CXD的一道题目，纠结于两个选项，为什么E不对？

francoiswang

Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simpy by virtue of ownership,ethically have the right to destroy that artwork if they find it morally or aesthetically distasteful, or if caring for it becomes inconvenient.

Jorge: Ownership of unique artworks ,unlike ownership of other kinds of objects carries the moral right to possess but not to destroy.A unique work of art with aesthetic or historical value belongs to posterity and so must be preserved, what ever the personal wishes of its legal owner.

On the basis of their statements, Shanna and Jorge are committed to disagreeing about the truth of which one of the following statements?

A Anyone who owns a portrait presenting his or her father in an unflattering light would for that reason alone be ethically justified in destroying it.

E It is legally permissible for a unique and historically valueable mural to be destroyed by its owner if h or she tires of it.

E为什么错呢，如果一个具有unique and historically valueable 的mural被它所有者破坏，Jorge肯定会反对呀，求教NN们，万谢！

francoiswang

我明白了，在Legal上，合法拥有者是有权利去毁坏艺术品德，但在ethical上，才是两个人真正的矛盾所在，一个觉得在ethical层面上合法拥有者也可以毁坏，而另一个人觉得即使合法拥有ethical上也不能毁坏

zowenny

答案肯定是A

honglu09

我觉得E中的legal一词可能是有问题的，因为争论的中心不是关于合法性问题

liangruichao

我觉得E是正确的。
Shanna说任何一件艺术品怎么怎么样；
Jorge说独一无二的艺术品怎么怎么样；
那么正确的选项一定要选两个人说的东西的交集，A显然不是交集，因为文中没有说那是独一无二的。E中的mural可以这样认为。

gtr

Shanna: Owners of any work of art, simpy by virtue of ownership,ethically have the right to destroy that artwork if they find it morally or aesthetically distasteful, or if caring for it becomes inconvenient.

Jorge: Ownership of unique artworks ,unlike ownership of other kinds of objects carries the moral right to possess but not to destroy.A unique work of art with aesthetic or historical value belongs to posterity and so must be preserved, what ever the personal wishes of its legal owner.

On the basis of their statements, Shanna and Jorge are committed to disagreeing about the truth of which one of the following statements?

A Anyone who owns a portrait presenting his or her father in an unflattering light would for that reason alone be ethically justified in destroying it.

E It is legally permissible for a unique and historically valueable mural to be destroyed by its owner if h or she tires of it.

E为什么错呢，如果一个具有unique and historically valueable 的mural被它所有者破坏，Jorge肯定会反对呀，求教NN们，万谢！

-- by 会员 francoiswang (2010/1/31 16:33:49)

这两个人到底在说什么？
一个说，拥有者只要自己喜欢，就能毁掉他认为低俗的或者是无聊的艺术品
另一个说，不行，艺术品是属于人类的文化遗产，不喜欢也不能毁


问题： 他们在什么地方可能会不同意对方？


E，非常正确啊，如果他们看见了一个拥有者非常讨厌，但又算是文化遗产的mural，对于它能不能被拥有者摧毁，肯定会吵起来。

pammy0926

我个人觉得A不对。a portrait presenting his or her father in an unflattering light 不是文章讨论的东西，因为不是有历史价值啥的艺术品。E项的内容才是双方不一致同意的。

honglu09

我想E选项的重点词在于legal这词吧， A选项表明的立场是ethically have the right

francoiswang

来个人帮帮忙吧！