(完整word版)哈佛大学公开课《公平与正义》第2集中英文字幕

Fundingforthisprogramisprovidedby:本节目的赞助来自......Additionalfundingprovidedby:另外的赞助来自......Lasttime,wearguedabout上次,我们谈到thecaseofTheQueenv.Dudley&Stephens,女王诉Dudley和Stephens案件,thelifeboatcase,thecaseofcannibalismatsea.,.Andwiththeargumentsaboutthelifeboatinmind,带着针对这个案件所展开的一些讨论theargumentsforandagainstwhatDudleyandStephensdidinmind,带着支持和反对Dudley和Stephens所做的吃人行为的讨论,let'sturnbacktothephilosophy,theutilitarianphilosophyofJeremyBentham.让我们回头来看看Bentham的功利主义哲学.BenthamwasborninEnglandin1748.Attheageof12,hewenttoOxford.Bentham于1748年出生于英国.12岁那年,他去了牛津大学.At15,hewenttolawschool.HewasadmittedtotheBaratage1915岁时,他去了法学院.19岁就取得了律师资格butheneverpracticedlaw.但他没有从事于律师行业.Instead,hedevotedhislifetojurisprudenceandmoralphilosophy.相反,他毕生致力于法理学和道德哲学.Lasttime,webegantoconsiderBentham'sversionofutilitarianism.上一次,我们开始考虑Bentham版本的功利主义.Themainideaissimplystatedandit'sthis:简单来说其主要思想就是：Thehighestprincipleofmorality,whetherpersonalorpoliticalmorality,道德的最高原则,无论个人或政治道德,istomaximizethegeneralwelfare,orthecollectivehappiness,就是将公共福利,或集体的幸福最大化,ortheoverallbalanceofpleasureoverpain;或在快乐与痛苦的平衡中倾向快乐;inaphrase,maximizeutility.简而言之就是,功利最大化.Benthamarrivesatthisprinciplebythefollowinglineofreasoning:Bentham是由如下推理来得出这个原则的：We'reallgovernedbypainandpleasure,我们都被痛苦和快乐所控制,theyareoursovereignmasters,andsoanymoralsystem他们是我们的主宰,所以任何道德体系hastotakeaccountofthem.都要考虑到这点.Howbesttotakeaccount?Bymaximizing.如何能最好地考虑这一点?通过最大化.Andthisleadstotheprincipleofthegreatestgoodforthegreatestnumber.从此引出的的原则就是将最大利益给最多数的人的.Whatexactlyshouldwemaximize?我们究竟该如何最大化?Benthamtellsushappiness,ormoreprecisely,utility-Bentham告诉我们幸福,或者更准确地说,实用-maximizingutilityasaprinciplenotonlyforindividuals最大化效用作为一个原则不仅适用于个人butalsoforcommunitiesandforlegislators.而且还适用于社区及立法者."What,afterall,isacommunity?"Benthamasks.“毕竟,什么是社区?”Bentham问道.It'sthesumoftheindividualswhocompriseit.它是构成这个社区的所有个体的总和.Andthat'swhyindecidingthebestpolicy,这就是为什么在决定最好的政策,indecidingwhatthelawshouldbe,indecidingwhat'sjust,在决定法律应该是什么样,在决定什么是公正时,citizensandlegislatorsshouldaskthemselvesthequestion公民和立法者应该问自己的问题ifweaddupallofthebenefitsofthispolicy如果我们把这项政策所能得到的所有利益andsubtractallofthecosts,therightthingtodo,正确的做法istheonethatmaximizesthebalanceofhappinessoversuffering.就是将幸福与痛苦之间的平衡最大化地倾向幸福.That'swhatitmeanstomaximizeutility.这就是效用最大化.Now,today,Iwanttoseewhetheryouagreeordisagreewithit,现在,我想看看你们是否同意它,anditoftengoes,thisutilitarianlogic,往往有云：功利主义的逻辑,underthenameofcost-benefitanalysis,名为成本效益分析,whichisusedbycompaniesandbygovernmentsallthetime.也是被公司以及各国政府所常常使用的.Andwhatitinvolvesisplacingavalue,它的内涵是用一个价值usuallyadollarvalue,tostandforutilityonthecosts通常是由美元,来代表不同提案的效用andthebenefitsofvariousproposals.这效用是基于成本和效益得出的Recently,intheCzechRepublic,therewasaproposal最近,在捷克共和国,有一个提案toincreasetheexcisetaxonsmoking.PhilipMorris,thetobaccocompany,对吸烟增加货物税.PhilipMorris烟草公司,doeshugebusinessintheCzechRepublic.该公司在捷克共和国有着大笔生意.Theycommissionedastudy,acost-benefitanalysis他们委托了一个研究,ofsmokingintheCzechRepublic,andwhattheircost-benefit关于吸烟在捷克共和国的成本效益分析.analysisfoundwasthegovernmentgainsbyhavingCzechcitizenssmoke.他们的分析发现,捷克政府将会因公民吸烟而收益.Now,howdotheygain?现在,他们如何收益?It'struethattherearenegativeeffectstothepublicfinance确实,捷克政府的公共财政体系oftheCzechgovernmentbecausethereareincreasedhealthcare会因为吸烟人群所引发的相关疾病而增加的医疗保健开支,costsforpeoplewhodevelopsmoking-relateddiseases..Ontheotherhand,therewerepositiveeffects,这也有积极效应andthosewereaddedupontheothersideoftheledger.并且这些积极效益累加到了账簿的另一面Thepositiveeffectsincluded,forthemostpart,积极效益包括,在大多数情况下,varioustaxrevenuesthatthegovernmentderivesfromthesale政府通过卷烟产品而获得的各种税收收入,ofcigaretteproducts,butitalsoincluded但也包括healthcaresavingstothegovernmentwhenpeopledieearly,政府因为吸烟人群过早死亡而省下的医疗储蓄,例如pensionsavings--youdon'thavetopaypensionsforaslong-养老金储蓄-不必支付退休金了-andalso,savingsinhousingcostsfortheelderly.还有,老年人住房费用.Andwhenallofthecostsandbenefitswereaddedup,当把所有的成本和效益都分别加起来,thePhilipMorrisstudyfoundthatthereisanetpublicfinancegainPhilipMorris公司的研究发现,捷克共和国会有一个intheCzechRepublicof$147,000,000,$147,000,000的公共财政净增益,andgiventhesavingsinhousing,inhealthcare,andpensioncosts,并鉴于节省了住房费用,医疗保健费用,养老金费用,thegovernmentenjoyssavingsofover$1,200foreachpersonwhodiesprematurelyduetosmoking.每个因吸烟而过早死亡的人都为政府节省了$1,200.Cost-benefitanalysis.成本效益分析.Now,thoseamongyouwhoaredefendersofutilitarianism现在,你们中间,那些功利主义的捍卫者maythinkthatthisisanunfairtest.可能认为这是一种不公平的测试.PhilipMorriswaspilloriedinthepressPhilipMorris公司在新闻界遭到了嘲笑andtheyissuedanapologyforthisheartlesscalculation.他们也因为这个无情的计算而发表了道歉.Youmaysaythatwhat'smissinghereissomethingthattheutilitarian你可能会说,功利主义在这里可以轻易弥补一个疏漏caneasilyincorporate,namelythevaluetotheperson它没有正确评估人的价值andtothefamiliesofthosewhodiefromlungcancer.以及那些因为肺癌而死亡的人的家属的损失.Whataboutthevalueoflife?如何评估生命价值?Somecost-benefitanalysesincorporateameasureforthevalueoflife.一些成本效益分析的确纳入了对生命价值的评估.OneofthemostfamousoftheseinvolvedtheFordPintocase.其中最有名的要数FordPinto案件.Didanyofyoureadaboutthat?你们有没有阅读过这个案件?Thiswasbackinthe1970s.那是发生在20世纪70年代.DoyourememberwhattheFordPintowas,你还记得FordPinto是,akindofcar?Anybody?什么样的车么?谁能记得?Itwasasmallsubcompactvery那是一种小型车,超小型车,很受欢迎,butithadoneproblem,whichisthefueltank但它也有问题,车后座的油箱wasatthebackofthecarandinrearcollisions,少数情况下,碰撞会导致thefueltankexplodedandsomepeoplewerekilled油箱爆炸并且有些人会因此死去andsomeseverelyinjured.还有人因此严重受伤.VictimsoftheseinjuriestookFordtocourttosue.Andinthecourtcase,itturnedoutthatFord而在诉讼案件,人们发现福特原来hadlongsinceknownaboutthevulnerablefueltank早已知道油箱的脆弱andhaddoneacost-benefitanalysistodeterminewhetheritwouldbe并且已做了成本效益分析,以确定是否worthittoputinaspecialshieldthatwould值得来放入一个特殊的盾牌protectthefueltankandpreventitfromexploding.用来保护油箱并防止它爆炸.Theydidacost-benefitanalysis.他们做了成本效益分析.ThecostperparttoincreasethesafetyofthePinto,FordPinto,theycalculatedat$11.00perpart.他们算出,要每部件$11.00.Andhere's--thiswasthecost-benefitanalysisthatemergedinthetrial.这里-这就是当时审判中出示的成本效益分析.Elevendollarsperpartat12.5millioncarsandtrucks每件11美元,乘以12.5万辆轿车和卡车cametoatotalcostof$137milliontoimprovethesafety.得到一个总成本,需要13700万美元来改善安全性.Butthentheycalculatedthebenefitsofspendingallthismoney不过,他们随后计算了一下花这笔钱来改善安全性的收益率onasafercarandtheycounted180deaths(如果不花这笔钱来改善安全,)假设会导致180人死亡andtheyassignedadollarvalue,$200,000perdeath,他们对此用美元价值来代替,每个死去的人赔偿$200,000180injuries,$67,000,andthenthecoststorepair,180人受伤的赔偿为每人$67,000,然后是维修受损车的费用,thereplacementcostfor2,000vehicles,2000辆车,itwouldbedestroyedwithoutthesafetydevice$700pervehicle.由于没有安装安全设施,每辆车将会需要$700来维修.Sothebenefitsturnedouttobeonly$49.5million结论是总效益只有$49.5million(相对于修复安全隐患总成本需要$137million)andsotheydidn'tinstallthedevice.因此他们没有安装那个安全设备.Needlesstosay,whenthismemoofthe毫无疑问,福特汽车公司的这个成本效益分析备忘录FordMotorCompany'scost-benefitanalysiscameoutinthetrial,在审判中出现时,itappalledthejurors,whoawardedahugesettlement.震惊了陪审团,也因此裁定了福特公司巨大的赔偿金额.Isthisacounterexampletotheutilitarianideaofcalculating?这是一个功利主义计算的反例么?BecauseFordincludedameasureofthevalueoflife.因为福特引入了对生命价值的评估.Now,whoherewantstodefendcost-benefitanalysis好,这里有谁想针对这一明显反例fromthisapparentcounterexample?来捍卫成本效益分析?Whohasadefense?谁来辩护?Ordoyouthinkthiscompletelydestroysthewhole或者你认为这一反例已经完全摧毁了utilitariancalculus?Yes?功利主义计算?你来Well,Ithinkthatonceagain,they'vemadethesamemistake嗯,我想再次指出,他们犯了同样的错误thepreviouscasedid,thattheyassignedadollarvalue和以前的情况一样,他们对人的生命赋予tohumanlife,andonceagain,一个美元为单位的价值,同样的,theyfailedtotakeaccountthingslikesuffering他们没有考虑到家属的痛苦和损失andemotionallossesbythefamilies.诸如此类的因素.Imean,familieslostearningsbuttheyalsolostalovedone我的意思是,家庭损失了收入来源,但他们也失去了爱人andthatismorevaluedthan$200,000.这些的价值远远超过$200,000的.Rightand--wait,wait,wait,that'sgood.What'syourname?好的-等等,等等,等等,很好.你叫什么名字?JulieRoteau.JulieRoteau.Soif$200,000,Julie,istoolowafigure因此,Julie,如果$200,000是个太低的金额,becauseitdoesn'tincludethelossofalovedone因为它不包括失去爱人andthelossofthoseyearsoflife,whatwouldbe-以及那些在没有亲人的岁月里的损失,你认为whatdoyouthinkwouldbeamoreaccuratenumber?更准确的金额是多少?Idon'tbelieveIcouldgiveanumber.Ithinkthatthissortofanalysis我不认为,我可以对此给出一个金额.我认为这类分析shouldn'tbeappliedtoissuesofhumanlife.不适用于人类生命相关的问题.Ithinkitcan'tbeusedmonetarily.我认为不能用金钱来衡量.Sotheydidn'tjustputtoolowanumber,Juliesays.因此,Julie认为,他们不只是金额定的太低.Theywerewrongtotrytoputanynumberatall.他们压根就不应该用金额来衡量.Allright,let'shearsomeonewho-Youhavetoadjustforinflation.好吧,让我们听听还有谁-Youhavetoadjustforinflation.(这个金额)要根据通货膨胀进行调整.Allright,fairenough.好吧,很公平.Sowhatwouldthenumberbenow?那么现在这个金额将是?Thiswas35yearsago.这发生在35年前.Twomilliondollars.两百万美元.Twomilliondollars?Youwouldputtwomillion?200?200万Andwhat'syourname?你的名字是?VoytekVoytekVoyteksayswehavetoallowforinflation.Voytek说,我们必须允许通货膨胀.Weshouldbemoregenerous.我们应该更慷慨些.Thenwouldyoubesatisfiedthatthisistherightwayof然后,你认为这就是考虑这个问题的thinkingaboutthequestion?正确的方式么?Iguess,unfortunately,itisfor-我想,不幸的是,现在-thereneedstobeanumberputsomewhere,like,I'mnotsure我们需要有一个金额,我不确定whatthatnumberwouldbe,butIdoagreethat合适的金额是多少,但我同意therecouldpossiblybeanumberputonthehumanlife.对人类生命定一个金额是可行的.Allright,soVoyteksays,andhere,hedisagreeswithJulie.好的,Voytek说,他不同意Julie.Juliesayswecan'tputanumberonhumanlife朱莉认为,我们不能在成本效益分析中forthepurposeofacost-benefitanalysis.Voyteksayswehavetobecausewehavetomakedecisionssomehow.Voytek认为,我们必须这样做因为我们无论如何需要作出某种决定.Whatdootherpeoplethinkaboutthis?其他人觉得呢?Isthereanyonepreparedtodefendcost-benefitanalysis这里有人打算为能足够准确的成本效益分析辩护么?hereasaccurateasdesirable?Yes?Goahead.好?请继续.IthinkthatifFordandothercarcompanies我认为,如果福特和其他汽车公司didn'tusecost-benefitanalysis,they'deventuallygooutofbusiness没有使用成本效益分析,他们会最终歇业becausetheywouldn'tbeabletobeprofitableandmillionsofpeople因为他们将无法盈利,(从而导致)数百万的人wouldn'tbeabletousetheircarstogettojobs,将无法使用这些汽车去上班,toputfoodonthetable,tofeedtheirchildren.(没钱)购买餐桌上的食物,(没钱)来喂养孩子.SoIthinkthatifcost-benefitanalysisisn'temployed,因此,我认为,如果不利用成本效益分析,thegreatergoodissacrificed,inthiscase.在这种情况下,(我们将会)牺牲更大的利益.Allright,letmeadd.What'syourname?好吧,让我来补充.你叫什么名字?Raul.Raul.Raul,therewasrecentlyastudydoneaboutcellphoneusebyadriverRaul,最近有一项研究表明,关于开车时驾驶者使用手机whenpeoplearedrivingacar,andtherewasadebate有一场辩论,关于这种行为whetherthatshouldbebanned.是否应被禁止.Yeah.是啊。Andthefigurewasthatsome2,000peopledieasaresult结论是每年大约有2000人ofaccidentseachyearusingcellphones.因此而死亡.Andyet,thecost-benefitanalysiswhichwasdonebythe然而,哈佛风险分析中心CenterforRiskAnalysisatHarvardfoundthat(针对此事)所做的成本效益分析发现ifyoulookatthebenefitsofthecellphoneuse如果你看看使用手机所得到的好处andyouputsomevalueonthelife,itcomesoutaboutthesame如果你将生命设定一个金额,结论也是相同的.becauseofthee