英語でストーリーテラー(Puppy and Animal Rights 2)

Question 1-5.

Question 2-5.

Although people don't regard keeping animals as their pets as an issue of the animal rights so long as animal is well being cared for by humans who are responsible for their well-being, there are controversial arguments about it among advocates of animal rights.

What kind of aspects are there among their arguments?

Question 3-5.

Domesticated cats have smaller brain than those of wild cats. It seems to mean they are destined to be endowed with less intelligence than the wild cats'.

Raise the cause of their smaller brains from two different points of view .

RETURN

Sample Answer 1-5. It is that we should develop its latent ability while it is a child so that it becomes a satisfactory companion. If we succeed in rearing a puppy so as to develop its intelligence while it is young, it will be able to adjust to our family life.

Question 1-6

The nature of a cat is like the human nature in emotional respect. Although it falls short of that of the mankind, a cat has mental abilities that are comparable to that of us.

But, is it alright that we can hold the belief that animals have abilities that are equivalent to ours, such as thinking abstractly or finding intuitive associations of ideas?

Sample Answer 2-5. One thing is the harm or benefit to individual companion animals. Another is the harm and benefit to population of animals from which companion animals come.

Question 2-6

There are following examples: keeping a companion dog in a small enclosure, with it left chained in a yard, or isolated from others of his or her kind.

Are the aforementioned examples the cases of abusive practices to companion animals?

Sample Answer 3-5.

One is that they have been separated from wild life system where they were supposed to enhance their ability to endure the influence of the natural selection. Instead, they must have endured "the artificial selection" as a pet irrelevant to intelligence.

Another is that life of sedating environment inside the house has deprived them of opportunities to develop their intelligence. In such an environment, they fail to have experiences valuable to activate their latent ability.

Question 3-6

Sample Answer 4-5. They tend to position the care of spouse in a proxy for their ex-jobs. They follow the way of ex-jobs in involving outer-organizations, entrusting the caring, and recognizing the limits. And they can afford to contrive about the duty of caring.

RETURN

Sample Answer 1-6. I don't think so. To regard them as such is to forcibly personify them as human beings(, which will cause various inconvenience to them). In the case of cats, they just have some intelligence of their own to survive as a cat. We are unable to force them to adopt any deeds that are meaningless to their natural nature.

Question 1-7

In an experiment, a cat is placed on one side of a fence. And on the other side of the fence a chip of wood connected to a piece of meat with a string is placed. The fence is equipped with an opening through which its paw can reach the chip on the other side of the fence.

Sample Answer 2-6. Yes, they are.

Question 2-7

Sample Answer 3-6. It is to let them be in their element , develop their intelligence, and adjust themselves to human society so that they can get along with people. In order to fulfill that, the person taming them needs to keep up the insight into them.

Question 3-7

Sample Answer 1-7. Yes. The cat can eat the meat by hauling the chip. But it must be just when the cat get hungry. It proves them to be insightful and foresighted.

RETURN

Sample Answer 2-7. They are abusive mainly in that they are neglecting to accommodate the needs arising from the inherent nature of the particular species.

Question 2-8

Sample Answer 3-7. The relationship between person and animal will reciprocally become beneficial to each other, as is evidenced by the genuine affection that exists between many people and their animal companions.

Question 3-8

The manner in which animals are kept and treated is largely in favour of the convenience of the "owner", and there are few legal limits on how humans treat the animals they own.

On what does it depends whether a pet can get along with human society without spoiling its original nature?

Sample Answer 2-8. It is because their features as a species require sufficient exercise and sensory stimulation, and also social contact with human or other dogs, together with exposure to outdoors, in order to be psychologically physically healthy.

Question 2-9

Sample Answer 3-8. Namely, it depends on the owner's understanding of pet's intelligence.

Question 3-9 As examples of the harm to the population of animals, there are the artificial selective breeding and the practice of inbreeding done in pursuit of the looks and the behavioral characteristics which are regarded as desirable in particular to breeds of dogs and cats.

Raise the example of harmful effect of artificial breeding.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

Sample Narration

The boy found a puppy abandoned in the park.

He brought it back home and earnestly asked his parents to keep it as a pet. But the parents seemed to be reluctant to do so.

At last, the father made him make a promise that the boy would make it a rule to take the dog for a walk every day and feed it by himself. The boy gave the nod on keeping the promise with gusto. And then, he was allowed to keep it home.

Next holiday, the father built a kennel for the dog. Looking at it, the boy got greatly excited. The dog also seemed glad.

But one year later, to their surprise, the boy had the dog, which used to be only a tiny dog, grow too huge to even enter the kennel. The boy felt he was too eager to care for his dog.

Material Relevant to The Topic

Domesticated Companion Animals

Throughout the history of humanity, animals have had a place in human social communities and have been valued as guardians, work partners, and companions by individuals and families. Keeping animals such as dogs and cats as companions is so familiar to us that generally people do not regard it as an animal rights issue so long as an animal is well cared for by the humans who are responsible for the animal's well being. Companion- animal keeping, however, is controversial among advocated of animal rights. The issues involved can be divided into two general categories: the harm or benefit to individual companion animals and the harm or benefit to populations of animals from which companion animals come.

Those who argue for the practice of keeping domesticated animals maintain that companions bring mutual benefit to both the animal and the human companion if the animal's needs are valued and accommodated. These needs, most would agree, include not only adequate food and shelter, but also the needs that arise from the inherent nature of the particular species. A companion dog, for example, requires sufficient exercise and sensory stimulation, social contact with both humans and other dogs, and exposure to the outdoors in order to be psychologically as well as physically healthy. Keeping a companion dog in a small enclosure, chaining it in a yard, or isolating it from others of his or her kind are generally acknowledged to be examples of abusive practices. It is also commonly agreed among animal rights activists that it is not appropriate or ethical to keep animals such as birds, mice, or hamsters, for example, as companions, because caging these animals violates their needs for freedom of movements. When a companion animal's needs are met, this arguments goes, the relationship between person and animal is reciprocally beneficial, as is evidenced by the genuine affection that exists between many people and their animal companions.

Those who argue against keeping animals as companions argue that the practice is motivated by a selfish human need to dominate and control members of other species. To support their argument, opponents of companion-animal keeping point to the many instances where people treat their animals in a patronizing or controlling manner, substitute animal affection for human affection, or use an animal as a surrogate child. That many animals are abused and/or neglected by their "owners" is a documented fact. The view that keeping animals as companions may violate the rights of animals further supported by the fact that the laws in most societies regard animals as chattel property (people are considered to be the "owners" of their animal companions. The manner in which animals are kept and treated is considered to be largely within the discretion of the "owner", and there are few legal limits placed on how humans treat the animals they "own". Opponents of companion-animal keeping doubt that statutory or educational changes will adequately protect the majority of companion animals.

The latter view also addresses the significant harm that has been done to populations of animals through artificially selective breeding and the practice of inbreeding for looks and behavioral characteristics that are regarded as desirable in particular breeds of dogs and cats. Irresponsible breeders such as the puppy mills that sell dogs to "pet" stores cause great suffering to both the animals that they use as breeding stock and to the puppies that are not adequately cared for or socialized when young.

当マガジンの解除は、上記のバナーより、まぐまぐプレミアム「購入者マイページ」にて行えます。

ご購読ありがとうございます！

Yakusugi netobjet@yahoo.co.jp

RETURN