You didn't give the options. However, i'll try.
To me, a stone cannot be ethical because it cannot suffer. Indeed, the capacity for suffering must be satisfied before we talk about interest in a meaningful way. For instance, nothing we could possibly do for a stone could make a difference in its welfare. It don't have interest. Whereas, we, humans have interest. Therefore we can be ethical because we are sentient beings that can be benifited or harmed. It's because we can experience pain as a result.
Hope this helps !
Photon
It really depends on the person.
The answer is the option C. The music teacher gave him a choice of horns
- for example, the trumpet, the tuba or the saxophone, because it is
correctly separating two main clauses; in this case the second clause
contains and explanation of the first one. In the options A, B and C the
dashes are splitting phrases that should not be split.
<u>Answer:</u>
If you decided to tell a story about how the Dalai Lama answers the question, "Where do we come from?", the type of <u>(C) Ultimate reality</u> explains this philosophical question
<u>Explanation:</u>
Reality means what is existent and is not imaginary. In philosophical terms, life of a person has certain aims because of which he gets motivated. The reason why one gets up in the morning and strives to achieve that purpose.
This purpose guides the person and influences his behaviour and goals of life. The question where we come from is ‘ultimate reality’. Ultimate reality refers to supreme power, i.e. God. It is the absolute power. We all have been sent here on this earth by God and we should always listen to our inner voice to decide between right and wrong.