1、公正第三课 选择的自由免费下载第三课：选择的自由我们上次结尾的时候 When we finished last time,我们讨论到，约翰密尔 we were looking at John Stuart Mills尝试对批判边沁的功利主义的人，作出回应。 attempt to reply to the critics of Benthams Utilitarianism.在他的功利主义一书中，密尔试图告诉那些批评者 In his book Utilitarianism Mill tries to show that critics在功利主义的框架下，我们可以to the contrary i
2、t is possible within the utilitarian framework区分出高级和低级的快乐 to distinguish between higher and lower pleasures.对价值作出的定性区分是可能的It is possible to make qualitative distinctions of worth and we tested我们用Simpsons和莎士比亚的例子来检验了这一点。 that idea with the Simpsons and the Shakespeare excerpts.而我们检验的结果，似乎质疑了密尔这种区分And
3、 the results of our experiment seem to call into question因为你们之中许多人都更喜欢 Mills distinction because a great many of you reported that you prefer看Simpsons动画，尽管你认为莎士比亚 the Simpsons but that you still consider Shakespeare to be是更高级、更有价值的乐趣。 the higher or the worthier pleasure.这就是我们给密尔所提出的困境。 Thats the dil
4、emma with which our experiment confronts Mill.在功利主义的第5章，密尔试图解释What about Mills attempt to account for the especially weighty character个人权利和正义的一些特别重要的特征of individual rights and justice in chapter five of Utilitarianism.他想说，个人权利是值得特别考虑的。 He wants to say that individual rights are worthy of special res
5、pect.事实上，他甚至说，正义是 In fact, he goes so far as to say that justice is最神圣的部分，也是最不可比拟的the most sacred part and the most incomparably binding part道德约束of morality.但用同样逻辑就可以攻击密尔的这一辩护 But the same challenge could be put to this part of Mills defense.为什么正义是主要组成部分，是最具道德约束力的？ Why is justice the chief part and
6、the most binding part of our morality?好吧，他说，因为从长远来看， Well, he says because in the long run,如果我们遵循正义，如果我们尊重权利， if we do justice and if we respect rights,从长远来说，整个社会的生活会有所改善society as a whole will be better off in the long run.那么，又会怎么样呢？ Well, what about that?但如果在某种情况下，我们破例地What if we have a case where
7、 making an exception and侵犯个人权利，却从长远来看violating individual rights actually will make people better off让人们过得更好？ in the long run?那么，这是否正确呢？ Is it all right then to use people?这可以进一步的反对And there is a further objection that could be raised密尔关于正义和权利的论述。 against Mills case for justice and rights.假设，从长远来算 S
8、uppose the utilitarian calculus in the long run功利主义计算出，如果尊重个人的权利 works out as he says it will such that respecting peoples rights从长远来看，能使大家过得更好，is a way of making everybody better off in the long run.功利主义的这个解释是真正的原因吗？ Is that the right reason?这是尊重个人的唯一理由吗？ Is that the only reason to respect people?如
9、果一个健康的家伙去检查身体（第一节的案例） If the doctor goes in and yanks the organs from医生把这个人的器官取出来the healthy patient who came in for a checkup去救活其他5条生命（站在功利主义的角度是合理的）to save five lives,但长远来看，会有不利影响there would be adverse effects in the long run.人们最终会知道这件事Eventually, people would learn about this and以后也不去做身体检查了（怕自己的器
10、官被取出来）would stop going in for checkups.所以，功利主义的理由是真正的原因吗？ Is it the right reason?这是你作为一个医生，不会从健康人身上 Is the only reason that you as a doctor wont yank the organs取走器官的唯一理由吗 out of the healthy patient that you think, well,如果我采用功利主义的逻辑，长远来看反而会失去更多的生命？ if I use him in this way, in the long run more lives
11、 would be lost?还是另有其因 Or is there another reason having to do with intrinsic respect要尊重个人？ for the person as an individual?如果这个原因十分重要，但我们暂时还不是那么清楚 And if that reason matters and its not so clear即使密尔的功利主义考虑到这点 that even Mills utilitarianism can take account of it,充分研究这两个忧虑或反对的意见fully to examine these
12、 two worries or objections,我们需要更深一层来考虑。 to Mills defense we need to push further.我们要问，对于那些更高级、更有价值的乐趣 And we need to ask in the case of higher or worthier pleasures是否有一些理论能够提供一个独立的are there theories of the good life that can provide关于快乐的道德判断标准？ independent moral standards for the worth of pleasure?如
13、果是能，是什么标准？这是个问题。 If so, what do they look like? Thats one question.关于正义和人权，如果我们怀疑密尔是否是In the case of justice and rights, if we suspect that Mill隐性地倾向于推崇高贵 is implicitly leaning on notions of human dignity或者是尊重那些，不是严格意义上的功利主义者 or respect for person that are not strictly speaking utilitarian,我们需要看看，是否
14、有一些更有力的理论 we need to look to see whether there are some stronger theories可以解释，密尔所直觉地认为的 of rights that can explain the intuition which even Mill shares,尊重个人的原因 the intuition that the reason for respecting individuals以及即使从长期来算效用更大，也不能过度地利用个人and not using them goes beyond even utility in the long run.
15、今天，我们要谈谈关于正义的一个有力理论Today, we turn to one of those strong theories of rights.这个理论认为，每个人都很重要，不是因为 Strong theories of right say individuals matter not just as个人是谋求社会更大利益的工具instruments to be used for a larger social purpose或者是为了达到效用的最大化or for the sake of maximizing utility,个人是值得尊重的、有各自生活的独立个体individuals
16、 are separate beings with separate lives worthy of respect.因此，根据这一理论And so its a mistake, according to strong theories只是把大家的偏好、价值观叠加起来or rights, its a mistake to think about justice来决定是否正义，是错误的 or law by just adding up preferences and values.我们今天要讨论的这个理论就是The strong rights theory we turn to today is
17、自由主义。 libertarianism.自由主义认真地考虑个人权利。 Libertarianism takes individual rights seriously.之所以称为自由主义，因为它说： Its called libertarianism because it says个人的基本权利是自由the fundamental individual right is the right to liberty正因为我们是独立的个体。 precisely because we are separate individual beings.我们不会用来充当Were not available
18、to any use that the society社会意愿、设想的工具，这恰恰是因为我们是 might desire or devise precisely because we are独立的个体。 individual separate human beings.我们有基本的自由权利， We have a fundamental right to liberty,这意味着我们有权自由选择， and that means a right to choose freely,过我们想要的生活， to live our lives as we please只要我们同时尊重到其他人的权利 prov
19、ided we respect other peoples rights to do the same.这是自由主义的基本想法。 Thats the fundamental idea.Robert Nozick，自由主义的哲学家之一 Robert Nozick, one of the libertarian philosophers认为we read for this course, puts it this way:个人拥有权利。 Individuals have rights.个人权利是如此强烈和深远So strong and far reaching are these rights t
20、hat they它们决定什么是国家要做的，如果有的话raise the question of what, if anything, the state may do.那么，自由主义是怎么论述政府扮演的角色 So what does libertarianism say about the role of government或国家的角色？ or of the state?大多数现代国家会做三件事 Well, there are three things that most modern states do自由主义却认为是that on the libertarian theory of ri
21、ghts are非法的或不公正的。 illegitimate or unjust.其中之一就是家长式立法。 One of them is paternalist legislation.也就是通过立法来保护民众 Thats passing laws that protect people from themselves,例如，安全带、摩托车头盔的立法。 seatbelt laws, for example, or motorcycle helmet laws.自由主义说，如果人们系好安全带The libertarian says it may be a good thing这可能是件好事 if
22、 people wear seatbelts但这应该由他们自己来决定 but that should be up to them and the state,国家、政府无权强迫我们the government, has no business coercing them,立法来要求我们系上安全带us, to wear seatbelts by law.这是一种胁迫。所以，第一条：废除家长式立法Its coercion, so no paternalist legislation, number one.第二：废除道德立法。 Number two, no morals legislation.许
23、多法律试图鼓励公民培养某些道德 Many laws try to promote the virtue of citizens或体现整体社会的道德价值观 or try to give expression to the moral values of the society as a whole.自由主义说，这也是侵犯自由权的。 Libertarian say thats also a violation of the right to liberty.一个典型的例子 Take the example of, well, a classic example以促进道德的名义来立法 of legi
24、slation authored in the name of promoting morality传统上法律禁止traditionally have been laws that prevent sexual intimacy同性恋的关系。 between gays and lesbians.自由主义说，同性恋并没有伤害到任何人 The libertarian says nobody else is harmed,没有侵犯到任何人的权利nobody elses rights are violated,因此，国家无权 so the state should get out of the bus
25、iness entirely of促进美德或通过道德立法。 trying to promote virtue or to enact morals legislation.而自由主义要废除的第三种法律、政策And the third kind of law or policy that is ruled out是税收等政策on the libertarian philosophy is any taxation or other policy以达到收入的再分配的目的that serves the purpose of redistributing income or wealth从富人流到穷人
26、。 from the rich to the poor.如果你仔细想想，再分配是Redistribution is a if you think about it,是一种胁迫，自由主义说says the libertarian is a kind of coercion.这就像是国家或多数派在偷窃What it amounts to is theft by the state or by the majority,从那些干得好、钱赚得多一点的人身上if were talking about a democracy, from people who happen to偷窃do very well
27、 and earn a lot of money.Nozick和其他自由主义者允许 Now, Nozick and other libertarians allow that there can be国家收取少额的税收，来支持那些公众都需要的东西 a minimal state that taxes people for the sake of what everybody needs,例如，国防，警察部队， the national defense, police force,司法系统judicial system to enforce contracts and property righ
28、ts,但仅此而已。 but thats it.现在，我希望听听你们怎么看Now, I want to get your reactions to this third feature自由主义的第三个观点 of the libertarian view.我想看看，谁同意这个想法，谁不同意，为什么不同意 I want to see who among you agree with that idea and who disagree and why.但是，为了让大家具体地看看利害攸关点But just to make it concrete and to see whats at stake,我们
29、可以考虑一下，美国的财富分配 consider the distribution of wealth in the United States.在所有先进的民主国家之中，美国是目前United States is among the most inegalitarian society as far as贫富最不平等的社会 the distribution of wealth of all the advanced democracies.这是正义的还是不正义的呢？ Now, is this just or unjust?那么，自由主义又是怎样说的？ Well, what does the l
30、ibertarian say?自由主义说，光从我给你的事实中你很难知道 Libertarian says you cant know just from the facts Ive just given you.你不知道分配是否是公正的 You cant know whether that distribution is just or unjust.光看分配，光看结果You cant know just by looking at a pattern or a distribution or你很难知道它是否公正。 result whether its just or unjust.你必须知道
31、它是怎么来的。 You have to know how it came to be.你不能只看最后的阶段，最后的结果。 You cant just look at the end stage or the result.你要看两个原则You have to look at two principles.第一：要看它一开始有什么，是怎么获得 The first he calls justice in acquisition or in initial holdings.也就是说，他们是公平地获得 And what that means simply is did people get the things they used他们所拥有的吗？ to make their money fairly?所以，我们需要知道它
