2022年公正：该如何做是好？中英文字幕对照整理校订版docx

1、Justice: Whats the Right Thing to Do.Episode Two 其次集PART ONE: PUTTING A PRICE TAG ON LIFE 第一部分：给生命定一个价格Today, companies and governments often use Jeremy Bentham utilitarian logic 今日, 企业和政府常常在“ 成本效益分析”的名under the name of “-benefit analysis.” Sandel presents some contemporary cases 义下使用杰里米边沁的功利主义规律；桑德

2、尔in which cost -benefit analysis was used to put a dollar value on human life. The cases 演示了几个当代的给人的生命定价的成本效益give rise to several objections to the utilitarian logic of seeking 分析案例； 这些案例引起了几个对“ 为最多数人the greatest number. ” Should we always give more weight to the happiness of a 的最大好处”的功利主义规律反对的看法；即使

3、majority, even if the majority is cruel or ignoble. Is it possible to sum up and 多数人是残酷而不光荣的,我们也应当总是更重compare all values using a common measure like money.视多数人的幸福吗？是否可以用通常的尺度比 如金钱来汇总和比较全部的价值？PART TWO: HOW TO MEASURE PLEASURE 其次部分：如何测量幸福Sandel introduces J.S. Mill, a utilitarian philosopher who attem

4、pts to defend 桑德尔介绍了 J.S.穆勒,功利主义哲学家,他试utilitarianism against the objections raised by critics of the doctrine. Mill argues that 图为功利主义辩护, 和该理论的批判者的反对声seeking “the greatest good for the greatest number” is compatible with protecting 音对抗；他的论调是“ 为最多数人的最大好处”individual rights, and that utilitarianism can

5、 make room for a distinction between 是和爱护个体权益相兼容的,而且功利主义可以higher and lower pleasures. Millidea is that the higher pleasure is always the 为区分高级的和低级的乐趣供应空间；穆勒的观pleasure preferred by a well-informed majority. Sandel tests this theory by playing 点是高级的乐趣总是被见多识广的大多数人所video clips from three very different

6、forms of entertainment: Shakespeare Hamlet , 宠爱；桑德尔通过播放三种不同形式的视频片段the reality show Fear Factor, and The Simpsons. Students debate which experience 来检验这个理论： 莎士比亚的哈姆莱特,恐惧因provides the higher pleasure, and whether Milldefense of utilitarianism is 素真人秀以及辛普森一家,同学们争辩哪一种体successful. 验供应了更高级的乐趣,以及穆勒的辩护是否是胜利

7、的；1 Funding for this program is provided by: 本节目由以下组织Additional funding provided by: 和以下个人供应赞助Last time, we argued about the case of The Queen vs. Dudley & Stephens, 上次, 我们谈到女王诉Dudley和Stephens案件, the lifeboat case, the case of cannibalism at sea. 那个救生艇上, 海上吃人的案件. And with the arguments about the lif

8、eboat in mind, the arguments for and against 以及针对这个案件所绽开的一些争论,并列举了 Dudley和what Dudley and Stephens did in mind, Stephens没有考虑到的支持和反对的看法；lets turn back to the philosophy, the utilitarian philosophy of Jeremy Bentham. 让我们回头来看看Jeremy Bentham 的功利主义哲学. Bentham was born in England in 1748. At the age of 12

9、, he went to Oxford. Bentham于1748年诞生于英国.12岁那年, 他去了牛津高校. At 15, he went to law school. He was admitted to the Bar at age 19, 15岁时,他去了法学院.19 岁就取得了大律师资格but he never practiced law. 但他从来没有从事于法律Instead, he devoted his life to jurisprudence and moral philosophy. Last time, we began to consider Benthams ver

10、sion of utilitarianism. 相反, 他毕生致力于判例法和道德哲学 上一次,我们开头摸索Bentham版本的功利主义. The main idea is simply stated and its this: 简洁来说其主要思想就是：The highest principle of morality, whether personal or political morality, 道德的最高原就, 无论个人或政治道德is to maximize the general welfare, or the collective happiness, or the overall b

11、alance of pleasure over pain; 就是将一般人的福利 , 或集体的幸福最大化或在欢乐与痛楚的权衡中取得总体优势in a phrase, maximize utility. 简而言之就是, 功利最大化. Bentham arrives at this principle by the following line of reasoning: Bentham是由如下理由来得出这个原就的：Were all governed by pain and pleasure, 我们都被痛楚和欢乐所掌握they are our sovereign masters, and so any

12、 moral system has to take account of 他们是我们的主宰, 所以任何道德体系都要考虑到这点 . 如them. How best to take account. By maximizing. 何以最优化考虑.通过最大化. And this leads to the principle of the greatest good for the greatest number. 从今引出的原就就是将最好的东西最大化What exactly should we maximize. 我们到底该如何最大化Bentham tells us happiness, or mo

13、re precisely, utility - maximizing utility as a principle Bentham告知我们幸福,或者更精确地说,有用-最大化效用not only for individuals but also for communities and for legislators. 作为一个原就不仅适用于个人而且仍适用于社区及立法者What, after all, is a community. Bentham asks. “ 到底什么是社区.” Bentham问道. Its the sum of the individuals who comprise it

14、. 它是组成这个社区的全部个体的总和And thats why in deciding the best policy, 这就是为什么在打算什么是最好的政策in deciding what the law should be, in deciding whats just, 在打算法律应当是什么样 , 在打算什么是公正时citizens and legislators should ask themselves the question if we add up all of the 公民和立法者应当问自己的问题,假如我们把这项政策所能benefits of this policy and s

15、ubtract all of the costs, the right thing to do is the one that 得到的全部利益减去全部的损耗 ,正确的做法就是将幸福相maximizes the balance of happiness over suffering. 对于痛楚做一个最大化的平稳2 Thats what it means to maximize utility. 这就是效用最大化. Now, today, I want to see whether you agree or disagree with it, 现在, 我想看看您是否同意它and it often

16、goes, this utilitarian logic, 往往有云：功利主义的规律under the name of cost-benefit analysis, 名为成本效益分析, which is used by companies and by governments all the time. 也是被公司以及各国政府所常常使用的And what it involves is placing a value, usually a dollar value, to stand for utility on the 当它涉及到价值时, 通常是由美元, 来代表成本以及效益costs and

17、the benefits of various proposals. Recently, in the Czech Republic, there was a proposal to increase the excise tax on 最近, 在捷克共和国,有人建议对吸烟增加消费税 . 菲利普莫smoking. Philip Morris, the tobacco company, does huge business in the Czech 里斯烟草公司, 在捷克共和国有大笔的生意Republic. They commissioned a study, a cost-benefit an

18、alysis of smoking in the Czech 他们托付了一个争论 , 来做吸烟在捷克共和国的成本效益Republic, and what their cost-benefit analysis found was the government gains by 分析. 他们的分析发觉, 政府将会因捷克公民吸烟而收益having Czech citizens smoke. Now, how do they gain. 那么, 他们如何收益. Its true that there are negative effects to the public finance of the

19、Czech government 的确, 捷克政府的公共财政会由于吸烟人群所引发的相关疾because there are increased health care costs for people who develop 病而增大的医疗保健开支 , 从而受到负面影响 . 另一方面,smoking-related diseases. On the other hand, there were positive effects and those 在帐册的另一端, 也有着累计起来的积极影响were added up on the other side of the ledger. The po

20、sitive effects included, for the most part, various tax revenues that the 积极影响包括, 在大多数情形下, 政府通过出售卷烟产品而government derives from the sale of cigarette products, but it also included health 获得的各种税收收入 , 但也包括政府由于吸烟人群过早死care savings to the government when people die early, pension savings - you dont 亡而省下的医

21、疗储蓄 , 例如养老金储蓄- 不必支付退休金了have to pay pensions for as long - and also, savings in housing costs for the elderly. 仍有, 老人住房储蓄费用. And when all of the costs and benefits were added up, 当把全部的花费和收益都分别加起来the Philip Morris study found that there is a net public finance gain in the Czech 菲利普莫里斯公司的争论发觉 , 捷克共和国会有

22、产生Republic of $147,000,000, and given the savings in housing, in health care, and $ 147000000的公共财政净增益, 并鉴于节约了住房储蓄pension costs, the government enjoys savings of over $1,200 for each person who 医疗保健, 养老金费用, 每个因吸烟而过早死亡的人都为政dies prematurely due to smoking. Cost-benefit analysis. 府节约了$1,200. 成本效益分析. Now

23、, those among you who are defenders of utilitarianism may think that this is an 现在, 你们中间,那些功利主义的捍卫者可能认为这是一种unfair test. 不公正的测试. Philip Morris was pilloried in the press and they issued an apology for this heartless 菲利普莫里斯公司在媒体中遭到了嘲笑他们也由于这个无calculation. 情的运算而发表了赔礼You may say that whats missing here i

24、s something that the utilitarian can easily 你可能会说,功利主义在这里可以轻易补偿一个疏漏,它没incorporate, namely the value to the person and to the families of those who die from 有正确评估上人的价值,以及那些由于肺癌而死亡的人的家lung cancer. 属的缺失. 3 What about the value of life. 如何评估生命价值. Some cost-benefit analyses incorporate a measure for the

25、value of life. 一些成本效益分析的确纳入了对生命价值的评估One of the most famous of these involved the Ford Pinto case. 其中最出名的要数Ford Pinto案件. Did any of you read about that. 你们有没有阅读过这个案件This was back in the 1970s. 那是发生在20世纪70岁月. Do you remember what the Ford Pinto was, a kind of car. Anybody. 你仍记得Ford Pinto是, 什么样的车么.谁能记得

26、. It was a small car, subcompact car, very popular, 那是一种小型车, 超小型车,很受欢迎, but it had one problem, which is the fuel tank was at the back of the car and in rear 但它也有问题, 车后座的油箱,在少数情形下,碰撞会导致爆collisions, the fuel tank exploded and some people were killed and some severely 炸并且有些人死亡,仍有些人严峻受伤injured. Victims

27、 of these injuries took Ford to court to sue. 这些损害的受害者将福特告到法院And in the court case, it turned out that Ford had long since known about the 而在诉讼案件, 人们发觉福特原先早已知道油箱的脆弱,并vulnerable fuel tank and had done a cost-benefit analysis to determine whether it 且已做了成本效益分析 , 以确定是否值得投入来放入一个特would be worth it to put

28、 in a special shield that would protect the fuel tank and prevent 殊的盾牌来爱护油箱并防止它爆炸it from exploding. They did a cost-benefit analysis. 他们做了成本效益分析The cost per part to increase the safety of the Pinto, 增加Pinto 的安全的每部分费用they calculated at $11.00 per part. 他们算出, 要每件$ 11.00. And heres - this was the cost-

29、benefit analysis that emerged in the trial. 这里这就是当时审批中出示的成本效益分析Eleven dollars per part at 12.5 million cars and trucks came to a total cost of $137 每件11美元,乘以12.5万辆轿车和卡车得到一个总成本million to improve the safety. 要13700万美元来改善安全. But then they calculated the benefits of spending all this money on a safer ca

30、r and 不过, 随后他们运算了花这笔钱的收益,假设会导致180人they counted 180 deaths and they assigned a dollar value, $200,000 per death, 180 死亡,他们对此用美元价值来代替 , 每个死亡赔偿$202200, injuries,$67,000,and then the costs to repair, the replacement cost for 2,000 vehicles, 180人受伤的赔偿为每人 $67000,然后是修理受损车的费用it would be destroyed without th

31、e safety device $700 per vehicle. 2022辆车, 由于未安装安全设施 ,每辆车将需要$700来修理. So the benefits turned out to be only $49.5 million and so they didnt install the device. 结论是效益仅$49.5 million 因此他们没有安装那个设备 Needless to say, when this memo of the Ford Motor Companys cost-benefit analysis 毫无疑问, 福特汽车公司的这个成本效益分析备忘录在审判

32、came out in the trial, it appalled the jurors, who awarded a huge settlement. 中显现时, 震动了陪审团, 也因此引发了庞大的赔偿金额 Is this a counterexample to the utilitarian idea of calculating. 这是一个功利主义运算的反例么 Because Ford included a measure of the value of life. 由于福特引入了对生命价值的评估 Now, who here wants to defend cost-benefit a

33、nalysis from this apparent 好,这里有谁想针对这一明显反例来捍卫成本效益分析 counterexample. Who has a defense. 来辩护. . 是吗. Or do you think this completely destroys the whole utilitarian calculus. Yes. 或者你认为这一反例已经完全摧残了功利主义演算4 Well, I think that once again, they made the same mistake the previous case did, 嗯,我想再次指出, 他们犯了和之前同样

34、的错误 , 他们对人的that they assigned a dollar value to human life, and once again, they failed to take 生命指派一个美元价格 , 同样的, 他们没有考虑到家属的痛account things like suffering and emotional losses by the families. I mean, families lost . 我的意思是, 家庭收入缺失了,但他earnings but they also lost a loved one and that is more valued th

35、an $200,000. 们也失去了亲人,这是更有价值的 , 是超过了$200,000的. 10minRight and - wait, wait, wait, thats good. Whats your name. 好的-等等, 等等, 很好. 你叫什么名字. Julie Roteau. Julie Roteau. So if $200,000, Julie, is too low a figure because it doesnt include the loss of a loved 因此, 朱莉, 假如 $200,000 是个太低的金额, 由于它不包one and the loss

36、 of those years of life, what would be - what do you think would be a 括失去亲人以及那些在没有亲人的岁月里的缺失 , 你认为,more accurate number. 更精确的金额是多少I dont believe I could give a number. I think that this sort of analysis shouldnt be 我不认为, 我可以对此给出一个金额 . 我认为这类分析不applied to issues of human life. I think it cant be used m

37、onetarily. So they didnt just put too low a number, Julie says. 适用于生命相关的问题 . 我认为不能用金钱来衡量因此,Julie 认为,他们不只是金额定的太低They were wrong to try to put any number at all. 他们压根就不应当用金额来衡量All right, let hear someone who - 好吧, 让我们听听仍有谁- You have to adjust for inflation. 这个金额要依据通货膨胀进行调整You have to adjust for inflat

38、ion. 要依据通货膨胀进行调整All right, fair enough. 好吧, 很公正. So what would the number be now. 那么现在这个金额将是This was 35 years ago. 这发生在35年前. Two million dollars. 两百万美元. Two million dollars. You would put two million. 200万美元. 你认为是200万. And whats your name. 你的名字是. Voytek Voytek Voytek says we have to allow for inflat

39、ion. Voytek说,我们必需答应通胀. We should be more generous. 我们应以更大方些. Then would you be satisfied that this is the right way of thinking about the question. 然后, 你认为这就是考虑这个问题的正确的方式么I guess, unfortunately, it is for - 我想, 不幸的是,现在- there needs to be a number put somewhere, like, Im not sure what that number wou

40、ld , 我不确定合适的金额是多少 ,但我同be, but I do agree that there could possibly be a number put on the human life. 意对人类生命设置一个金额是可行的All right, so Voytek says, and here, he disagrees with Julie. Julie says we cant put a 好的,Voytek说, 他不同意Julie. 朱莉认为, 我们不能在成number on human life for the purpose of a cost-benefit analy

41、sis. 本效益分析中对人的生命设置金额Voytek says we have to because we have to make decisions somehow. Voytek认为,无论如何要做打算所以我们必需这样做；5 What do other people think about this. 其他人觉得呢. Is there anyone prepared to defend cost-benefit analysis here as accurate as 这里有人准备为成本效益分析辩护么 . 好. 请连续. desirable. Yes. Go ahead. I think

42、that if Ford and other car companies 我认为, 假如福特和其他汽车公司didnt use cost-benefit analysis, theyd eventually go out of business 没有使用成本效益分析 , 他们会最终歇业because they wouldnt be able to be profitable and millions of people 由于他们将无法盈利 , 从而导致数百万的人wouldnt be able to use their cars to get to jobs, 将无法受聘于这些汽车公司to put

43、 food on the table, to feed their children. So I think that if cost-benefit analysis isnt employed, the greater good is sacrificed, in this case. 没钱购买餐桌上的食物 , 没钱来喂养孩子. 因此, 我认为, 假如不利用成本效益分析 在这种情形下, 我们将会 牺牲更大的利益. All right, let me add. Whats your name. 好吧, 让我来补充. 你叫什么名字. Raul. Raul. Raul, there was re

44、cently a study done about cell phone use by a driver when people Raul,最近有一项争论说明 ,关于开车时驾驶者使用手机有are driving a car, and there was a debate whether that should be banned. 一场辩论, 关于这种行为是否应被禁止Yeah. 是啊. And the figure was that some 2,000 people die as a result of accidents each year 结论是每年大约有2022人因这种行为而死亡usi

45、ng cell phones. And yet, the cost-benefit analysis which was done by the Center for Risk Analysis at 然而, 哈佛风险分析中心针对此事所做的成本效益分析发Harvard found that if you look at the benefits of the cell phone use and you put some 现假如你看看使用手机所得到的好处假如你将生命设置一value on the life, it comes out about the same because of the

46、enormous economic 个金额,结论也是相同的. 由于它能够使驾驶者能够充分利benefit of enabling people to take advantage of their time, not waste time, be able to 用时间来获得庞大的经济利益 , 不需要铺张时间,就可以进make deals and talk to friends and so on while theyre driving. 行交易,与伴侣交谈等等Doesnt that suggest that its a mistake to try to put monetary figu

47、res on questions of 这是不是说明, 在涉及生命的问题中试图用货币数字来衡量human life. 是个错误的尝试. Well, I think that if the great majority of people try to derive maximum utility out of a 嗯,我认为, 假如大多数人试图获得最大的效用 , 例如用手service, like using cell phones and the convenience that cell phones provide, that 机和手机所供应的便利 , 这种牺牲是必要的. sacrifi

48、ce is necessary for satisfaction to occur. Youre an outright utilitarian. 你是一个完全功利主义者Yes. Okay. 是.好吧. All right then, one last question, Raul. 那么好吧, 最终一个问题,Raul. - Okay. -好. And I put this to Voytek, what dollar figure should be put on human life to decide 我问了Voytek同样的问题, 在打算是否应当禁止使用手机whether to ban

49、 the use of cell phones. 时, 对人类生命的合理金额评估应当是多少6 Well, I dont want to arbitrarily calculate a figure, 嗯,我不想任凭说出一个金额I mean, right now. I think that - 我的意思是,现在. 我认为- You want to take it under advisement. 你肯定要深思熟虑吗Yeah, I take it under advisement. 是的, 我要好好考虑一下. But what, roughly speaking, would it be. Yo

50、u got 2,300 deaths. 但是, 粗略地讲,将会是多少. 例如有2,300人死亡. - Okay. -好. You got to assign a dollar value to know whether you want to prevent those deaths by , 才能知道是否应当通过禁止在车内使banning the use of cell phones in cars. 用手机来阻挡那些死亡- Okay. -好. So what would your hunch be. How much. A million. 所以, 你觉得会是多少呢. 多少钱. 100万.

51、 Two million. Two million was figure. 200万. 200万是Voytek的数字. - Yeah. -是啊. Is that about right. 对么. - Maybe a million. -或许100万元. A million. 100万. - Yeah. -是啊. You know, that good. Thank you. 恩,很好. 感谢. -Okay. -好吧. So, these are some of the controversies that arise these days from cost-benefit 因此, 这些天有一

52、些争议,针对成本效益分析,特殊是那些涉analysis, especially those that involve placing a dollar value on everything to be added 及到将全部东西都设置一个金额的成本效益分析 . 那么, 现up. Well, now I want to turn to your objections, 在我想听听反对方to your objections not necessarily to cost-benefit analysis specifically, 详细而言, 你不肯定要反对成本效益分析because thats

53、 just one version of the utilitarian logic in practice today, 由于这只是如今功利主义的其中一个版本而已but to the theory as a whole, to the idea that the right thing to do, the just basis for policy and law is to maximize utility. 但作为一个整体的理论 , 就是说做一个正确的事公正的基础就是在政策和法律上将效用最大化How many disagree with the utilitarian approach

54、 to law and to the common good. 有多少人不同意将功利主义应用于法律和共同利益How many agree with it. So more agree than disagree. 有多少人同意. 好, 同意的比不同意多So lets hear from the critics. Yes. 恩,让我们听听批判. 请. My main issue with it is that I feel like you cant say that just because someones in the 我对它的主要看法是,你不能说仅仅由于一些人是少数派minority,

55、what they want and need is less valuable than someone who is in the 他们想要的东西和需要就要比那些占大多数的价值低majority. So I guess I have an issue with the idea that the greatest good for the 以我认为主要看法是 , 为最大多数人谋求最大的利益依旧是greatest number is okay because there are still - 对的- what about people who are in the lesser numbe

56、r. 7 s not fair to them.但那些占少数的人们怎么办呢 . 这样,对他们不公正. They didnt have any say in where they wanted to be. 当他们想表达却没有任何发言权All right. Thats an interesting objection. 好的. 这是一个好玩的反对Youre worried about the effect on the minority. 你担忧对少数人的影响Yes. 是. Whats your name, by the way. 你叫什么名字, 顺便说一句. Anna. Anna. Who h

57、as an answer to Annas worry about the effect on the minority. 是谁回答Anna的担忧. 关于对少数人的影响What do you say to Anna. 你对Anna的回应是. Um, she said that the minority is valued less. 嗯,她说, 少数人的价值少. I dont think thats the case because individually, 我不认为是这种情形 , 由于个体, the minoritys value is just the same as the indiv

58、idual of the majority. 少数人的价值和作为多数人的个人是一样的Its just that the numbers outweigh the minority. 多数派只是数字大于少数. And I mean, at a certain point, you have to make a decision and Im sorry for the 我的意思是,在某一点, 你必需做出打算很愧疚 , 少数派. 但minority but sometimes, its for the general, for the greater good. 有时, 必需为大多数谋求更大的利益

59、For the greater good. Anna, what do you say. 为更大的利益. Anna,你怎么说. Whats your name. 你叫什么名字. Yang-Da. Yang-Da. What do you say to Yang-Da. Yang-Da says you just have to add up peoples 你怎么回应Yang-Da. Yang-Da说, 你只需要将人们偏好累加preferences and those in the minority do have their preferences weighed. 起来,少数人的偏好也的确

60、有相应的权重 并非无发言权. Can you give an example of the kind of thing youre worried about when you say 你能对这类事情举个例子么 . 您担忧,你说你担忧功利主义youre worried about utilitarianism violating the concern or respect due the minority. 没有关注或者敬重少数派And give an example. 并且举一个例子. Okay. So, well, with any of the cases that weve talk