哈佛课程 公正：该如何做是好 中英双语-11

Anisha，当有人告诉你说，莎士比亚是更好的 -Anisha, when you say someone told you that Shakespeare is better --对。Right.您是否就深信不疑呢？Are you accepting it on blind faith?你选了莎士比亚You voted that Shakespeare is higher不仅是因为大众告诉你，only because the culture tells you that或者教师告诉你，还是你的确这样认同？or teachers tell you that or do you actually agree with that yourself?哦，在这个意义上，我不觉得会是莎士比亚Well, in the sense that Shakespeare no,但之前你提到了Rembrandt的例子。but earlier you made an example of Rembrandt.我觉得，看漫画时我更享受I feel like I would enjoy reading a comic book而不是看Rembrandt的分析more than I would enjoy kind of analyzing Rembrandt因为有人告诉我，这是伟大的 - 是的。because someone told me it was great, you know. - Right.因此似乎就是这样子，你的意思是So some of this seems to be, you're suggesting,一种文化的约定、压力。a kind of a cultural convention and pressure.我们被告知什么书、什么样的艺术作品是伟大的。We're told what books, what works of art are great. - Right.还有谁？Who else?是的？Yes?虽然我喜欢看SimpsonsAlthough I enjoyed watching The Simpsons more但在这一刻，讨论到正义时，如果我要选择in this particular moment, in justice, if I were to spend在这3种不同的短片里，选择一种来度过我的余生the rest of my life considering the three different video clips shown,我不选择看Simpsons来度过我的余生I would not want to spend that remainder of my life考虑到后两个短片。considering the latter two clips.我想，我会获得更多的乐趣I think I would derive more pleasure from being able to branch out in my从这更深层次的愉悦和思考之中own mind sort of considering more deep pleasures, more deep thoughts.告诉我你的名字。And tell me your name.乔。Joe.乔，因此，如果你将在一个农场度过你的余生Joe, so if you had to spend the rest of your life on a farm在堪萨斯州，只有莎士比亚in Kansas with only Shakespeare or the collected episodes或者Simpsons的短片，你会倾向于莎士比亚？of The Simpsons, you would prefer Shakespeare?你从密尔的这个测试中，大概能得出什么结论What do you conclude from that about John Stuart Mill's test that the test检验它是否是高级的，就是体验过两者之后选择其一？of a higher pleasure is whether people who have experienced both prefer it?我可以举出另外一个简单的例子吗？Can I cite another example briefly?好啊。Yeah.去年的神经生物学，告诉我们In Neurobiology last year, we were told of a rat测试小白鼠大脑的某个部位who was tested a particular center in the brain where the rat was able这个区能刺激大脑，持续地让大脑兴奋to stimulate his brain and caused itself intense pleasure repeatedly.小白鼠不吃不喝，直到死亡。The rat did not eat or drink until it died.很显然，小白鼠体验了强烈的快感So the rat was clearly experiencing intense pleasure.现在，如果你问我，我是否愿意体验Now, if you ask me right now if I would rather experience这种强烈的快感，或一生都体验着高级的快乐intense pleasure or have a full lifetime of higher pleasure,我会觉得这种强烈的快乐是低级的I would consider intense pleasure to be low pleasure.虽然我会很享受强烈的快感，但I would right now enjoy intense pleasure but- 是的，我会的。-- yes, I would.我当然会。I certainly would.不过，如果是一生，我想，我觉得几乎大多数人都会同意，But over a lifetime, I think I would think almost a complete majority here would agree that they would rather大多数人会同意，他们宁愿选择a complete majority here would agree that they would rather一个具更高级的乐趣，而不是像小白鼠强烈的、be a human with higher pleasure than be that rat with intense pleasure而又短暂的快感for a momentary period of time.在回答你的问题前，我认为这证明了 -Now, in answer to your question, I think this proves that -或者我不会说“证明”。or I won't say "proves."我认为，密尔的理论，结论是I think the conclusion is that Mill's theory that when a majority当大多数人被问道，他们愿意做什么时of people are asked what they would rather do,他们会回答，他们选择更高级的乐趣。they will answer that they would rather engage in a higher pleasure.那么，你认为，这支持密尔的观点？So you think that this support Mill's you think Mill is onto something here?是的。I do.好的，是否有人不同意乔的观点All right, Is there anyone who disagrees with Joe and who thinks认为我们的实验驳倒了密尔的测试，that our experiment disproves Mill's test,认为并没有一种适当的方式shows that that's not an adequate way, that you can't distinguish在功利主义的框架内，区分出更高级的快乐？higher pleasures within the utilitarian framework?是吗？Yes?如果它是好是坏，就是因为人们是否跟喜欢它If whatever is good is truly just whatever people prefer,它的好坏是相对的，并没有客观的定义，it's truly relative and there's no objective definition,那么，就会有些人更喜欢Simpsons。then there will be some society where people prefer Simpsons more.任何人都可以欣赏Simpsons，但我认为Anyone can appreciate The Simpsons but I think it does take education我们需要经过学习，才能欣赏莎士比亚。to appreciate Shakespeare as much.好的，你说需要学习All right, you're saying it takes education才能欣赏真正更高级的事情。to appreciate higher true things.密尔观点是，更高级的快乐确实需要Mill's point is that the higher pleasures do require经过培养、欣赏和教育。cultivation and appreciation and education.他不否认这点。He doesn't dispute that.但是，一旦被培养和教育，人们将会看到，But once having been cultivated and educated, people will see,不但可以看到高级和低级的快乐不同，not only see the difference between higher and lower pleasures,而且，事实上人们会选择更高级的，而非低级的but will actually prefer the higher to the lower.你能找到约翰密尔的一段很著名的话You find this famous passage from John Stuart Mill.“宁可像人类那样饥渴，也不要像猪一样饱足"It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied;宁可像让苏格拉底饿着，也不要把一个傻瓜喂饱。better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.而且，如果傻瓜或猪有不同的意见，And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion,这是因为他们只看到自己的那一面。“it is because they only know their side of the question."所以在这里，你试图去区分So here, you have an attempt to distinguish高级和低级的乐趣。higher from lower pleasures.因此，是去艺术博物馆，还是呆在沙发上So going to an art museum or being a couch potato喝着啤酒，在家看电视。and swilling beer, watching television at home.有时候，密尔也认同，我们可能会屈从于诱惑Sometimes, Mill agrees, we might succumb to the temptation选择了后者，选择了做电视迷 （呆在沙发上）to do the latter, to be couch potatoes.但即使在我们出于怠惰而这样做的时候，But even when we do that out of indolence and sloth,我们知道，我们在博物馆里凝视着Rembrandts的作品时we know that the pleasure we get gazing at Rembrandts in the museum那是更高级的乐趣，因为我们已经体验过这两种乐趣is actually higher because we've experienced both,看Rembrandts的作品是更高级的享受and it is a higher pleasure gazing at Rembrandts因为它运用到了人类更高级的能力。because it engages our higher human faculties.密尔是怎样回答有关个人权利的争议的呢？What about Mill's attempt to reply to the objection about individual rights?从某种意义上说，他使用了相同的论点，In a way, he uses the same kind of argument,第五章有讲到。and this comes out in chapter five.他说：“我反对任何主张假想出一个He says, "I dispute the pretensions of any theory which sets up关于正义的标准，而不是建立在效用的基础上”an imaginary standard of justice not grounded on utility."尽管如此，他认为正义是建立在效益上But still, he considers justice grounded on utility to be what he calls被他称作“是主要的、无可比拟、最神圣的"the chief part and incomparably, the most sacred所有道德的约束力”and binding part of all morality."因此，公正是更高级的，个人权利是优先的，So justice is higher, individual rights are privileged,这并不是从功利主义的假设引申出来的but not for reasons that depart from utilitarian assumptions.正义是一种名义，为了一定的道德准则Justice is a name, for certain moral requirements,其中，集体的效益是更高级的which, regarded collectively, stand higher in the scale社会利益是更重要的of social utility and are, therefore, of more paramount比其他任何义务都高级。obligation than any others.因此，正义，它是神圣的。So justice, it is sacred.这是先决的。它是优先的。It's prior. It's privileged.它不是一件容易兑换的东西It isn't something that can easily be traded off against lesser things.但密尔声称，最终都归结于功利主义But the reason is ultimately, Mill claims, a utilitarian reason一旦你考虑到人类长远的利益，once you consider the long-run interests of humankind,我们全人类的进步。of all of us as progressive beings.如果我们服从正义，如果我们尊重权利，If we do justice and if we respect rights,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.这个观点有说服力吗？或者说，尽管密尔没有表面承认Well, is that convincing or is Mill actually, without admitting it,走出了功利主义的论调stepping outside utilitarian considerations in arguing for为了区分出更高一级、更神圣的快乐qualitatively higher pleasures and for sacred或特别重要的个人权利？or especially important individual rights?我们还没有完全解答这个问题，因为要解答这个问题，We haven't fully answered that question because to answer that question,在权利和正义的情况下，in the case of rights and justice,要求我们探索其它方法，will require that we explore other ways,不是用功利主义的方法non-utilitarian ways of accounting for the basis然后再看看这些方法是否成功。of rights and then asking whether they succeed.至于边沁，他提出了功利主义As for Jeremy Bentham, who launched utilitarianism作为一种道德和法律哲学的学说，as a doctrine in moral and legal philosophy,边沁在1832年去世，享年85岁。Bentham died in 1832 at the age of 85.但是如果你去伦敦，你可以今天就去“拜访”他。But if you go to London, you can visit him today literally.按着他的意愿，他的尸体还保留着，He provided in his will that his body be preserved,经过防腐处理，陈列在伦敦大学，embalmed, and displayed in the University of London,在玻璃柜中，用蜡做的头像where he still presides in a glass case with a wax head,穿着当年的衣服。dressed in his actual clothing.在他去世前，边沁对待自己You see, before he died, Bentham addressed himself跟他的哲学思想是一致的。to a question consistent with his philosophy.有什么能让死人活着？Of what use could a dead man be to the living?一个方法是，他说，将一个人的尸体One use, he said, would be to make one's corpse用来被解剖作研究。available to the study of anatomy.但是，对于一位伟大的哲学家，更好的保存方法是In the case of great philosophers, however, better yet to preserve