求英汉互译!不要在线翻译网站!要有英文水平的人翻译!

So you can see drawing the cut off line for even lower animals could present considerable challenges. You have trouble reaching an adequate definition of "sentient". You are now facing how much awareness a creature has to perceive pain and pleasure along with joy from anticipation of future events to consider it morally significant. If a cat is significant, but not a fish, what makes the cat a moral patient while the fish is not? Where is there a difference? There is a problem of arbitrarily assigning moral value when actual feelings and emotions are beyond description.

To go a step further away from human sentience you would hold all living thing to be of moral value. This would then bring plants and non-sentient animals into the picture. This view holds life as the ultimate intrinsic value. Beings have moral value in just being alive. So life is viewed as an intrinsic good, and no verifying pleasures or pains being experienced are needed to allot this worth. Anything living is held with a reverence for that life .

回答好的话我给加分

不相信的话那就只帮我翻译第一段!

然后我追加分数

在给我翻译第二段!

最好是海归帮忙翻译!如果觉得英文哪里有错误!请一一指出!

这是关于环保的文章!

最新回答 (1条回答)

2009-11-28 回答

应该是:

所以你可以看到绘制下线即使低等动物也会减少目前相当大的挑战。你有问题达成一个适当的定义是“众生”。你现在面临多少认识的动物就察觉到,从对未来事件预期的痛苦和高兴地认为这是一起重大的道义上的喜悦。如果一只猫是重要的,但不是鱼,是什么使猫道德病人,而鱼是不是?哪里有区别吗?有一种道德价值任意分配时,实际感受和情绪无法描述的问题。 多走一步,远离人类知觉你将持有的所有活的,是道德价值。这样做,使植物和非众生到动物的图片。持有这种观点的最终内在价值的生活。人有道德价值刚刚开始活着。因此,生命被看作是一个内在的善,没有核实的快乐或正在经历的痛苦,需要配发这种价值。万物皆有生命是同一个生命的崇敬。

追问:
你的答案和我在线翻译的一模一样!答案被封杀掉了!