题目内容
Since the nineteenth century became the twentieth, Black bands were being heard more and more on the streets of New Orleans. Included in the crowd of listeners who followed them were black youngsters such as Louis Armstrong. Soon there were white bands trying to copy this Black style of playing.（）
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
我们要共同珍惜和爱护地球家园。我们可以看到工业化、城市化、全球化在给人类带来无尽财富的同时，也付出了资源枯竭、环境污染、生态破坏的巨大代价。地球不仅是我们从父辈那里继承来的，更是从我们的后代那里借来的，因此我们必须尊重自然，注重节约能源资源和保护生态环境。
There is one last question I must deal with in this chapter. Why should human beings be moral Another way of putting the problem is as follows. Is there any clear foundation or basis for morality Can any reasons be found for human beings to be good and do right acts rather than he bad and do wrong actsI have already pointed out the difficulties involved in founding morality on religion, and especially on religion as a safe factor. (1) However, if a person has religious faith, then he or she does have a foundation for a personal morality, even though this foundation is basically psychological rather than logical in nature. What disturbs me about the use of religion as the foundation of morality is the frequently-made assumption that if there is no supernatural or religious basis for morality, then there can be no basis at all. A related, and perhaps deeper, statement is that there can be no real meaning to human life. unless there is some sort of afterlife or some other extra-natural reason for living. (2) It is obvious that for many individuals this is psychologically true. that is, they feel that their existence has meaning and purpose and that they have a reason for being moral if and only if there is a God, an afterlife, or some sort of religion in their lives. I feel that we must respect this point of view and accept the conviction of the many people who hold it, because that is how they feel about life and morality.It is also obvious, however, that many people do not feel this way. (3) I think it is terribly presumptuous of religious believers to feel that if some people do not have a religious commitment, their lives are meaningless, or that such people have no reason for being moral in their actions. But if religion does not necessarily provide a "why" for morality, then what does Let us assume for a moment that there is no supernatural morality and see if we can find any other reasons why people should be moral.Enlightened Self-InterestOne can certainly argue on a basis of enlightened self-interest, that it is, at the very least, generally better to be good rather than bad and to create a world and society that is good rather than one that is bad. As a matter of fact, self-interest is the sole basis of one ethical theory, ethical egoism. I am not, however, suggesting at this point that one ought to pursue one’s own self-interest. I am merely presenting the argument that if everyone tried to do and be good and to avoid and prevent bad, it would be in everyone’s self-interest. For example, if within a group of people no one killed, stole, lied, or cheated, then each member of the group would benefit. (4) An individual member of the group could say, "It’s in my self-interest to do good rather than bad because I stand to benefit if I do and also because I could be ostracized or punished if I don’t. " Therefore, even though it is not airtight, the argument from enlightened self-interest is a somewhat compelling one.Argument from Tradition and LawRelated to the foregoing argument is the argument from tradition and law. This argument suggests that because traditions and laws, established over a long period of time, govern the behavior of human beings and because these traditions and laws urge human beings to be moral rather than immoral, there are good reasons for being so. (5) Self-interest is one reason, but another is respect for the human thought and effort that has gone into establishing such laws and traditions and transferring them from one historic period and one culture to another. This can be an attractive argument, even though it tends to suppress questioning of traditions and laws—a kind of questioning that is, I feel, the very touchstone of creative moral reasoning. It is interesting to note that most of us probably learned morality through being confronted with this argument, the religious argument, and the experiences surrounding them. Don’t we all remember being told we should or should not do something because it was or was not in our own self-interest, because God said it was right or wrong, or because it was the way we were supposed to act in our family, school, society, and world However, if a person has religious faith, then he or she does have a foundation for a personal morality, even though this foundation is basically psychological rather than logical in nature. What disturbs me about the use of religion as the foundation of morality is the frequently-made assumption that if there is no supernatural or religious basis for morality, then there can be no basis at all.
And while the medical community generally supports the guiding principle of the current policy—that organ donation should be an act of giving, without monetary incentives of any kind—the American Society of Transplant Surgeons has endorsed the idea of a pilot program that would partially reimburse surviving funeral expenses of individuals who allow their organs to take after death.（）
The decades after 1830 were a period of disintegration and uncertainty in German philosophy. For almost half a century idealist philosophies, culminating in Hegel’s grandiose system, had dominated the philosophical scene, revolving around such spiritual notions as transcendental ego, consciousness, presentation (Vorstellung ) , idea, mind, and spirit (Geist). The rapid collapse of German Idealism—that "gigantic mountain range" of creative thought, as Husserl called it in 1917, was due to a combination of causes.There was in the first place, accelerated progress in the natural sciences, ranging from physiology (Johannes Muller, Ernst Weber) to physics (Robert Mayer, Hermann Helmholtz) and chemistry (Justus von Liebig, Friedrich Wöhler). The success of the experimental approach visibly demonstrated the futility of all idealistic speculation about nature. Secondly, there was the rapid growth of technology (especially the construction of railways and the invention of the telegraph), combined with the process of industrialization (resulting in tensions between capital and labour which led to radical changes in the economic system). Moreover, new political ideas concerning popular participation in government led first of all to the abortive revolution of 1848 and resulted finally in the unification of Germany after the war of 1866.Next to philosophical idealism, the other great loser in this course of events was Christianity, especially protestant Christianity, a long-standing ally of idealism. The vacuum thus produced was often filled by vulgar materialist ideas along the line of Ludwig Buchner’s Kraft und Stoff (1855). The more educated classes, however, had needs of a more refined nature, and they turned instead to Schopenhauerianism. Schopenhauer stood firmly in the great European tradition of idealism extending from Plato and Kant, but he nevertheless resolutely rejected post-Kantian, and more specifically Hegelian idealism. Schopenhauer combined the scientist’s conviction of a blind causality reigning in the world of nature with a view according to which this world is none the less rooted in a subjective bestowal of sense. He combined the democratic feeling of compassion for all mankind with an elitist view on art, and a belief in the ultimate meaninglessness of history with an ontology in which the will is fundamental. But above all his philosophy, while rating Christianity rather low, made room for religion on better soil. the religion of India.The view of Indian thought current among educated circles in the second half of the nineteenth century in Germany was strongly influenced by Schopenhauer. Not only did he give popular currency to expressions such as "nirvana" and "the veil of maya", but also he may also be held responsible for the current amalgamation of all ideas which blew into Europe from the East. Neither Hinduism and Buddhism nor Brahmanism and Vedanta philosophy were clearly distinguished by Schopenhauer. On one point, however, he was particularly firm. Buddhism is the highest religion in the world, because it is an "atheistic religion" .Thus it not only surpasses Christian theism, but also comes close to Schopenhauer’s own conception of the absolute. Schopenhauer’s followers in Germany were therefore able to look down on the parochial Christian rituals practised in their country, while upholding the claim that they, too, were directed toward some higher entity however, vaguely conceived. Moreover, they could feel themselves close to the Vedas and Upanisads, considered to be the oldest and most venerable documents of human thought, while at the same time feeling superior to these Indian "myths" as a result of their own rootedness in the purely philosophical ideas of the Schopenhauerian system.To illustrate all this, I want to quote from a document which not only exemplifies this widespread attitude, but also deviates from it in a significant way. It will moreover display the typical framework of Husserl’s own understanding of Indian thought. The document in question is a letter written by Thomas Masaryk (1850—1937) in 1876, while Masaryk (who later was to rise to fame as the thunder and first president of the Czechoslovakian state) was still a student of philosophy. The letter is addressed to Franz Brentano who had been for some years Masaryk’s teacher at the University of Vienna, the capital of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. It was written from Leipzig in Germany where Masaryk moved in order to continue his studies. On 23 November 1876, he writes to Brentano.... Given Schopenhauer’s conviction of "blind causality," why, according to the passage, would he claim that Buddhism was the highest religion（）.
微信支付 
支付宝支付