Hints: 


本文探讨了动物是否有权利的问题。


文中10s处有冒号；

16s和19s处有破折号。

This view which holds that torturing a monkey is morally equivalent to chopping wood, may seem bravely 'logical'. In fact it is simply shallow: the confused center is right to reject it. The most elementary form of moral reasoning -- the ethical equivalent of learning to crawl -- is to weigh others' interests against one's own. This in turn requires sympathy and imagination: without which there is no capacity for moral thought. To see an animal in pain is enough, for most, to engage sympathy. When that happens, it is not a mistake: it is mankind's instinct for moral reasoning in action, an instinct that should be encouraged rather than laughed at.
这种观点认为，折磨猴子从道义上讲无异于劈柴，这种看法似乎是大胆的“逻辑推理”。实际上，这种看法非常肤浅，因为其中心混乱到应该被摒弃的程度。道德推理的最初级形式，和学习爬行的理论一样，是把自身利益和他人利益加以权衡考虑。那么，这就需要同情心和想象力。没有这两点，就无法用道德观念来进行思考。看到动物受苦足以使大多数人产生同情感。这种反应并不是错误，这是人类用道德观念进行推理的本能在起作用。这种本能应该得到鼓励，而不应该遭到嘲笑。