By Steven D。Greydanus
The better part of two decades ago，in a college philosophy class，I found myself debating a professor whose views on gender issues were so extreme that she apparently denied even the most basic biological differences between men and women。Culture，not biology，she maintained，was the real source of all male female distinctions，even physiological ones。
At one point in the discussion，I blurted out in frustration，“But look，aren't there such things as male and female penguins？”
I could see her hesitate before answering，not stumped by my logic but trying to bridge the vast cognitive gap between us。Finally she asked，“But how like a penguin are you？”
Good question。
Certainly I believed，and believe，that humans are radically different from animals-created in God's image，bequeathed with rational souls and moral freedom。But I also continue to believe that there are real similarities。Despite that professor's best efforts，I still think that humans，like penguins，are innately male and female-that we are both warm blooded vertebrate bipeds who reproduce sexually and rear our offspring to maturity as couples。At least，penguins do；people are supposed to。
Of course，penguin chicks are independent within a year，whereas human children mature much more slowly-and，furthermore，humans can have multiple dependent children of different ages at the same time，potentially prolonging the parental commitment still further。In human societies，this commitment has been enshrined in the institutions of marriage and family。Penguins，naturally，don't bother about institutions，and generally choose new mates each year，maximizing the genetic diversity of the community。
To human observers，the ways in which animal behavior variously resembles or contrasts with human behavior is an inexhaustible source of fascination。Catch animals behaving one way，and we can't help marveling at how“almost human”they seem。Catch them behaving another way，and we're struck by the unbridgeable gulf between the animal and human worlds。
Both impressions are valid as far as they go，though either can be overdone。And both types of animal behavior are very much in evidence in Luc Jacquet's March of the Penguins，a French nature documentary，translated into English language。
First things first。March of the Penguins offers an intriguing look at the formidable complications and obstacles involved in the reproductive life of Emperor penguins。To begin with，given the harsh Antarctic environment，the precious egg，and later the vulnerable young chick，must be completely protected from the elements at all times。
This requires the penguin parents to do a lot of standing around with an egg or a chick perched on their feet，tucked under warm abdominal plumage，and when necessary passed with surgical precision（get it wrong and bye bye，baby）from one parent to the other。And because of the extent to which the Antarctic ice melts and refreezes each year，all this standing around has to be done a considerable distance from the sea in order to remain on permanently solid ice。This means，first of all，a laborious initial trek，not to mention the journey back to the sea for food，an ordeal during which the remaining parent will be left alone。
Given what the egg making process has taken out of the mother，she naturally gets first dibs on returning to the sea to feed，leaving the father holding the egg till her return。This，in turn，obliges the father to go without food for the equivalent of four trips back and forth to the sea。And so on，and on，and on。
This difficult and dangerous dance has a certain innate fascination；but what gives the narrative its emotional appeal，in part，is the discovery of echoes in penguin life，or what look like echoes，of human experiences of love and loss。
The original French language version of the film（La Marche de l'Empereur）was unabashedly anthropomorphic，with speaking roles for the penguins by way of voiceover dialogue from French actors。Perhaps wisely，the English language version of the film eschews this approach，instead offering narrative commentary in what is widely described in the press as the“honeyed”cadences of Morgan Freeman's voice。
While not giving the penguins dialogue，the English version is not without anthropomorphisms of its own。From the outset，we are told that“This is a story of love。And like all love stories this one begins with an act of utter foolishness。”The“foolishness”in question refers to the Emperor penguins cannonballing out of their natural element，the water，onto the ice，where they are clumsy and（to us）silly looking。
Needless to say，the appearance of“foolishness”is in the eye of the human beholder；penguins can't mate and hatch eggs in the ocean，and that's all there is to it。But what about the love？Do penguins love their mates？Do penguin parents love their chicks？
Consider，for example，the pathetic episode in which an unsuccessful mother bird makes a futile effort to replace her lost chick by stealing another mother's chick-an episode not unlike the story of the two harlots judged by Solomon in Kings（The penguins don't have a Solomon，but they do band together to stop the would be chick napper。）
Is a penguin mother's biological bond to her chick the same as a human mother's love for her child？Of course not。Yet the biology of the mother child bond exists for humans as well as for birds。It seems reasonable to suppose that the suffering of a human mother at the death of a child at least includes（though it isn't limited to）something similar to what the bereaved penguin mother appears to be going through。Thus，to see a degree of common experience is not necessarily mere anthropomorphism。
But now consider，on the other hand，the behavior of the penguins during a scene in which adolescent chicks are attacked by a predator。Do they flock to the chick's defense，as they did during the instance of attempted chick napping？Do they cry and carry on，or watch anxiously from the sidelines？It doesn't look like it。As long as the predator is outside their own personal space，as far as we can tell，they don't appear to be particularly concerned at all。
Granted，penguin concern might not look like human concern。For that matter，behavior that resembles human grief might not correspond to anything we would recognize as emotion in penguin psychology。Appearances are all we have to go on。
That said，if March of the Penguins is anthropomorphic，for the most part its anthropomorphism may lie largely in drawing our attention to those aspects of penguin life that legitimately remind us of human life。The emotions and moral affections with which we approach parental sacrifice for children or spousal separation and reunion may be uniquely human，but on some level whatever the penguins are doing probably figures into what human couples do（or are supposed to do）。
Of course this line of thought can be pressed too far，as was demonstrated by the public debate over the significance of penguins in the war over marriage-surely a spectacle more ridiculous than the alleged“act of utter foolishness”with which the film opens。
Granted，watching March of the Penguins，we may well reflect that if all human couples did at least as well by their offspring as Emperor penguins do-if in general we left our partners and young in the lurch only in the event of unfortunate encounters with large predators，or similarly deadly circumstances-the world would be a better place。
记得大约20年前，在大学的一次哲学课上，我和教授进行过辩论。原因是我觉得她对性别问题的看法过于极端。这位女教授断然否认，男人和女人之间存在生物学上的差异。她坚持自己的观点，认为文化因素是造成男女之间所有差异、不同的根源，而不是生物因素，甚至男女心理上的差距也是文化因素所导致的。
在这场辩论中，说到某一点的时候，我很有受挫的感觉，不禁脱口而出：“可是，想想看，不是还有雄性企鹅、雌性企鹅吗？”
可以看得出，她犹豫了一下才回应我的提法。倒不是被我问得哑口无言，而是她在考虑怎么样才能缩小我和她之间认知上存在着的巨大的差距。最后，她问：“的确如此。可是，你跟企鹅有多相似？”
问得好。
当然，过去我相信，现在也还这么认为，人类与动物是截然不同的——人是上帝按照自己的模样创造出来的，还从上帝那里继承了理性的精神及道德上的自由。但是，我仍然相信，人类和动物之间有相似性。尽管那位教授做了最大的努力来说服我，我还是认为，跟企鹅一样，人本来就有男女之别，这种差异是与生俱来的。人类和企鹅都是长着脊椎的两足动物，都是有性繁殖，都结成夫妇共同抚养后代长大。至少，企鹅就是如此。人类应该是这样的。
毫无疑问，用不了一年的时间，企鹅宝宝就可以独立，然而人类的孩子长大成人的过程就慢得多，但是，还有一点，人类可以同时养育多个年龄不一样、不能独立的孩子，这就潜在地使得父母要尽更多的责任。在人类社会，这种责任被列为婚姻和家庭制度的神圣的一部分。企鹅生来用不着为什么制度、习俗而烦恼，每年都会选择新的配偶，最大限度地增加企鹅这个生物种类的遗传多样性。
在观察、研究动物的人看来，动物行为和人类的行为在很多方面相似，动物行为与人类的行为也存在很多不同，这些相似或是不同都让他们着迷，而且永远吸引着他们去观察。有一天，偶然看到动物的一种表现，我们忍不住惊叹他们看起来“几乎就是人”。隔天又发现动物的另一种表现，我们又会强烈地感受到，人类世界和动物世界存在不可逾越的鸿沟，我们绝不相同。
就我们的观察而言，得出的这两种印象都是正确的。不过，也许这个、也许那个印象会被我们极端化。然而，动物的这两种表现在吕克·雅克特执导的电影《帝企鹅日记》里都能看得见。这是法国人拍的纪录片，被译制成英语。
先说重要的。《帝企鹅日记》以迷人的视角，讲述了帝企鹅生殖、繁衍后代过程中的种种困难和难以应付的复杂情况。首先，在南极洲严酷的环境里，必须保护好珍贵的企鹅蛋，以及后来孵出来的脆弱的小企鹅，抵御恶劣天气的袭击，不论任何时候都要如此。
这要求企鹅父母长时间地围着企鹅蛋站立，或者他们把小企鹅放在脚上，塞进腹部温暖的羽毛下面。如果需要的话，他们中的一个会把蛋传给另一个，动作非常精确（一旦失手，小企鹅就会死去）。还有，因为每年南极洲冰层都会融化、再次结冰，波及的范围非常大，为了能够确保他们总是处于坚固的冰上，帝企鹅围站的地方必须距离海洋很远。这首先就意味着，企鹅们经历极其艰难的长途跋涉，来到这里，更不用说他们为了寻觅食物，再次返回海洋的行程了。那是严峻的考验，留守的一方要独自孵蛋、照顾小企鹅。
母企鹅在生蛋这个过程消耗了大量的体力和食物。所以，她就先要返回海洋去寻找食物，留下公企鹅独自守着蛋，直到她回来。这就迫使公企鹅空着肚子独自支撑下去，坚持的时间相当于他们来回海洋四趟。诸如此类。等等。
企鹅走起路来摇摇晃晃，来来回回地，很艰难，也充满危险，电影上这种情景具有一种内在的吸引力。但是，电影里的叙事之所以如此震撼人心，部分原因在于它探索出了企鹅生活中类似于人与人之间的爱与失，或者说展现了看起来相似的地方。
这部电影最初是法语版，完完全全用拟人化的手法，里面企鹅的台词由法国演员来演绎，他们的对话作为画外音出现。英语版的电影没有照着这么做，而是由摩根·弗里曼来做讲述、评论，这个办法也许很明智。摩根的声音被媒体一致描述为抑扬顿挫、悦耳流畅。
虽然英语版的电影没有企鹅对话，却也用了独特的拟人化手法。影片一开始，我们就听见“这是一个关于爱的故事，和所有爱情故事一样，我们所讲述的故事也以非常愚蠢的行为开头。”这里所说的“愚蠢”指的是帝企鹅离开海洋家园，从他们的自然生活环境，也就是水里，轻巧、快速地滚到冰上，然后，他们用蹒跚的双脚在冰上笨拙地移动着，让我们觉得怪怪的。
不用说，作为旁观者，会觉得企鹅的样子很“愚蠢”；然而，企鹅不可能在海洋里配对，更不会在海洋里孵蛋，所以必须来到冰上。可是，爱情呢？企鹅爱自己的伴侣吗？企鹅爸爸妈妈爱自己的孩子吗？
例如，考虑一下那个哀婉动人的场景，里面的母企鹅失去了自己的宝宝，就努力想去偷另一位企鹅妈妈的孩子，想借此弥补自己失去孩子的痛苦，结果并没有成功。这件事和《列王纪上》里面所罗门所断的两个妓女的案子不无相似之处。（企鹅群里没有所罗门这样的智者，但他们联合起来，共同制止那个母企鹅去偷别的母企鹅的孩子。）
企鹅妈妈和她的小企鹅之间的这种生物学意义上的联系、纽带等同于人类的妈妈对孩子的那种爱吗？当然不是。母亲和孩子之间血缘关系的生物性存在于人类，也存在于鸟类。假定人类母亲失去孩子的痛苦里至少包含（可是不仅仅限于）一些东西，类似于那位死了幼仔的企鹅妈妈（好像）所遭受的，这样的假定是合情合理的。因此，去发现一定的共同经历未必就是拟人论。
但是，另一方面，现在考虑一下另一个镜头里企鹅的行为，在这个镜头里我们看到没有长大的小企鹅受到捕食者的攻击。他们都涌过去保卫这个小企鹅了吗？像他们在那次偷企鹅幼仔未遂事件中做的那样？他们是大叫、发怒，或是站在一旁焦急地注视着？看来并非如此。就我们知道的说，只要捕食者不进入他们自己的私人领地，他们好像一点也不关心。
就算是关心，企鹅的关心也可能和人类的关心不一样。其实，他们那种与人类的悲伤类似的行为，也许不能和企鹅心理学里我们称之为感情的东西划等号。不得已，我们全是根据现象来判断，得出结论的。
如果《帝企鹅日记》是拟人化的，那么，在极大程度上，这部电影的拟人手法大都在于把我们的注意力吸引到企鹅生活中那些方面，无可非议，那些方面会让我们想起人类生活。我们看待父母为孩子做出牺牲的问题，或者夫妇分离、重聚的问题，都充满了感情，充满了道德之爱，这种感情和道德感也许是人所特有的。但是，从某种角度上讲，企鹅在做的事情，无论是什么事，很可能就是人类夫妇会做的事情（或者应该做的事情）。
当然，人可能会被这样的思路引入极端，那场公开辩论就是证明。那是一场关于企鹅在婚姻战里的重要性问题的辩论——的确是比电影开头自称的“愚蠢的行为”还要可笑的景象。
但是，观看电影《帝企鹅日记》时，我们也许会想，如果人类所有夫妇的子孙后代的所作所为（至少）能和帝企鹅所做的那样好——概括地讲，如果我们是在不幸遇上了对付不了的敌人的情况下，或者是在毁灭性的情况下，才置我们的父母、孩子于不顾的话——这个世界会是一个更加美好的家园。
牛角挂书
New Words
blurted out脱口说出；直言不讳地说出，不假思索地说出，无意中泄露
例句：to blurt out the news 泄露消息
She blurted the secret out before we could stop her。我们没有来得及制止，她就把秘密泄露出去了。
bequeath vt。把……遗赠给；把……传下去；遗赠
tuck 把……塞进；把……挤进；把……放置好
abdominal adj。[动]有腹鳍的；[解]腹部的
unabashedly adv。不害臊地；不怕羞地
anthropomorphic adj。（动物、无生命物、神灵等）拟人（说）的
eschews vt。避开；远避；避免
avian adj。鸟类的；鸟的n。鸟
T
猴老师有话说
est Yourself
Multiple Choice Questions
1.I could see her hesitate before answering，not stumped by my logic but trying to bridge the vast cognitive gap between us。
A。把……难倒
B。砍伐
C。脚步笨重地走
D。使（脚、脚趾）绊踢
2.It seems reasonable to suppose……to what the bereaved penguin mother appears to be going through。
A。仔细检查
B。被通过
C。参加
D。经历；遭受
3.Do they cry and carry on，or watch anxiously from the sidelines？
A。从事；继续
B。坚持下去
C。发怒；悲伤
D。喋喋不休地诉说
4.Appearances are all we have to go on。
A。继续（下去）
B。发生，进行
C。（时间）过去
D。根据……来判断
5.The emotions and moral affections with which we approach parental sacrifice for children……figures into what human couples do（or are supposed to do）。
A。向……靠近
B。与……打交道
C。对待，看待
D。接近；相似
Keys：
1.A 2.D 3.C 4.D 5.C