首页
登录
职称英语
In the grand scheme of things Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill are normal
In the grand scheme of things Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill are normal
游客
2024-12-24
36
管理
问题
In the grand scheme of things Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill are normally thought of as good guys. Between them, they came up with the ethical theory known as utilitarianism. The goal of this theory is encapsulated in Bentham’s aphorism that "the greatest happiness of the greatest number is the foundation of morals and legislation."
It all sounds fine and dandy until you start applying it to particular cases. A utilitarian, for example, might approve of the occasional torture of suspected terrorists—for the greater happiness of everyone else, you understand. That type of observation has led Daniel Bartels at Columbia University and David Pizarro at Cornell to ask what sort of people actually do have a utilitarian outlook on life. Their answers, just published in Cognition, are not comfortable.
One of the classic techniques used to measure a person’s willingness to behave in a utilitarian way is known as trolleyology.
The subject of the study is challenged with thought experiments involving a runaway railway trolley or train carriage. All involve choices, each of which leads to people’s deaths. For example: there are five railway workmen in the path of a runaway carriage. The men will surely be killed unless the subject of the experiment, a bystander in the story, does something. The subject is told he is on a bridge over the tracks. Next to him is a big, heavy stranger. The subject is informed that his own body would be too light to stop the train, but that if he pushes the stranger onto the tracks, the stranger’s large body will stop the train and save the five lives. That, unfortunately, would kill the stranger.
Dr Bartels and Dr Pizarro knew from previous research that around 90% of people refuse the utilitarian act of killing one individual to save five. What no one had previously inquired about, though, was the nature of the remaining 10%.
To find out, the two researchers gave 208 undergraduates a battery of trolleyological tests and measured, on a four-point scale, how utilitarian their responses were. Participants were also asked to respond to a series of statements intended to get a sense of their individual psychologies. These statements included, "I like to see fist fights", "The best way to handle people is to tell them what they want to hear", and "When you really think about it, life is not worth the effort of getting up in the morning". Each was asked to indicate, for each statement, where his views lay on a continuum that had "strongly agree" at one end and "strongly disagree" at the other. These statements, and others like them, were designed to measure, respectively, psychopathy, Machiavellianism and a person’s sense of how meaningful life is.
Dr Bartels and Dr Pizarro then correlated the results from the trolleyology with those from the personality tests. They found a strong link between utilitarian answers to moral dilemmas (push the fat guy off the bridge) and personalities that were psychopathic. Machiavellian or tended to view life as meaningless. Utilitarians, this suggests, may add to the sum of human happiness, but they are not very happy people themselves.
That does not make utilitarianism wrong. Crafting legislation—one of the main things that Bentham and Mill wanted to improve— inevitably involves riding roughshod over someone’s interests. Utilitarianism provides a plausible framework for deciding who should get trampled. The results obtained by Dr Bartels and Dr Pizarro do, though, raise questions about the type of people who you want making the laws. Psychopathic, Machiavellian misanthropes? Apparently, yes. [br] The phrase "riding roughshod over" in the last paragraph probably means
选项
A、reflecting upon.
B、resting upon.
C、trampling upon.
D、looking upon.
答案
C
解析
语义题。根据题干定位至末段第二句“Crafting legislation一one of the main things that Bentham and Mill wanted to improve--inevitably involves riding roughshod over someone’s interests.”,紧接着下一句对该句做出进一步解释“Utilitarianism provides a plausible framework for deciding who should get trampled.”,结合首段末句对功利主义的解释“the greatest happiness of the greatest number is the foundation of morals and legislation”可以判断,trample upon“践踏”符合本处语境,故[C]为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3882528.html
相关试题推荐
Manisoneofanumberofanimalsthatmakethings,butmanistheonlyone
Manisoneofanumberofanimalsthatmakethings,butmanistheonlyone
Manisoneofanumberofanimalsthatmakethings,butmanistheonlyone
Therelationshipbetweenwordsandthingsintheworldisestablishedbymeanso
ThingstobeTaughtinEverySchoolⅠ.Introduction:Importanceofstude
ThingstobeTaughtinEverySchoolⅠ.Introduction:Importanceofstude
ThingstobeTaughtinEverySchoolⅠ.Introduction:Importanceofstude
ThingstobeTaughtinEverySchoolⅠ.Introduction:Importanceofstude
ThingstobeTaughtinEverySchoolⅠ.Introduction:Importanceofstude
WhatwerethethingsinBritainthatDr.Mathewfoundmoststrangewhenhefirst
随机试题
We’veallhadtoworkanddothingsthatwedidnotenjoy.Usually,somepeo
WilmaSubrahadnointentionofbecomingapublicspeaker.After【B1】______fr
Manyfloodravagedfarmerssay______(他们别无选择只得解雇一些工人).theywillhavenochoiceb
多因素方差分析中交互作用不显著说明()A.各因素之间不存在内在联系 B.各因素
()提供的信息既可以为财务会计编制财务报表之用,也可满足企业内部管理人员进行决策
A. B. C. D.
带下量多,色黄呈脓性或浆液性,有臭气,阴部红肿热痛,口苦咽干,尿黄。舌红,苔黄腻
人格决定一个人的生活方式,甚至会决定一个人的命运。这里体现的是人格的( )。A
发展的关键期的概念是心理学家根据个体身心发展的()规律提出来的。A.不平衡性
按照物料在生产工艺过程中的流动特点,企业生产物流可分为()。A.大量生
最新回复
(
0
)