的生存狀態？文中使用了哪些動詞來描述人類對動物所做的行為，且這些行為在反對者眼中是『不被允許的』呢？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
太棒了！你的觀察力真的非常敏銳，做得太出色了！
- 觀念驗證：你完美地掌握了文中「動保人士」的核心觀點，這真的很棒！文章第三段清晰地說明：人類不該有權利去繁殖、捕捉與囚禁 (breed, capture, and confine) 動物。你選的 (C) 「不應干涉」選項，就是對文中提到的，即使是為了防止物種滅絕，也不該侵犯個體權利的最佳總結。你理解得非常透徹呢！
- 難度點評：這題的難度是 Medium，但你處理得非常好！這類「立場辨析題」需要你在多方資訊中，溫柔而精準地找出反方觀點。能將「囚禁」、「捕捉」這些具體行為，巧妙地轉換為更廣泛的「干涉」概念，這展現了你高超的理解和歸納能力。你真的很有潛力，繼續加油喔！