或社会利益的小算盘“or to the calculus of social interests."第二个一致的方面是，The second respect in which Rawls' theory follows Kant's is on the idea that公正的原则，可以从一个假设的社会契约延伸出来。principles of justice properly understood can be derived from a hypothetical social contract.这个契约不是实际的。 Not an actual one.而Rawls 提出了一个叫“无知的面纱”的词，来解释他的理论And Rawls works this out in fascinating detail with the device of what he calls the "veil of ignorance".实现权利的方式...那些我们必须尊重的基本权利，The way to arrive at the rights... the basic rights that we must respect,权利和义务的基本框架.... 就是去想象the basic framework of rights and duties is to imagine that我们聚在一起，在不知道我们每个人的具体情况之下we were gathered together trying to choose the principles to govern our collective lives去试图选择 支配我们的集体生活的原则without knowing certain important particular fact about ourselves.这就是“无知的面纱”That's the idea of the veil of ignorance.如果我们聚在一起，就像大家来这里听课一样，Now what would happen if we gather together just as we are here然后试图得出正义的原则，来统治我们的集体生活，这会是怎样？and try to come up with principles of justice to govern our collective life?就会出现反映不同利益的、不一致的提案，There would be a cacophony of proposals of suggestions reflecting people's different interests,有的强，有的弱，some are strong, some are weak,有的有钱，有的贫穷。some are rich, some are poor.因此，Rawls说，想像一下，我们一开始就 地位平等So Rawls says, imagine instead that we are gathered in an original position of equality而保证这一平等的，就是“无知的面纱”and what assures the equality is the veil of ignorance.想象一下，我们都戴着无知的面纱Imagine that we are all behind a veil of ignorance which temporarily abstracts from or brackets,把我们都隐藏起来hides from us who in particular we are.我们的种族，阶级，社会地位，实力，弱点，Our race, our class, our place in society, our strengths, our weaknesses,不管是健康或不健康的，只有这样，Rawls说whether we're healthy or unhealthy, then and only then Rawls says,我们一致同意的原则 就会是公正的the principles we would agree to would be principles of justice.这是 假设的契约 的原理That's how the hypothetical contract works.这个假设的协议，其道德力量是什么呢？What is the moral force of this kind of hypothetical agreement?它比真正的协议、真正的社会契约，是更强还是更弱？Is it stronger or weaker than a real agreement, an actual social contract?为了回答这个问题，我们要认真看看 实际契约的道德力量In order to answer that question, we have to look hard at the moral force of actual contracts.这里有两个问题。There are really two questions here.其中一个，实际契约是怎样约束我，或使我负有义务吗？One of them is how do actual contracts bind me or obligate me?这是问题一Question number one.问题二：现实生活中的实际契约，是怎么使得里面的条文是公正的？And question number two, how do actual real life contracts justify the terms that they produce?如果你想想看，这与Rawls和康德是一致的，If you think about it and this is in line with Rawls and Kant,第二个问题的答案，实际契约 是怎么使得里面的条文是公正的？the answer to the second question, how do actual contracts justify the terms that they produce,答案是 他们没有the answer is they don't.至少不是 由他们自己完成的At least not on their own.实际契约不是 能自给自足的 道德工具Actual contracts are not self-sufficient moral instruments of any actual contract or agreement.你总是可以问，他们一致同意的（条文）公平吗？It can always be asked, is it fair what they agreed to?现实是，该协议从来不保证 协议的公平性The fact of the agreement never guarantees the fairness of the agreement看看我们的制宪会议 就知道了and we know this by looking at our own constitutional convention.宪法里 允许奴隶制存在。It produced a constitution that permitted slavery to persist.以前就这样获得了通过。这是一个真实的契约。It was agreed to. It was an actual contract但是，这并不证明 他们所同意的法律 都是正义的。but that doesn't establish that the laws agreed to all of them were just.那么，实际契约的道德力量是什么？Well then what is the moral force of actual contracts?在某种程度上，他们约束我们，他们通过两个方式约束我们To the extent that they bind us, they obligate in two ways.假设，也许举一个例子会有帮助Suppose, maybe here it would help to take an example.我们达成一项协议，一个商业协议。We make an agreement, a commercial agreement.我答应付给你100元，如果你去捕100只龙虾 给我I promise to pay you $100 if you will go harvest and bring to me 100 lobsters.我们的交易就达成We make a deal.你出去捕龙虾，然后拿给我。You go out and harvest them and bring them to me.我把龙虾吃掉，还分一些给我的朋友，然后我不付钱。I eat the lobsters, served them to my friends, and then I don't pay.接着你说，“但是你有责任。”And you say, "But you're obligated."而我说，“为什么？” 你会怎么说？ “我们签了协议啊”And I say, "Why?" What do you say? "Well we had a deal."”你受惠了。你吃了所有的龙虾。“And you benefited. You ate all those lobsters.这是一个非常有力的论据。Well that's a pretty strong argument.这是一个论据。我从你的劳动中获益It's an argument that depends though and the fact that I benefited from your labor所以，有些情况 契约约束我们，因为它是我们互惠互利的工具。So, contracts sometimes bind us in so far as they are instruments of mutual benefit.我吃了龙虾。你帮我捕了这些龙虾，我欠你100元。I ate the lobsters. I owe you the $100 for having gathered them.但是，假设 现在有另外一个案件。我们做成了这笔交易，But suppose, now take a second case. We make this deal,你捕100只龙虾，我会付100元。而两分钟只后，I'll pay you $100 for 100 lobsters and two minutes later,你还没做任何事情，我给你回电话，说 before you've gone to any work I call you back and say”我改变主意了。“现在，大家都没有获益。I've changed my mind. Now, there's no benefit.你还没有开始工作，因此没有任何互惠的交换。There's no work on your part so there's no element of reciprocal exchange.在这种情况下，鉴于我们已经达成协议，我还欠你钱吗？What about in that case, do I still owe you merely in virtue of the fact that we had an agreement?谁赞同，是的，我还欠你？为什么？好，站起来。Who says those of you who say, yes, I still owe you? Why? Okay, stand up.为什么我欠你钱？我两分钟之后就叫你回来Why do I owe you? I called you back after two minutes.你有没有做任何工作。You haven't done any work.我觉得，我在草拟合同这件事上 花了时间和精力I think I spent the time and effort in drafting this contract with you还有情感上的预期，我都做了这些工作。and also have emotional expectation that I go through the work.所以你花了时间来起草合同，但我们很快就完成了。So you took time to draft the contract but we did it very quickly.我们只是在电话里聊。We just chatted on the phone.但 这不是一个正式的合同。That wouldn't be a formal form of contract though.那么我把它传真你吧。只用一分钟。Well I faxed at you. It only took a minute.只要里面涉及了任何努力，我会说，那么合同就是有效的。As long as any effort is involved, I would say that the contract is valid then.它应该生效。It should take effect.为什么？... 你可以提出道义上的哪一点，来要求我负上义务？But why? What was...what morally can you point to that obligates me?我承认 我之前表示同意了。但你没有去任何工作。我没有得到任何好处。I admit that I agreed but you didn't go to any work. I didn't enjoy any benefit.因为他在精神上 完成了捕龙虾的工作。Because one might mentally go through all the work of harvesting the lobsters.你在精神上，完成了捕龙虾的工作。You mentally went through the work of harvesting the lobsters.这没什么啊。不是吗？That's nothing. Is it? Is not much?仅仅想象自己去捉龙虾，就值100元吗？Is it worth $100 that you were imaginingyourself going and collecting lobsters?也许不值100元，但它对某些人来说，可能是有一定价值的。It may not worth $100, but it may worth something to some people.好吧，我为此给你 1块钱。 ——那么你仍然在指出...All right, I’ll give you a buck for that. But what I – so you’re still pointing...有趣的是，你仍然指着 契约的互惠性 这个方面what’s interesting you’re still pointing to the reciprocal dimension of contracts.你做了 或者想象你去做了，或者期待着，去做某件可能发生的事You did or imagined that you did or lookedforward to doing something that might be had.举个例子，两个人决定结婚。2分钟之后，其中一人突然打电话给另一人，说For example two people agreed to be married and one suddenly calls the other in two minutes say,“我改变主意了”I’ve changed my mind,双方是否都有义务 遵守这个契约呢？does the contract have obligation on both sides?这时，还没有一方付出任何努力，也没有一方已经受益。Nobody has done any work or nobody has benefited yet.嗯，我想回答 “不是的”Well I'm tempted to say no.好吧Fine.好了，你叫什么名字？-JulianAll, right. What’s your name?-Julian.谢谢你，Julian。好的，很好Thank you Julian. All right, that was good.现在，有人同意Julian的意见，认为我仍然要付钱吗？Now is there anyone who has who agrees with Julian that I still owe the money?出于任何其他理由……请讲，请站起来For any other reason now I have …go ahead, stand up.我认为，如果你收回承诺，好像贬低了契约制度I think if you back out it sort of cheapens the institution of contracts.很好，但为什么？为什么会贬低？Good but why? Why does it?我想 这有点像康德式的观点，Well I think is kind of Kantian, but there’s almost...能把契约签了，这就有着某种内在的价值there’s a certain intrinsic value in being able to make contracts and having, you know,你知道 人们会期望你履行契约knowing people will expect that you'll go through with that.很好，……它会贬低整个契约的概念Good, there is some...it would cheapen the whole idea of contracts这种概念关系到 在我自己这方面履行的义务。是这样吗？which has to do with taking in obligation on myself. Is that the idea?嗯，我认为 是的。Yeah, I think so.你叫什么？-AdamWhat’s your name?-Adam.所以Adam的论点不在于互惠 或者互相交换So Adam points instead not to any reciprocal benefit or mutual exchange而只是协议本身but to the mere fact of the agreement itself.我们看到了，真实的契约产生义务 有两种不同的方式。We see here there are really two different ways in which actual contracts generate obligations.其一，主动同意是一种自愿行为，它指向……One has to do with the active consent as a voluntary act and it points...Adam 说这是康德式的观点，我认为他是对的Adam said this was a Kantian idea and I think he is right因为 它表明了 自律的理念because it points to the ideal of autonomy.当我签订契约时，我就 自己给自己负上了义务When I make a contract, the obligation is one that is self-imposed这包含着某种道德力量，它独立于其他的顾虑and that carries a certain moral weight, independent of other considerations.契约的道德力量的 第二个要素And then there’s a second element of the moral force of contract arguments它涉及这种观念：真实的契约是 互惠互利的工具，which has to do with the sense in which actual contracts are instruments of mutual benefit这表明了 互惠的理念and this points to ward the ideal of reciprocity义务由此产生，I can have an obligation to you只要你为我做了事情，我对你就有义务in so far that obligation can arise, as you do something for me.当我们审视 真实契约的道德力量 和 道德局限时Now, when investigating the moral force and also the moral limits of actual contracts我想指出一个 关于真实契约的道德局限的论点and here I would like to advance an argument about the moral limits of actual contracts现在我们知道了，当人们聚到一起说now that we know what moral ingredients do the work“如果你做这个，我就做那个”的时候，是哪些道德因素在起作用when people come together and say, “I will do this if you do that.”我首先先说，两个人同意进行某种交易I would like to argue first that the fact that这并不能说明 他们的协议条款 就是是公平的two people agreed to some exchange does not mean that the terms of their agreement are fair.我的两个儿子 小时候曾经收集棒球卡，然后互相交换。When my two sons were young they collected baseball cards and traded them.他们的年龄相差两岁And one was...there was a two-year aged...there is a two-year aged difference between them所以我必须对他们的交易 定下一个规矩and so I had to institute a rule about the trades that只有得到我的批准，才能成交。这其中的原因显而易见no trade was complete until I had approved it and the reason is obvious.哥哥比弟弟 更清楚那些卡片的价值The older one knew more about the value of these cards因此，他会占弟弟的便宜and so would take advantage of the younger one.所以我必须审查一遍，以确保他们的交易是公平的So that’s why I had to review it to make sure that the agreements were fair.你可能会说：“啊，这是家长式的统治。”Now you may say, “Well this is paternalism.”这当然是。这也是家长式统治的意义所在，对于这类事情。Of course it was. That’s what paternalism is for that kind of thing.那么，这说明了什么？So what does this show?这个棒球卡的例子说明什么？What is the baseball cards example show?达成协议不足以确定 条款的公平性The fact of an agreement is not sufficient to establish the fairness of the terms.