purport / anthropocentric

[Christopher kim]

purport

주장하다

요지 (要旨)

옛날 식전 (食前)이라는 낱말이 '밥 먹기 전' 의 뜻 외에

'이른 아침'이라는 뜻으로도 쓰인 적이 있었다

너무 이르기 때문에 아침 식사하지 않고 하루를 시작할 때

식전부터 열심이 일한다는 뜻으로 쓰였다.

그러기 때문에 이른 아침에 만나면

"진주 잡수셨어요, 식사했니.?!"라고 인사를 건네는 일도 많았다

물론 식전이므로 식사하지 않았지만 ~

They scarecely PURORTED not to eat breakfast.

그들은 아침 먹지 않았다고 거의 주장하지 않았다

체면문화에 익숙한 사람들의 궁색한 답변이다.

요즈음 세대는 자기 표현에 인색하지 않아서 ~

Many youngseters PURPORT to express honesltly what they thought in mind.

젊은이들은 그들 마음에 생각하고 있는 것을 솔직하게 주장한다

자기 주장이 뚜렷하고 솔직한 것은 좋은데

종종 교묘한 맡투로 상대방을 혼란스겁게 만드는 일도 많다

Those who maquerade as good leaders PURPORT to be generous enough to help others

좋은 지도자들이라고 가장하는 사람들은 

다른 사람들을 도울 정도로 너그럽다고 주장한다.

But unfortunately the main PURPORTS of what they insist aren't always true.

그러나 불행하게도 그들이 주장하는 중요 요지들이 

언제나 진실인 것은 아니다

한 때 유행했던 가요 가운데 

'아직도 알 수 없는 당신의 마음'이라는 것이 있었다

I stll don't know the PURPORT of his (or her) mind.

나는 아직도 그의 (또는 그녀) 마음의 요지를 알지 못한다

우리가 천사에 대해 오해하는 것

천사는 마음씨 좋고 아름다운 존재라고 생각하는데 ~

Angeles that PURORT to serve God as messengers work like running errand

between God and humans.

하나님의 말씀 전달자로 그분을 섬긴다고 주장하는 천사들은

하나님과 인간 사이의 심부름 하는 것 같은 일을 한다

얼마 전에 애완동물 파양 때문에 말이 많았는데

세계적으로 많은 동물들이 고통을 당하고 있다고 한다

밀렵, 도륙, 정식 허가된 사냥을 비롯해서

(Because of) neglecting of the companion animals that people PUROORT to love,

animals suffer injustice and horrors at our hands every day.

사람들이 사랑한다고 주장하는 반려동물이 무시당하므로 인해

동물들은 매일 인간들의 손 안에 불공정과 공포로 고난을 받고 있다

(Psychology Today, December 12, 2022)

My wish is to know the PURPORT of what my wife thinks.

나의 소원은 내 아내가 생각하는 요점을 아는 것이다

the main purport of his speech

wished to know the purport of 

Angels, actual winged beings that purport to serve God, are meddling in man's affairs.

the purport of the letter was that 

2 Corinthians 11:14

And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

I'm always a sucker for books that purport to explain how the world - or at least how America - works.

1. They purport to represent the wishes of the majority of parents at the school.

The two Incrementer classes purport to do some do-nothing work (incrementing a variable).

This film does purport to have something to say, believe it or not.

 we purport to be good organizers on pape

The pills also purport to stimulate the metabolism, breaking down fat.

I do not purport to be any kind of expert on Austin music

Why does Karen purport she knows Spanish well when she is only familiar with two words in the language? 

We must move toward a future in which human-animal conflict no longer exists, and do so as quickly as possible.
 the defendant would purport he was an innocent man.
 purport to provide an answer to this question i
"Animals are in trouble all over the world. Whether through the cruelties of the factory meat industry, poaching and game hunting, habitat destruction, or neglect of the companion animals that people purport to love, animals suffer injustice and horrors at our hands every day."
Marc Bekoff Ph.D.

Animal Emotions
Justice for Animals Means Freedom to Do

What Comes Naturally
Martha C. Nussbaum offers the Capabilities Approach, a new comprehensive theory.
Posted December 12, 2022
Reviewed by Jessica Schrader
Share on FacebookShare
Share on TwitterTweet
Share via EmailEmail

KEY POINTS

The Capabilities Approach argues that as a matter of justice, animals must be able to perform their characteristic form of life.

Domestic and wild animals are considered while calling the notion of the “wild” into question given the ubiquity of human domination and control.

purport (n.)

early 15c., "meaning, tenor, the surface or expressed meaning of a document, etc.; that which is conveyed or expressed," from Anglo-French purport (late 13c.), Old French porport "contents, tenor," back-formation from purporter "to contain, convey, carry; intend," from pur- (from Latin pro- "forth;" see pur-) + Old French porter "to carry," from Latin portare "to carry" (from PIE root *per- (2) "to lead, pass over"). Meaning "that which is to be done or effected" is from 1650s.

purport (v.)

1520s, "indicate, express, set forth, convey to the mind as the meaning or thing intended," from the noun in English and from Anglo-French purporter (c. 1300), from Old French purporter "to contain, convey, carry; intend," from pur- (from Latin pro- "forth;" see pur-) + Old French porter "to carry," from Latin portare "to carry" (from PIE root *per- (2) "to lead, pass over"). Related: Purported; purporting.

We must move toward a future in which human-animal conflict no longer exists, and do so as quickly as possible.


"Animals are in trouble all over the world. Whether through the cruelties of the factory meat industry, poaching and game hunting, habitat destruction, or neglect of the companion animals that people purport to love, animals suffer injustice and horrors at our hands every day."

☆ pur·port
verb
/pərˈpôrt/
appear or claim to be or do something, especially falsely; profess.
"she is not the person she purports to be" ☆

I've long been interested in animal ethics and well-being, and the first sentence (above) of the description of renowned philosopher Dr. Martha C. Nussbaum's landmark new book Justice for Animals:

Our Collective Responsibility was all it took to make me put down what I was reading and learn about what she was offering, namely, a revolutionary theory and call to action―

the Capabilities Approach.

I'm thrilled she could take the time to answer a few questions about the new ethical awakening that is most needed globally.

article continues after advertisement

Simon and Schuster, with permission.
Source: Simon and Schuster, with permission.
Marc Bekoff:

Why did you write Justice for Animals?

Martha C. Nussbaum:

The issue of animal justice is incredibly urgent, and the normative theories that are currently directing practical efforts and legal are inadequate.

My Capabilities Approach offers better guidance.

MB: How does your book relate to your background and general areas of interest?

MCN: I’m a philosopher, and I’ve worked on this theory for years with human justice in view.

Now I apply it to this new set of issues. As a law professor, I include legal as well as ethical issues.

MB: Who is your intended audience?

MCN: Anyone who cares about animals and has an interest in theories of justice.

MB: What are some of the topics you weave into your book and what are some of your major messages?

MCN: I begin by laying out some major areas of our wrongful treatment of animals, defining injustice in terms of wrongfully thwarted striving.

Next, I examine the three leading theories of animal justice that are currently propelling practical efforts.

First is the anthropocentric approach
of Steven Wise and the Nonhuman Rights Project, which argues for rights for some animals (apes, elephants) because of their likeness to humans. Second is the Utilitarian approach of Jeremy Bentham, J. S. Mill, and today’s Peter Singer, which holds that pain is the one bad thing and pleasure is the one good thing. Third is the Kantian approach of philosopher Christine Korsgaard, which says many wonderful things but concludes that on account of their alleged lack of ethical capacities animals can be only “passive citizens.”

Frans van Heerden/Pexels
Source: Frans van Heerden/Pexels
Having criticized all of these approaches as inadequate to the complexity of animal lives, I turn to my own Capabilities Approach, which argues that what each sentient creature is entitled to, as a matter of justice, is the ability to exercise the major parts of its characteristic form of life, up to a reasonable threshold level. I also consider the elusive topic of sentience, delving into a lot of recent research that amply demonstrates that all vertebrates and many invertebrates are sentient and have the capacity to feel pain and a point of view on the world. I argue that plants are not sentient, and that for that reason they should not be regarded as subjects of justice, though they may be owed other types of ethical concern.




US
Search
Find a Therapist (City or Zip)
Marc Bekoff Ph.D.
Marc Bekoff Ph.D.
Animal Emotions
Justice for Animals Means Freedom to Do What Comes Naturally
Martha C. Nussbaum offers the Capabilities Approach, a new comprehensive theory.
Posted December 12, 2022
Reviewed by Jessica Schrader
Share on FacebookShare
Share on TwitterTweet
Share via EmailEmail
KEY POINTS
The Capabilities Approach argues that as a matter of justice, animals must be able to perform their characteristic form of life.
Domestic and wild animals are considered while calling the notion of the “wild” into question given the ubiquity of human domination and control.
We must move toward a future in which human-animal conflict no longer exists, and do so as quickly as possible.
"Animals are in trouble all over the world. Whether through the cruelties of the factory meat industry, poaching and game hunting, habitat destruction, or neglect of the companion animals that people purport to love, animals suffer injustice and horrors at our hands every day."

I've long been interested in animal ethics and well-being, and the first sentence (above) of the description of renowned philosopher Dr. Martha C. Nussbaum's landmark new book Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility was all it took to make me put down what I was reading and learn about what she was offering, namely, a revolutionary theory and call to action―the Capabilities Approach.

I'm thrilled she could take the time to answer a few questions about the new ethical awakening that is most needed globally.

article continues after advertisement

Simon and Schuster, with permission.
Source: Simon and Schuster, with permission.
Marc Bekoff: Why did you write Justice for Animals?

Martha C. Nussbaum: The issue of animal justice is incredibly urgent, and the normative theories that are currently directing practical efforts and legal are inadequate.

My Capabilities Approach offers better guidance.

MB: How does your book relate to your background and general areas of interest?

MCN: I’m a philosopher, and I’ve worked on this theory for years with human justice in view. Now I apply it to this new set of issues. As a law professor, I include legal as well as ethical issues.

MB: Who is your intended audience?

MCN: Anyone who cares about animals and has an interest in theories of justice.

MB: What are some of the topics you weave into your book and what are some of your major messages?

MCN: I begin by laying out some major areas of our wrongful treatment of animals, defining injustice in terms of wrongfully thwarted striving. Next, I examine the three leading theories of animal justice that are currently propelling practical efforts. First is the anthropocentric approach of Steven Wise and the Nonhuman Rights Project, which argues for rights for some animals (apes, elephants) because of their likeness to humans. Second is the Utilitarian approach of Jeremy Bentham, J. S. Mill, and today’s Peter Singer, which holds that pain is the one bad thing and pleasure is the one good thing. Third is the Kantian approach of philosopher Christine Korsgaard, which says many wonderful things but concludes that on account of their alleged lack of ethical capacities animals can be only “passive citizens.”

Frans van Heerden/Pexels
Source: Frans van Heerden/Pexels
Having criticized all of these approaches as inadequate to the complexity of animal lives, I turn to my own Capabilities Approach, which argues that what each sentient creature is entitled to, as a matter of justice, is the ability to exercise the major parts of its characteristic form of life, up to a reasonable threshold level. I also consider the elusive topic of sentience, delving into a lot of recent research that amply demonstrates that all vertebrates and many invertebrates are sentient and have the capacity to feel pain and a point of view on the world. I argue that plants are not sentient, and that for that reason they should not be regarded as subjects of justice, though they may be owed other types of ethical concern.

article continues after advertisement

I also consider death: when, and for what reasons, is it a harm? I use this philosophical reflection to argue that death is a harm to all animals who have projects that extend over time. I also address “tragic dilemmas”: cases where we feel that we are stuck and must do wrong whatever we do. The cases I take up are medical experimentation, where cures for human and animal diseases are found through harm to many animals; the conflict between indigenous peoples’ rights to culture and the welfare of animals, especially in the area of whaling; and conflicts over habitat between poor people and animals. My general strategy is to ask us to use our imaginations to conceive of a possible future in which that conflict would no longer exist, and then to move toward that future as quickly as possible.

In my discussion, I consider companion animals and spell out in detail the implications of the Capabilities Approach for policies concerning their lives. I also do the same for “wild” animals, in the process calling the whole notion of the “wild” into question, given the ubiquity of human domination and control.

I also discuss the idea of human-animal friendships and whether and under what conditions friendship can exist between humans and non-human animals. I conclude they can and offer detailed examples of such friendships.

What about law? First I examine the current resources in U.S. law for the protection of animals and then argue that animals ought to be given legal standing (the right to be the plaintiff of an action), as they currently are in four countries but not in the U.S. I focus on several specific areas of legal change: the horrors of factory farming; the abusive practices of “puppy mills”; and, finally, the mistreatment of whales and the impotence of international law to address their predicament.

article continues after advertisement