Unit 6 Men and Animals新编大学英语第二版第三册课文翻译.doc

Unit 6 Men and AnimalsAggression in Humans and AnimalsMan must be the most aggressive and cruel of all living creatures. We may say a violent man is behaving like a beast, but, in fact, no beast behaves as violently as man. When a territorial animal or bird intrudes on the territory of another creature of the same species, the latter will only perform some hostile gestures to warn off the intruder. Nevertheless, should a fight follow, neither creature will be badly hurt, for the loser will save himself by making a gesture of submission. Normally one animal will only kill another for food, and rarely does an animal kill a member of its own species. If, however, an animal finds itself in abnormal conditions, it may show abnormal aggressiveness. A tiger that once came out of the jungle into a village and attacked a man was later found to have an injured paw that had evidently prevented it from hunting its usual prey. If it had not had this disability it would have undoubtedly stayed in the jungle and hunted for food in the customary way. Animals in zoos are kept in cages and often become more aggressive than they would be in the wild. If the caged lion, for example, were free to wander on the grassy plains of Africa, it would be continually active, ranging over long distances, hunting in family groups. In the zoo it is probably better fed and cared for, but it is evidently bored and frustrated for lack of company. Some zoologists and psychologists compare modern man to a caged lion. Living conditions in crowded cities, they say, are similar to those of animals in a zoo and make the inhabitants unusually aggressive. If the human population had not increased so rapidly, people would have had more space and freedom. In prehistoric times a group of about 60 people had many kilometres of empty land to wander and search for food in. If conditions had remained thus, man might have been no more aggressive than his fellow creatures. As it is, it is possible for as many as 30,000 people to be working in a single office-building. It is not surprising if in these conditions people behave aggressively towards each other. In fact, it is almost impossible for them to behave otherwise. Man must have become more aggressive over the years as the world population has increased. However, aggression in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. Some psychologists believe that aggression is a basic human instinct that must be satisfied. If constructive means are not available to satisfy this instinct, man will turn to destructive means. The impulse to assert himself has enabled him to survive in a dangerous world, but, ironically, he is now likely to destroy his own species unless alternative, non-violent ways of expressing aggression can be found. In fact, it is growing more and more difficult for people to assert themselves as individuals, as towns, nations and organizations become steadily bigger, with authority increasingly centralized and remote. A man who may once have been a self-employed craftsman, master of his own trade, might now have a boring job in a factory. A small firm that once worked as a team to produce high-quality goods is likely to be absorbed into a vast organization where their work is mechanical and there is no possibility for personal expression. Unable in these conditions to channel their aggression into creative work, people will probably express it through resentment and anger. At the international level an accumulation of hostile emotions finally finds expression in large-scale impersonal warfare. A man who would hesitate to hit another person in front of his eyes may kill thousands of people by dropping a bomb from a plane; to him they are too remote to be human beings, but are merely figures on a chart of his routine job. Nevertheless, it might be possible at least to improve the situation. The encouragement of competition in all possible fields should tend to diminish the likelihood of war rather than increase it. In his book Human Aggression, Anthony Storr suggested that the United Nations should organize international competitions in sports and also for the best designed house or hospital, or the safest car. Even the enormous amount of money and energy devoted to the space race is, he says, to be welcomed, for this kind of competition can be regarded as similar to the ritual conflicts of animals. Only if hostility and aggression can be expressed in constructive activity and non-violent competition, will the human race be able to survive. 人和动物的好斗性人肯定是所有动物中最好斗和最残忍的。我们会说暴徒的行为“就像野兽”，然而事实上，没有任何一种动物像人类那样残暴。当地盘性的动物或鸟类侵入别的同类动物的领地时，后者只会做一些表示敌意的姿态来吓跑入侵者。而且，万一有争斗，任何一方都不会受重伤，因为败方只要做出姿态表示投降便可保全性命。一般情况下，动物之间只会为了争食而杀戮，同类动物之间自相残杀是极少见的。然而，如果动物发现自己处于异常环境下，它会表现出不同寻常的攻击性。有一只老虎从丛林跑到村庄来，袭击了人。后来人们发现原来它的爪子受了伤，使它显然不能像平时那样去猎食。如果不是受了伤，这只虎毫无疑问还会呆在丛林里，并像往常那样去猎取食物。关在动物园笼子里的动物，往往会比在野外时更加好斗。比如说，关在笼子里的狮子一旦能自由自在地徜徉在非洲的大草原上，那么它会一直活力充沛，长途跋涉，与家族同类一起追捕食物。在动物园里，也许它吃得更好，能得到精心的照料，但是，由于离群索居，它显然会感到倦怠，情绪沮丧。一些动物学家和心理学家把现代人比喻成笼子里的狮子。他们认为，人们生活在拥挤不堪的城市里，生活条件与动物园里的动物很相似，这种状况使得这些居民特别地好斗。如果人口增长速度不是这样快，人们就会有更多的空间和自由。在史前时代，60人左右的群体会有数公里的空间来活动和觅食。假如现在还有这样的条件，人类就不会比其他动物更加好斗。实际情况是，在同一栋办公大楼里工作的人，有可能多达3万人。在这种条件下，人们之间变得寻衅好斗也就不足为奇了。实际上，要他们不这样几乎是不可能的。这些年来，随着世界人口的增长，人类肯定是更加好斗了。然而，好斗本身并不一定是坏事。一些心理学家认为好斗是一种必须得到满足的基本的人类本能。如果没有建设性的手段来满足这一本能，人类就会采用破坏性的手段。人类坚持自己的权利和主张的冲动使其能够在这充满危险的世界上生存下来；然而，具有讽刺意义的是，人类有可能自我毁灭，除非能找到其他非暴力的、能发泄其好斗本性的方法。实际上，人类作为个体要想坚持自己的权利和主张已经越来越困难了，因为城镇、国家以及组织机构变得越来越庞大，而权力则变得越发集中，越发遥远了。一个人也许曾经是个体手工业者，而且还是本行业的能工巧匠，而现在却可能在工厂里干着单调乏味的工作。一家小公司曾经团结合作生产出高质量产品，而现在可能被并入了一家大机构，员工的工作很机械，也没有自我发挥的机会了。在这样的条件下，人们无法将自己争强好斗的特性发挥在创造性的工作上，很可能就表现出怨恨、愤怒等情绪。在国与国之间，敌对情绪的日积月累最终会以大规模的没有人性的战争形势爆发出来。一个不大愿意对他面前的人拨拳相向的人，也许会从飞机上投下一枚炸弹导致成千上万的人死亡；对他来说，那些人太遥远，已不算是人了，仅仅是他日常工作报表上的数字而已。然而，这种状况至少还是能够得到改善的。鼓励所有可能领域中的竞争，应该会逐渐减少而不是增加战争的可能性。安东尼斯托尔在他的人类的好斗性一书中，建议联合国组织国际性体育比赛，还可以开展诸如最佳房屋或医院设计、最安全汽车竞赛等活动。他说，甚至那些把大量的财力和人力用于太空竞赛的做法，也是值得欢迎的，因为这种竞争与动物之间惯常的冲突类似。只有将人类的敌意和好斗性通过建设性活动和非暴力的竞争方式发挥出来，人类才能继续生存下去。Should the Navy Draft Dolphins?First they risked their lives guarding American ships in Vietnam. Next, they protected a fleet of Naval boats from mines and enemy frogmen in the Persian Gulf. Now, they may guard submarines armed with nuclear weapons in Washingtons Puget Sound. Who are they? Dolphins. The Navy plans to recruit 16 of them as underwater watchdogs. The plan has set off a storm of controversy. The Navy recognizes that the dolphins are highly intelligent. They say dolphins are easy to train and important in protecting against surprise attacks by enemy submarines. But animal rights groups and dolphin trainers protest. They charge that its wrong to recruit the animals in the military. Its immoral for people to use animals in their own wars, says Mitchell Fox, of the Progressive Animal Welfare Society (PAWS). PAWS is one of 15 animal rights groups who have joined together to take the Navy to court. The groups charge that the Navys plan violates federal laws that protect animals from being mistreated. For instance, says Fox, the Navy plans to use Atlantic bottle-nosed dolphins captured in the Gulf of Mexicos warm water. Putting them into Puget Sounds icy cold water could kill them, he says. One dolphin died suddenly just 11 days after arriving at the Navys submarine base in Washington. But the Navy says they take very good care of their dolphins. It would be foolish to jeopardize them, mistreat them, or put them in an unsafe area, says Navy spokesman Lt. James Wood. It would just be wasting our money and effort. In the past four years, he says, the Navy has spent $ 32 million training marine mammals. 9 If the dolphins dont like the training, they can easily swim away, Lt. Wood points out. In May 1988, Science magazine reports, five dolphins had a chance to swim free when someone cut the nets at a Navy training center in San Diego. But they stayed close by. When trainers returned in the morning, the highly trained dolphins swam back in. Much of the criticism of the program stems from the fact that we are very fond of dolphins, says Thomas Lapuzza, spokesman at the Navys dolphin training center in San Diego. Dolphins are cute, he told the New York Times. They are lovable. People have an emotional attachment to them. I wish we were able to use cows. It would probably be a lot easier for us. But cows cant do the job. Dolphin sonar (tracking by sound) works even better than man-made tracking devices, the Navy claims. With their eyes closed, dolphins can locate a vitamin pill on the bottom of a tank. Dolphins find things by first making a series of clicking and whistling sounds. Then, by listening to the echoes made when the sounds reflect from an object, they determine its position. This system is called echo-location. The swimming sonar comes cheap. All dolphins ask for is 20 pounds of fish a day and a few pats on the nose. For the Navy, thats a real bargain. To actually make a system as good as the dolphins would be much more expensive, says Lt. Wood. But critics wonder if dolphins can be trusted to guard nuclear weapons. Fox worries, for instance, that the animals may decide to take surprise breaks from their duties. You only have control over them when they are hungry, he says. Once they are full they may start being a little too playful. Lt. Wood reports that the animals obey orders well. And he stands by his claim that we need dolphins to protect the country. 美国海军应该征募海豚吗？ 最初，他们曾在越南冒着生命危险守卫过美国船只。接着，在波斯湾他们保护美国海军舰队免遭鱼雷和地方蛙人的进攻。现在，他们也许会在华盛顿的普吉湾首位装备着核武器的潜水艇。 他们是谁？海豚。美国海军计划征募16只海豚担任水下监视员。该计划引发了一场激烈的争论。 美国海军认识到海豚是极其聪明的。他们说，海豚容易培训，并且在防卫敌人潜艇的突然袭击中能起重要作用。 但是动物权利保护组织和海豚训练人员却反对这一计划。他们指责说军队征募这种动物是错误的。 动物福利进步协会（PAWS）的米切尔福克斯说，人类在自己的战争中使用动物是不道德的。 15个动物权利保护组织联合起来把海军推上了法庭，PAWS是其中之一。这些组织指控海军的计划违背了保护动物不受虐待的联邦法律。 福克斯举例说，海军计划使用在墨西哥湾温水海域里捕获的大西洋屏蔽海豚。他说，把这些海豚放入普吉湾冰冷的水里会使它们送命。有一只海豚在到达华盛顿州的海军潜艇基地的11天后就突然死亡了。但是海军部说他们把海豚照料的很好。海军发言人詹姆士伍德上尉说：“危害他们，虐待他们或者把他们安置在不安全的地方都是很愚蠢的。那只会浪费我们的金钱和经历。”他说，在过去的四年里，海军已经花费了3，200万美元训练海洋哺乳动物。伍德上尉指出，如果海豚不喜欢训练，它们可以很容易地游走。1988年5月，科学杂志报道，在圣迭戈海军训练中心，有人把网剪开，这时五只海豚是有机会游走并得到自由的。但是他们就呆在附近。当早上训练员回来时，这些训练有素的海豚又游了回来。圣迭戈海军海豚训练中心的发言人托马斯拉普什说，对该项目批评的主要原因是我们大家太喜欢海豚了。“海豚很漂亮，”他对纽约时报的记者说。“他们很可爱。人们在感情上对他们很依恋。我真希望能用母牛代替他们。这样事情可能就会好办得多。”但母牛无法胜任这项工作。海军部声称，海豚的声纳（通过声音跟踪）系统甚至优于人造跟踪设备。他们闭着眼睛也能确定在船舱底部的一片维生素药片的位置。海豚找东西时先发出咔嗒声或嘘嘘声，这些声音从物体反射回来产生的回声被海豚听到后，海豚就能确定物体的位置。这个系统叫做回声定位。这种会游泳的声纳很便宜。一天20磅鱼以及在鼻子上轻轻拍几下，就是海豚的全部需要。这对海军来说，实在太便宜了。伍德中尉说，真正做一个像海豚那么好的声纳系统会贵好多。但是批评家们怀疑海滩是否能担负起守卫核武器的重任。比如，福克斯很担心动物会擅离职守，突然决定休息。“你只能在他们饥饿时控制他们，”他说。“一旦他们吃饱了，也许会开始调皮捣蛋了。”伍德上尉汇报说动物非常遵守命令，而且坚持说我们需要海豚保家卫国。Animals on the JobAnimals not only make good pets, they sometimes make perfect workersif they have the right traits and training. Every morning, Allie wakes up and accompanies her friend to the washroom. She turns on the light, soaps up a washcloth, and begins cleaning her friends face. Is Allie an extremely devoted companion? Yes! Allie is a capuchin monkey who helps her disabled friend perform everyday tasks. Monkeys like Allie are just one of many kinds of animals that help improveor even savehuman lives. But not all animals are suited to do every job. Certain animals are hired for specific jobs based on their traits, or characteristics. By using different methods of conditioning (training animals to act in a particular way in response to a stimulus, or signal), humans can teach animals to perform extraordinary tasks. Throughout history, humans have relied on animals traits to get certain jobs done. For example, compared with humans, dogs are far superior at tracking down odors, says Marian Bailey, an animal behaviorist at Henderson State University in Arkansas. Thats because dogs have millions of olfactory receptors, or smell nerves, in their noses. For that reason, hunters used dogs to track down prey even in ancient Egypt. Today, dogs may be employed to sniff out illegal substances in school lockers or earthquake victims buried beneath the rubble of a collapsed building or highway. Primates may not be good sniffers, but they can certainly lend a helping handor two. Monkeys are perfect helpmates for quadriplegics, people paralyzed from the neck down who are unable to use their own hands (and legs). Like humans, explains Bailey, monkeys have opposable thumbsthumbs that face the hands other fingersso monkeys can pick up objects. Capuchins learn to open doors, clean up spills, and unscrew bottle tops. They can even get a sandwich out of the refrigerator and load your favorite tape into the VCR. And speaking of VCRs, animals are even helping scientists make a videotape. Jennifer Hurley, an animal researcher at the Long Marine Lab in Santa Cruz, California, is training two sea lions to carry video cameras on their backs to record the natural behavior of whales. Hurley could never dive to the depths at which whales swim, she says. But sea lions can. And whales behave naturally around sea lions because these mammals are part of the whales natural environmentunlike humans or submarine-like research boats. So how do you get an animal employee to do its job? The answer: career-training. Trainers teach the animals to obey their instructions through a process called conditioning. Most trainers condition animals by using positive reinforcement, rewarding an animal for doing something correctly, says animal behaviorist Bailey. For example, trainers teach their dogs how to sniff out drugs by hiding a towel with the smell of drugs. Dogs love to retrieve objects so the towel becomes a reward, says Morris Berkowitz, who heads up a canine drug-sniffing program in New York. After repeating this game of hide-and-seek many times, the dog begins to associate the odor with a reward, says Berkowitz. When he gives the command, or stimulus, the dog seeks out drugs. (Its like learning to study hard for a test in order to get a good grade as a reward.) At Helping HandsMonkey Helpers for the Disabled, capuchin monkeys are trained twice before being teamed with a disabled human. First, monkeys are placed with a foster family to become socialized to people. For five years, families help the monkeys adapt to a human environment, so the monkeys will trust and enjoy being around people. Taking the monkeys in when theyre four to six weeks old is important, says Bailey. Thats when monkeys normally become socialized to other monkeys, she says. Second, trainers at Helping Hands train th