2014~2015'라운드/NEWS_영어뉴스 해석

[TIME 영어뉴스 해석] 2014.08.26_ What Are Animals Thinking? (Hint: More That You Suspect)

생튜 2014. 8. 26. 10:39



time.com/3173937/what-are-animals-thinking-hint-more-that-you-suspect/

 

What Are Animals Thinking? (Hint: More That You Suspect)

 

·         Jeffrey Kluger @jeffreykluger 5:01 PM ET






 

The mind of an animal is a far richer, more complex thing than most people know—as a new TIME book reveals

 

Let’s be honest, you’d probably rather die than wake up tomorrow morning and find out you’d turned into an animal. Dying, after all, is inevitable, and there’s even a certain dignity to it: Shakespeare did it, Einstein did it, Galileo and Washington and Twain all did it. And you, someone who was born a human and will live your life as a human, will end your life that way too.

 

But living that life as an animal—an insensate brute, incapable of reason, abstraction, perhaps even feeling? Unthinkable. Yes, yes, the animals don’t recognize the difference, and neither would you. If you’re a goat, you possess the knowledge of a goat, and that can’t be much. But there’s more to it than that.

 

Human beings have always had something of a bipolar relationship with the millions of other species with which we share the planet. We are fascinated by them, often dazzled by them. They can be magnificently beautiful, for one thing: the explosive color and frippery of a bird of paradise, the hallucinatory variety of the fish in a coral reef, the otherworldly markings and architecture of a giraffe. Even the plain or ugly animals—consider the naked, leathery grayness of the rhino or elephant—have a certain solidity and equipoise to them. And to see an animal at what appears to be play—the breaching dolphin, the swooping raptor—is to think that it might be fun to have a taste, a tiny taste, of their lives.

 

But it’s a taste we’d surely spit right out, because as much as we may admire animals, we pity them too: their ignorance, their inconsequence, and their brief, savage lives. It’s in our interest to see them that way—not so much because we need to press our already considerable advantage over them; we don’t. But because we have certain uses in mind for them. We need the animals to work for us—to pull carts, drag plows, lift logs and carry loads, and stand still for a whipping if they don’t. We need them to entertain us, in our circuses and zoos and stage shows. And most of all, we need them to feed us, with their eggs and milk and their very flesh. A few favored beasts do get a pass—dogs, cats, some horses—but the rest are little more than tools for our use.

 

But that view is becoming impossible to sustain—as a new TIME book reveals. The more deeply scientists look into the animal mind, the more they’re discovering it to be a place of richness, joy, thought and even nuance. There are the parrots that don’t just mimic words but appear to understand them, for example, assembling them into what can only be described as sentences. There are the gorillas and bonobos that can do the same with sign language or pictograms. Those abilities are hard to dismiss, but they also miss the point; they are, in many way, limited gifts—animals doing things humans do, but much less well.

 

A better measure is the suite of behaviors the animals exhibit on their own: crows that can fashion tools, lions that collaborate on elaborate hunts, dolphins and elephants with signature calls that serve as names, and cultural norms like grieving for their dead and caring for grandchildren. There are the complex, even political societies that hyenas create and the factory-like worlds of bees and ants. There are the abiding friendships among animals, too—not just the pairs of dolphins or horses or dogs that seem inseparable but the cross-species loyalties: the monkey and the dog, the sheep and the elephant, the cat and the crow, members of ordinarily incompatible species that appear never to have thought to fight with or eat one another because, well, no one told them they had to.

 

Animals, the research is proving, are creatures capable of reflection, bliss, worry and more. Not all of them in the same ways or to the same degrees, surely, but all of them in far deeper measures than we’ve ever believed. The animal mind is nothing like the wasteland it’s been made out to be. And if it’s not the mind you’d want to have as your own, it’s one that is still worth getting to know much better.

 

(“The Animal Mind” is now available on newsstands.)

 

동물들이 생각하는 것은?(힌트너가 예상하는  이상이다.)

 

동물들의 마음은 대부분의 사람들이 알고 있는  보다 훨씬  풍부하고 복잡하다라고 새롭게 발간된 TIME book에서 언급했다.

 

솔직히너는 아마도 다음날 아침에 일어나서 너가 동물로 변해있는 것을 발견하는  보다 죽은 것을 선택할 것이다결국에는 죽음은 피할  없다그리고 심지어 죽음에 대한 존엄성이 존재한다.: 셰익스피어도 그랬고아인슈타인도 그랬고갈릴레오워싱턴 그리고 트웨인 모두 그랬다그리고 인간으로 태어나고인간으로서 삶을 사는 누군가는 똑같은 방식으로 삶을 마감할 것이다.

 

하지만 동물로 삶을 사는 -비정한 짐승사고와 관념과 심지어 감정이 없나상상도   없어그래그래동물들은 차이점을 인지하지 못한다그리고 너도 인지하지 못해만약에 너가 염소라면너는 염소의 지식을 갖고 있을 것이다그리고 그것은 많지 않을 것이다하지만  지식보다  많은 것이 있다.

 

인간은 항상 우리가 행성을 공유하는 수백 개의 다른 종들과 양극의 관계에 대한 무엇인가를 소유해 왔다우리는  종들에 의해서 매료되었고 종종 그것에 반했었다그들은 엄청나게 아름다울  있다한가지에 대해서낙원에 있는 새들의 격정적인 색깔과 장신구산호초에 있는 환각을 초래하는 다양한 물고기기린의 비현실적인 마킹과 아키텍쳐심지어 단순하거나 못생긴 동물들은-코뿔소나 코끼리의 발가벗겨진 회색 가죽을 고려해라-그들에게 확실한 견고함과 균형을 갖고 있다그리고 놀고 있는 동물을 보는 것은-돌파하는 돌고래 하강하는 맹금-그들의 생활을 아주 약간 맛보는 즐거움임에 틀림없다.

 

하지만 이것은 우리가 확실하게 바로 내뱉어버리는 흥미이다왜냐하면우리가 동물에게 반하는 만큼우리는 또한 그들에게 연민을 갖는다그들의 무지그들의 비논리성그리고 그들의 짧은 야생의 생활이러한 방식으로 그들을 보는 것은 우리에게 흥미 있는 것이다.-우리의 상당한 이점으로 그들을 압박할 필요가 있기 때문이 아니라우리는 그러지 않아하지만 우리는 확실히 동물들을 위한 활용을 염두 해두었기 때문이다우리는 우리를 위해 일할  있는 동물들을 필요로 한다-카트를 밀고쟁기를 끌고통나무를 올리고짐을 나르기 위해서그리고 동물들이 그렇게 하지 않으면채찍질을 하기 위해 여전히 서있다서커스동물원 그리고 무대 쇼에서 우리를 재미있게 해달라고 그들에게 요구하고 있다그리고 무엇보다도우리는 그들의 우유그리고 바로  살로 우리의 먹이가 되라고 그들에게 요구하고 있다약간의 편애를 받고 있는 동물은 제외되었다-고양이몇몇 하지만 나머지는 우리의 사용을 위한 도구에 지나지 않는다.

 

하지만 이러한 관점은 지속되기 불가능해지고 있다-새로 발간된 TIME book 따르면과학자들이 동물의 마음을  깊게 바라볼 수록그들은 풍족함기쁨생각심지어 뉘앙스의 영역을 동물에게서 더욱  발견하였다단어를 중얼거릴 뿐만 아니라 예를 들어오직 문장으로 묘사될  있는 것에 단어를 섞었을   의미를 명확히 아는 앵무새가 있다수화나 그림 문자와 동일하게 행동하는 고릴라와 보노보가 있다이러한 능력은 무시하기 어렵다하지만 그들은 또한 요점을 놓친다다양한 방법에서그들의 재능은 제한되었다-인간의 행동을 하는 동물들하지만  잘하지는 못한다.

 

 나은 측정방법은 동물들이 그들 자신을 나타내는 적절한 행동들이다도구를 만드는 까마귀정교한 사냥을 협력하는 사자이름의 역할을 하는 signature calls 가진 돌고래 그리고 코끼리그리고 죽음을 비통해하고 손자를 키우는 것과 같은 문화적 규범하이에나가 형성한 복잡하고 심지어 정치적인 사회 그리고 벌과 개미의 세계와 같은 공장이 있다동물들 사이에서 변하지 않는 우정이 있다-떨어지지 않을  같은 여러 쌍의 돌고래또는 개뿐만 아니라 교차종의 충실원숭이와 양과 코끼리고양이와 까마귀아무도 그들이 그랬다고 말하지 않았기 때문에 싸우거나 서로서로 나눠 먹는 것을 절대 생각할  없는 보통 양립할  없는 종들이다.

 

 조사에서 증명한 동물들은 반성하고행복해 하고걱정하는  이상이 가능한 창조물이다그들의 모두가 똑같은 방식이나 똑같은 정도로 있는 것은 아니다물론 그러나 그들의 모두는 우리가 믿어 왔던  보다 훨씬  깊게 조취를 취하고 있다동물의 마음은 알려진 것처럼 황무지 같지 않다그리고 만약 너가 너의 것으로서 갖기를 원한 그런 마음이 아니라면여전히   알아야  가치가 있는 것이다.

 

("동물의 마음" 지금 newsstands에서 구할  있다.)

 

 

 

insensate: 감각이 없는비정(非情)무정한감수성이 없는 ((to)), 분별이 없는(senseless)

brute: 짐승 (같은 ), (동물볼품없는 

bipolar: 조울증의조울증을 앓는

frippery: 사치품장신구

hallucinatory: 환각의환각을 초래하는

coral reef: 산호초

after all: (예상과는 달리결국에는

parrot: 앵무새

sign language: 수화