哈弗大学 公开课 《公正》 03 字幕

1
00:00:00,180 --> 00:00:04,180
 阿基米德曾说
 
2
00:00:04,180 --> 00:00:08,180
 “给我一个支点，我能撬起整个地球”
 
3
00:00:08,180 --> 00:00:13,180
 如果你有好的研究想法
 
4
00:00:13,180 --> 00:00:16,180
 希望别人推你一把
 
5
00:00:16,180 --> 00:00:20,180
 “一五一十” 资助行动 也许能帮到你
 详情可留意www.aprilseason.com
  
6
00:00:20,180 --> 00:00:24,180
 你需要的也许就是这个支点
 
7
00:00:24,180 --> 00:00:26,180
选择的自由
 Free to Choose
8
00:00:27,780 --> 00:00:29,080
 欲观看、下载高清视频，可移步
 www.AprilSeason.com
9
00:00:30,180 --> 00:00:31,910
 我们上次结尾的时候
 When we finished last time,
10
00:00:36,000 --> 00:00:37,780
 我们讨论到，约翰密尔
 we were looking at John Stuart Mill's
11
00:00:38,510 --> 00:00:47,320
 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 Bentham's Utilitarianism.
12
00:00:48,300 --> 00:00:54,310
 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
13
00:00:54,419 --> 00:01:00,350
 在功利主义的框架下，我们可以
 to the contrary it is possible within the utilitarian framework
14
00:01:00,610 --> 00:01:03,930
 区分出高级和低级的快乐
 to distinguish between higher and lower pleasures.
15
00:01:04,030 --> 00:01:08,680
 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
16
00:01:08,780 --> 00:01:15,080
 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.
17
00:01:15,920 --> 00:01:21,490
 而我们检验的结果，似乎质疑了密尔这种区分
 And the results of our experiment seem to call into question
18
00:01:24,899 --> 00:01:32,820
 因为你们之中许多人都更喜欢
 Mill's distinction because a great many of you reported that you prefer
19
00:01:33,030 --> 00:01:37,190
 看Simpsons动画，尽管你认为莎士比亚
 the Simpsons but that you still consider Shakespeare to be
20
00:01:37,390 --> 00:01:42,120
 是更高级、更有价值的乐趣。
 the higher or the worthier pleasure.
21
00:01:42,670 --> 00:01:48,160
 这就是我们给密尔所提出的困境。
 That's the dilemma with which our experiment confronts Mill.
22
00:01:48,800 --> 00:01:54,060
 在《功利主义》的第5章，密尔试图解释
 What about Mill's attempt to account for the especially weighty character
23
00:01:54,289 --> 00:01:58,730
 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.
24
00:01:59,669 --> 00:02:07,380
 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 respect.
25
00:02:08,400 --> 00:02:10,570
 事实上，他甚至说，正义是
 In fact, he goes so far as to say that justice is
26
00:02:10,900 --> 00:02:15,080
 最神圣的部分，也是最不可比拟的
 the most sacred part and the most incomparably binding part
27
00:02:15,269 --> 00:02:16,480
 道德约束
 of morality.
28
00:02:17,150 --> 00:02:23,320
 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 Mill's defense.
29
00:02:24,459 --> 00:02:32,690
 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 the most binding part of our morality?
30
00:02:32,870 --> 00:02:35,200
 好吧，他说，因为从长远来看，
 Well, he says because in the long run,
31
00:02:36,090 --> 00:02:38,860
 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,
32
00:02:39,609 --> 00:02:43,220
 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.
33
00:02:44,519 --> 00:02:46,480
 那么，又会怎么样呢？
 Well, what about that?
34
00:02:49,590 --> 00:02:52,050
 但如果在某种情况下，我们破例地
 What if we have a case where making an exception and
35
00:02:52,280 --> 00:02:56,330
 侵犯个人权利，却从长远来看
 violating individual rights actually will make people better off
36
00:02:56,560 --> 00:02:57,170
 让人们过得更好？
 in the long run?
37
00:02:57,350 --> 00:03:00,310
 那么，这是否正确呢？
 Is it all right then to use people?
38
00:03:00,980 --> 00:03:04,120
 这可以进一步的反对
 And there is a further objection that could be raised
39
00:03:04,220 --> 00:03:07,460
 密尔关于正义和权利的论述。
 against Mill's case for justice and rights.
40
00:03:07,560 --> 00:03:10,570
 假设，从长远来算
 Suppose the utilitarian calculus in the long run
41
00:03:10,829 --> 00:03:16,010
 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 people's rights
42
00:03:17,780 --> 00:03:21,550
 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.
43
00:03:21,700 --> 00:03:24,420
 功利主义的这个解释是真正的原因吗？
 Is that the right reason?
44
00:03:24,570 --> 00:03:28,130
 这是尊重个人的唯一理由吗？
 Is that the only reason to respect people?
45
00:03:29,450 --> 00:03:32,480
 如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
46
00:03:32,590 --> 00:03:34,970
 医生把这个人的器官取出来
 the healthy patient who came in for a checkup
47
00:03:35,149 --> 00:03:37,010
 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,
48
00:03:38,179 --> 00:03:41,240
 但长远来看，会有不利影响
 there would be adverse effects in the long run.
49
00:03:41,570 --> 00:03:44,470
 人们最终会知道这件事
 Eventually, people would learn about this and
50
00:03:44,679 --> 00:03:46,910
 以后也不去做身体检查了（怕自己的器官被取出来）
 would stop going in for checkups.
51
00:03:47,369 --> 00:03:49,130
 所以，功利主义的理由是真正的原因吗？
 Is it the right reason?
52
00:03:50,480 --> 00:03:54,430
 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 won't yank the organs
53
00:03:54,660 --> 00:03:59,030
 取走器官的唯一理由吗
 out of the healthy patient that you think, well,
54
00:03:59,260 --> 00:04:05,850
 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 would be lost?
55
00:04:07,280 --> 00:04:10,520
 还是另有其因
 Or is there another reason having to do with intrinsic respect
56
00:04:10,780 --> 00:04:13,030
 要尊重个人？
 for the person as an individual?
57
00:04:13,420 --> 00:04:17,730
 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 it's not so clear
58
00:04:17,830 --> 00:04:22,430
 即使密尔的功利主义考虑到这点
 that even Mill's utilitarianism can take account of it,
59
00:04:24,570 --> 00:04:29,150
 充分研究这两个忧虑或反对的意见
 fully to examine these two worries or objections,
60
00:04:30,420 --> 00:04:35,230
 我们需要更深一层来考虑。
 to Mill's defense we need to push further.
61
00:04:36,590 --> 00:04:41,430
 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
62
00:04:42,909 --> 00:04:47,880
 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
63
00:04:48,110 --> 00:04:53,550
 关于快乐的道德判断标准？
 independent moral standards for the worth of pleasure?
64
00:04:54,919 --> 00:04:58,220
 如果是能，是什么标准？这是个问题。
 If so, what do they look like? That's one question.
65
00:04:59,440 --> 00:05:04,120
 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
66
00:05:04,330 --> 00:05:07,340
 隐性地倾向于推崇高贵
 is implicitly leaning on notions of human dignity
67
00:05:07,460 --> 00:05:12,850
 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,
68
00:05:13,710 --> 00:05:16,720
 我们需要看看，是否有一些更有力的理论
 we need to look to see whether there are some stronger theories
69
00:05:16,890 --> 00:05:22,980
 可以解释，密尔所直觉地认为的
 of rights that can explain the intuition which even Mill shares,
70
00:05:23,400 --> 00:05:26,750
 尊重个人的原因
 the intuition that the reason for respecting individuals
71
00:05:26,849 --> 00:05:34,950
 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.
72
00:05:37,820 --> 00:05:43,360
 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.
73
00:05:44,609 --> 00:05:49,710
 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
74
00:05:49,859 --> 00:05:53,570
 个人是谋求社会更大利益的工具
 instruments to be used for a larger social purpose
75
00:05:56,080 --> 00:05:58,360
 或者是为了达到效用的最大化
 or for the sake of maximizing utility,
76
00:05:59,190 --> 00:06:05,180
 个人是值得尊重的、有各自生活的独立个体
 individuals are separate beings with separate lives worthy of respect.
77
00:06:07,000 --> 00:06:10,010
 因此，根据这一理论
 And so it's a mistake, according to strong theories
78
00:06:10,210 --> 00:06:14,710
 只是把大家的偏好、价值观叠加起来
 or rights, it's a mistake to think about justice
79
00:06:14,810 --> 00:06:21,660
 来决定是否正义，是错误的
 or law by just adding up preferences and values.
80
00:06:22,169 --> 00:06:25,470
 我们今天要讨论的这个理论就是
 The strong rights theory we turn to today is
81
00:06:25,570 --> 00:06:27,510
 自由主义。
 libertarianism.
82
00:06:28,260 --> 00:06:32,580
 自由主义认真地考虑个人权利。
 Libertarianism takes individual rights seriously.
83
00:06:33,799 --> 00:06:35,550
 之所以称为自由主义，因为它说：
 It's called libertarianism because it says
84
00:06:35,840 --> 00:06:39,920
 个人的基本权利是自由
 the fundamental individual right is the right to liberty
85
00:06:42,520 --> 00:06:46,890
 正因为我们是独立的个体。
 precisely because we are separate individual beings.
86
00:06:48,659 --> 00:06:53,470
 我们不会用来充当
 We're not available to any use that the society
87
00:06:53,700 --> 00:06:57,180
 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
88
00:06:57,280 --> 00:07:00,210
 独立的个体。
 individual separate human beings.
89
00:07:01,570 --> 00:07:04,240
 我们有基本的自由权利，
 We have a fundamental right to liberty,
90
00:07:04,490 --> 00:07:10,290
 这意味着我们有权自由选择，
 and that means a right to choose freely,
91
00:07:10,760 --> 00:07:12,930
 过我们想要的生活，
 to live our lives as we please
92
00:07:13,159 --> 00:07:16,930
 只要我们同时尊重到其他人的权利
 provided we respect other people's rights to do the same.
93
00:07:17,630 --> 00:07:19,700
 这是自由主义的基本想法。
 That's the fundamental idea.
94
00:07:20,739 --> 00:07:24,120
 Robert Nozick，自由主义的哲学家之一
 Robert Nozick, one of the libertarian philosophers
95
00:07:24,320 --> 00:07:28,820
 认为
 we read for this course, puts it this way:
96
00:07:29,620 --> 00:07:31,220
 个人拥有权利。
 Individuals have rights.
97
00:07:31,479 --> 00:07:35,040
 个人权利是如此强烈和深远
 So strong and far reaching are these rights that they
98
00:07:35,130 --> 00:07:39,550
 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.
99
00:07:44,010 --> 00:07:49,580
 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
100
00:07:50,180 --> 00:07:51,750
 或国家的角色？
 or of the state?
101
00:07:52,190 --> 00:07:56,300
 大多数现代国家会做三件事
 Well, there are three things that most modern states do
102
00:07:58,299 --> 00:08:02,140
 自由主义却认为是
 that on the libertarian theory of rights are
103
00:08:02,400 --> 00:08:05,640
 非法的或不公正的。
 illegitimate or unjust.
104
00:08:06,609 --> 00:08:10,090
 其中之一就是家长式立法。
 One of them is paternalist legislation.
105
00:08:10,340 --> 00:08:13,950
 也就是通过立法来保护民众
 That's passing laws that protect people from themselves,
106
00:08:14,370 --> 00:08:18,030
 例如，安全带、摩托车头盔的立法。
 seatbelt laws, for example, or motorcycle helmet laws.
107
00:08:19,070 --> 00:08:22,080
 自由主义说，如果人们系好安全带
 The libertarian says it may be a good thing
108
00:08:22,179 --> 00:08:24,350
 这可能是件好事
 if people wear seatbelts
109
00:08:24,870 --> 00:08:28,710
 但这应该由他们自己来决定
 but that should be up to them and the state,
110
00:08:28,969 --> 00:08:32,210
 国家、政府无权强迫我们
 the government, has no business coercing them,
111
00:08:32,990 --> 00:08:38,060
 立法来要求我们系上安全带
 us, to wear seatbelts by law.
112
00:08:39,030 --> 00:08:44,780
 这是一种胁迫。所以，第一条：废除家长式立法
 It's coercion, so no paternalist legislation, number one.
113
00:08:45,040 --> 00:08:48,310
 第二：废除道德立法。
 Number two, no morals legislation.
114
00:08:48,980 --> 00:08:54,500
 许多法律试图鼓励公民培养某些道德
 Many laws try to promote the virtue of citizens
115
00:08:54,600 --> 00:09:02,260
 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.
116
00:09:03,610 --> 00:09:08,600
 自由主义说，这也是侵犯自由权的。
 Libertarian say that's also a violation of the right to liberty.
117
00:09:10,840 --> 00:09:14,000
 一个典型的例子
 Take the example of, well, a classic example
118
00:09:14,240 --> 00:09:17,300
 以促进道德的名义来立法
 of legislation authored in the name of promoting morality
119
00:09:17,400 --> 00:09:22,790
 传统上法律禁止
 traditionally have been laws that prevent sexual intimacy
120
00:09:22,910 --> 00:09:26,730
 同性恋的关系。
 between gays and lesbians.
121
00:09:27,670 --> 00:09:31,180
 自由主义说，同性恋并没有伤害到任何人
 The libertarian says nobody else is harmed,
122
00:09:31,319 --> 00:09:33,420
 没有侵犯到任何人的权利
 nobody else's rights are violated,
123
00:09:33,880 --> 00:09:38,610
 因此，国家无权
 so the state should get out of the business entirely of
124
00:09:38,850 --> 00:09:42,460
 促进美德或通过道德立法。
 trying to promote virtue or to enact morals legislation.
125
00:09:45,480 --> 00:09:51,990
 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
126
00:09:52,400 --> 00:09:58,520
 是税收等政策
 on the libertarian philosophy is any taxation or other policy
127
00:09:59,010 --> 00:10:03,270
 以达到收入的再分配的目的
 that serves the purpose of redistributing income or wealth
128
00:10:03,430 --> 00:10:06,150
 从富人流到穷人。
 from the rich to the poor.
129
00:10:07,500 --> 00:10:10,870
 如果你仔细想想，再分配是
 Redistribution is a – if you think about it,
  
130
00:10:11,160 --> 00:10:13,910
 是一种胁迫，自由主义说
 says the libertarian is a kind of coercion.
131
00:10:15,569 --> 00:10:22,260
 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,
132
00:10:23,280 --> 00:10:27,150
 从那些干得好、钱赚得多一点的人身上
 if we're talking about a democracy, from people who happen to
133
00:10:27,329 --> 00:10:29,610
 偷窃
 do very well and earn a lot of money.
134
00:10:32,060 --> 00:10:37,130
 Nozick和其他自由主义者允许
 Now, Nozick and other libertarians allow that there can be
135
00:10:37,310 --> 00:10:42,800
 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,
136
00:10:43,550 --> 00:10:46,510
 例如，国防，警察部队，
 the national defense, police force,
137
00:10:46,660 --> 00:10:50,450
 司法系统
 judicial system to enforce contracts and property rights,
138
00:10:50,660 --> 00:10:52,490
 但仅此而已。
 but that's it.
139
00:10:53,370 --> 00:11:00,380
 现在，我希望听听你们怎么看
 Now, I want to get your reactions to this third feature
140
00:11:01,240 --> 00:11:02,810
 自由主义的第三个观点
 of the libertarian view.
141
00:11:02,910 --> 00:11:10,100
 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.
142
00:11:11,079 --> 00:11:14,170
 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 what's at stake,
143
00:11:14,900 --> 00:11:19,190
 我们可以考虑一下，美国的财富分配
 consider the distribution of wealth in the United States.
144
00:11:20,459 --> 00:11:24,360
 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
145
00:11:24,589 --> 00:11:28,430
 贫富最不平等的社会
 the distribution of wealth of all the advanced democracies.
146
00:11:29,480 --> 00:11:33,040
 这是正义的还是不正义的呢？
 Now, is this just or unjust?
147
00:11:34,199 --> 00:11:36,300
 那么，自由主义又是怎样说的？
 Well, what does the libertarian say?
148
00:11:37,260 --> 00:11:43,480
 自由主义说，光从我给你的事实中你很难知道
 Libertarian says you can't know just from the facts I've just given you.
149
00:11:43,579 --> 00:11:46,980
 你不知道分配是否是公正的
 You can't know whether that distribution is just or unjust.
150
00:11:47,209 --> 00:11:51,940
 光看分配，光看结果
 You can't know just by looking at a pattern or a distribution or
151
00:11:52,120 --> 00:11:56,200
 你很难知道它是否公正。
 result whether it's just or unjust.
152
00:11:57,900 --> 00:12:00,130
 你必须知道它是怎么来的。
 You have to know how it came to be.
153
00:12:02,569 --> 00:12:05,500
 你不能只看最后的阶段，最后的结果。
 You can't just look at the end stage or the result.
154
00:12:06,670 --> 00:12:08,970
 你要看两个原则
 You have to look at two principles.
155
00:12:09,959 --> 00:12:14,770
 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.
156
00:12:14,930 --> 00:12:20,030
 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
157
00:12:20,230 --> 00:12:25,220
 他们所拥有的吗？
 to make their money fairly?
158
00:12:25,660 --> 00:12:29,270
 所以，我们需要知道它们一开始是否是公正的
 So we need to know was there justice in the initial holdings?
159
00:12:29,500 --> 00:12:32,060
 是不是他们偷了一块地，或偷窃工厂或货物
 Did they steal the land or the factory or the goods
160
00:12:32,250 --> 00:12:34,340
 才使他们得到这笔钱？
 that enabled them to make all that money?
161
00:12:35,040 --> 00:12:38,050
 如果没有，如果他们有权
 If not, if they were entitled to whatever it was
162
00:12:38,260 --> 00:12:42,370
 做一切可以让他们富裕起来的事
 that enabled them to gather the wealth,
163
00:12:43,110 --> 00:12:44,650
 第一个原则：公平竞争
 the first principle is matched.
164
00:12:45,120 --> 00:12:48,860
 第二个原则：这种收入分配是否源自
 The second principle is did the distribution arise from
165
00:12:49,069 --> 00:12:52,810
 经过大家同意、自愿的
 the operation of free consent, people buying and trading
166
00:12:52,910 --> 00:12:54,300
 自由买卖？
 on the market?
167
00:12:55,290 --> 00:12:58,900
 正如你所看到的，自由主义的思想对应于
 As you can see, the libertarian idea of justice corresponds to
168
00:12:59,180 --> 00:13:06,760
 一个公正自由市场来提供人们所需
 a free market conception of justice provided people got what they used
169
00:13:06,860 --> 00:13:13,160
 公平的，而不是偷来的
 fairly, didn't steal it, and provided the distribution results
170
00:13:13,360 --> 00:13:17,440
 人们自由地买卖，导致了这种收入分配
 from the free choice of individual's buying and selling things,
171
00:13:18,140 --> 00:13:20,130
 那么，分配是公正的。
 the distribution is just.
172
00:13:20,500 --> 00:13:22,360
 如果没有，这是不公正的。
 And if not, it's unjust.
173
00:13:25,480 --> 00:13:30,060
 为了解决这次讨论的问题，
 So let's, in order to fix ideas for this discussion,
174
00:13:30,530 --> 00:13:36,200
 我们举一个实际的例子。
 take an actual example.
175
00:13:38,620 --> 00:13:41,030
 谁是美国最富有的人？
 Who's the wealthiest person in the United States
176
00:13:41,310 --> 00:13:43,980
 全世界最富有的人？比尔盖茨。
 wealthiest person in the world? Bill Gates.
177
00:13:44,240 --> 00:13:49,650
 是的。很正确
 It is. That's right. Here he is.
178
00:13:53,620 --> 00:13:55,690
 你会感到高兴。
 You'd be happy, too.
179
00:13:55,839 --> 00:13:59,550
 他的净资产是多少？有没有人知道？
 Now, what's his net worth? Anybody have any idea?
180
00:14:02,060 --> 00:14:04,470
 这是一个很大的数字
 That's a big number.
181
00:14:04,719 --> 00:14:07,570
 克林顿执政时期，还记得有一个颇受争议的捐助者吗？
 During the Clinton years, remember there was a controversy donors?
182
00:14:07,780 --> 00:14:11,550
 他们邀请竞选的赞助商们
 Big campaign contributors were invited to stay overnight
183
00:14:11,770 --> 00:14:13,810
 在白宫里的林肯卧室过夜？
 in the Lincoln bedroom at the White House?
184
00:14:14,990 --> 00:14:18,180
 如果你捐了25000美元或以上的话
 I think if you've contributed twenty five thousand dollars or above,
185
00:14:18,750 --> 00:14:23,330
 有人计算出，这些被邀请在林肯卧室睡一晚的赞助商们
 someone figured out at the median contribution that got you invited
186
00:14:23,550 --> 00:14:25,830
 捐献数额的中位数
 to stay a night in the Lincoln bedroom,
187
00:14:26,060 --> 00:14:30,770
 比尔盖茨的财富足以让他
 Bill Gates could afford to stay in the Lincoln bedroom every night
188
00:14:30,949 --> 00:14:33,910
 在林肯卧室里睡66,000年。
 for the next sixty six thousand years.
189
00:14:39,180 --> 00:14:44,590
 也有人计算过，他的时薪
 Somebody else figured out, how much does he get paid on an hourly basis?
190
00:14:45,079 --> 00:14:49,240
 于是他们想，自从他创立了微软，
 And so they figured out, since he began Microsoft,
191
00:14:50,699 --> 00:14:55,980
 假设他每天工作14小时，这算是合理的猜测
 I suppose he worked, what 14 hours per day, reasonable guess,
192
00:14:56,810 --> 00:15:04,520
 然后用他的净财富除以他的工作时间
 and you calculate this net wealth, it turns out that his rate of pay
193
00:15:04,750 --> 00:15:13,400
 计算的结果是超过150美元，不是时薪，也不是“分薪”
 is over 150 dollars, not per hour, not per minute
194
00:15:13,630 --> 00:15:17,370
 而是秒薪超过150美元
 150 dollars, more than 150 dollars per second
195
00:15:19,380 --> 00:15:24,870
 这意味着，如果他去办公室的途中
 which means that if on his way to the office,
196
00:15:26,459 --> 00:15:30,330
 发现了街上有一张100美元的钞票，
 Gates noticed a hundred dollar bill on the street,
197
00:15:30,430 --> 00:15:33,830
 也不值得他停下捡起来。
 it wouldn't be worth his time to stop and pick it up.
198
00:15:38,240 --> 00:15:44,640
 你们大多人会，像这么富有的人，我们当然可以要他交税
 Now, most of you will say someone that wealthy surely we can tax them
199
00:15:44,979 --> 00:15:52,950
 来养活那些没饭吃，没房子住，没书读
 to meet the pressing needs of people who lack in education or lack enough
200
00:15:53,150 --> 00:15:56,030
 那些有迫切需要的人
 to eat or lack decent housing.
201
00:15:57,699 --> 00:16:00,240
 他们比 比尔盖茨更需要这些
 They need it more than he does.
202
00:16:01,699 --> 00:16:04,940
 如果你是一个功利主义者，你会怎么做？
 And if you were a utilitarian, what would you do?
203
00:16:05,170 --> 00:16:06,900
 你会采取什么税收政策？
 What tax policy would you have?
204
00:16:07,910 --> 00:16:10,370
 你很快就重新分配了，不是吗？
 You'd redistribute in a flash, wouldn't you?
205
00:16:11,859 --> 00:16:19,100
 因为你知道，一个优秀的功利主义者
 Because you would know being a good utilitarian that taking some,
206
00:16:19,479 --> 00:16:22,490
 只需要一个小数目，小到你几乎忽略了它
 a small amount, he'd scarcely going to notice it,
207
00:16:22,670 --> 00:16:25,700
 但它能给那些在底层生活的人们
 but it will make a huge improvement in the lives and in the welfare
208
00:16:25,939 --> 00:16:27,880
 带来极大的改善
 of those at the bottom.
209
00:16:28,729 --> 00:16:37,590
 但自由主义理论认为，我们不能只是简单地
 But remember, the libertarian theory says we can't just add up an
210
00:16:37,819 --> 00:16:41,590
 把所有人的偏好叠加起来
 aggregate preferences and satisfactions that way.
211
00:16:42,240 --> 00:16:47,230
 我们还要尊重个人，如果他公平地赚钱
 We have to respect persons and if he earned that money fairly without
212
00:16:47,329 --> 00:16:51,100
 不侵犯其他人的权利，根据自由主义的这两条原则，
 violating anybody else's rights in accordance with the two principles
213
00:16:51,199 --> 00:16:54,550
 公平的获取和交换财富
 of justice in acquisition and in justice in transfer,
214
00:16:54,849 --> 00:17:00,650
 强制性地收税是错误的，这一种胁迫，
 then it would be wrong, it would be a form of coercion to take it away
215
00:17:01,829 --> 00:17:05,830
 迈克尔乔丹虽然没有比尔盖茨富有
 Michael Jordan is not as wealthy as Bill Gates but he did
216
00:17:06,060 --> 00:17:07,920
 但他也过得相当不错
 pretty well for himself.
217
00:17:09,300 --> 00:17:11,860
 你想看看迈克尔乔丹。在那里
 You wanna see Michael Jordan. There he is.
218
00:17:13,710 --> 00:17:19,620
 他的年收入是3.1千万美元
 His income alone in one year was 31 million dollars and then
219
00:17:19,899 --> 00:17:23,090
 为耐克和其他公司代言，
 he made another 47 million dollars in endorsements for a Nike
220
00:17:23,379 --> 00:17:25,500
 他每年赚4.7千万美元
 and other companies.
221
00:17:25,990 --> 00:17:30,850
 因此，加起来，他的年薪7.8千万美元。
 So his income was, in one year, $78 million.
222
00:17:31,080 --> 00:17:35,580
 比方说，他收入的三分之一要用来交税
 To require him to pay, let's say, a third of his earnings to
223
00:17:35,860 --> 00:17:41,770
 来支持诸如食品、保健、住房、穷人的教育
 the government to support good causes like food and health care and
224
00:17:41,870 --> 00:17:46,990
 这是胁迫，这是不公正的。
 housing and education for the poor, that's coercion, that's unjust.
225
00:17:47,379 --> 00:17:50,490
 这侵犯了他的权利。
 That violates his rights.
226
00:17:53,470 --> 00:17:57,130
 这就是为什么收入再分配是错误的。
 And that's why redistribution is wrong.
227
00:17:57,600 --> 00:18:01,310
 现在，有多少人赞同自由主义的这种观点
 Now, how many agree with that argument, agree with the libertarian argument
228
00:18:01,520 --> 00:18:09,150
 认为为了帮助穷人而再分配是错的？
 that redistribution for the sake of trying to help the poor is wrong?
229
00:18:10,790 --> 00:18:13,250
 有多少人不同意这种观点？
 And how many disagree with that argument?
230
00:18:15,520 --> 00:18:17,510
 好吧，让我们先听听那些不同意的
 All right, let's begin with those who disagree.
231
00:18:19,669 --> 00:18:26,390
 自由主义反对再分配，有什么地方不正确？
 What's wrong with the libertarian case against redistribution?
232
00:18:28,450 --> 00:18:29,680
 是。
 Yes.
233
00:18:30,379 --> 00:18:32,530
 我认为，像迈克尔乔丹，这些人已获得了
 I think these people like Michael Jordan have received
234
00:18:32,990 --> 00:18:35,290
 我们在谈论，在一个社会里工作
 we're talking about working within a society and they receive
235
00:18:35,399 --> 00:18:39,530
 他们已经从社会中获得更多，他们有更大的责任
 a larger gift from the society and they have a larger obligation
236
00:18:39,629 --> 00:18:43,160
 来回报社会，通过再分配
 in return to give that through redistribution, you know,
237
00:18:43,340 --> 00:18:46,400
 你或许说，迈克尔乔丹和其他人一样努力地工作
 you can say that Michael Jordan may work just as hard as some who works,
238
00:18:46,600 --> 00:18:52,590
 那些洗衣服的人也每天工作12、14个小时，但乔丹却得到更多
 you know, doing laundry 12 hours, 14 hours a day, but he's receiving more.
239
00:18:52,820 --> 00:18:56,950
 我不认为这是公平的。这原本就对乔丹有利
 I don't think it's fair to say that, you know, it's all on him,
240
00:18:57,129 --> 00:19:00,060
 他固有的（天赋），和勤奋。
 on his, you know, inherent, you know, hard work.
241
00:19:00,240 --> 00:19:03,900
 好吧，让我们听听支持自由主义的声音
 All right, let's hear from defenders of libertarianism.
242
00:19:05,460 --> 00:19:09,670
 为什么在原则上，从富人身上征税来帮助穷人是错误的？
 Why would it be wrong in principle to tax the rich to help the poor?
243
00:19:09,899 --> 00:19:10,870
 请继续。
 Go ahead.
244
00:19:11,919 --> 00:19:14,330
 我叫Joe。我收集滑板
 My name is Joe and I collect skateboards.
245
00:19:14,550 --> 00:19:16,170
 我有100快滑板。
 I've since bought a hundred skateboards.
246
00:19:16,360 --> 00:19:18,220
 假设，我生活在一个人口100的社会里
 I live in a society of a hundred people.
247
00:19:18,419 --> 00:19:20,360
 我是唯一一个拥有滑板的
 I'm the only one with skateboards.
248
00:19:20,460 --> 00:19:22,160
 突然，大家决定他们想要一个滑板。
 Suddenly, everyone decides they want a skateboard.
249
00:19:22,389 --> 00:19:23,750
 他们来到我家，
 They come to my house, they take my
250
00:19:23,929 --> 00:19:25,970
 拿走我的那99块滑板
 they take 99 of my skateboards.
251
00:19:26,210 --> 00:19:27,780
 我认为这是不公正的。
 I think that is unjust.
252
00:19:27,879 --> 00:19:31,590
 我认为在某些情况下，
 Now, I think in certain circumstances it becomes necessary
253
00:19:31,690 --> 00:19:34,520
 有必要忽视或纵容这种不正义
 to overlook that unjustness, perhaps condone that injustice
254
00:19:34,620 --> 00:19:37,760
 例如，那个在船上活着被吃掉的男童（第一节的案例）
 as in the case of the cabin boy being killed for food.
255
00:19:37,909 --> 00:19:41,620
 当人们在死亡的边缘，忽视不公正也许是必要的
 If people are on the verge of dying, perhaps it is necessary to
256
00:19:41,830 --> 00:19:43,660
 但我认为
 overlook that injustice, but I think it's important
257
00:19:43,760 --> 00:19:46,170
 要记住，我们必须承认拿走他人的财物或资产
 to keep in mind that we're still committing injustice
258
00:19:46,370 --> 00:19:48,310
 是不公平
 by taking people's belongings or assets.
259
00:19:48,510 --> 00:19:51,000
 你是说，向迈克尔乔丹征取33%的税
 Are you saying that taxing Michael Jordan, say,
260
00:19:51,200 --> 00:20:00,110
 贡献给公益事业是一种盗窃？
 at a 33 percent tax rate for good causes to feed the hungry is theft?
261
00:20:00,429 --> 00:20:02,660
 我认为这是不公正的。
 I think it's unjust.
262
00:20:02,860 --> 00:20:07,310
 是的，我相信这是盗窃，也许有必要接纳这种盗窃
 Yes, I do believe it's theft but perhaps it is necessary to condone that theft.
263
00:20:07,919 --> 00:20:08,970
 但它确实是一种盗窃。
 But it's theft.
264
00:20:09,200 --> 00:20:10,330
 是。
 Yes.
265
00:20:17,770 --> 00:20:19,710
 为什么是一种盗窃，Joe？
 Why is it theft, Joe?
266
00:20:19,889 --> 00:20:21,020
 因为 -
 Because --
267
00:20:21,240 --> 00:20:23,600
 为什么，像你收集滑板
 Why is it like your collection of skateboards?
268
00:20:24,070 --> 00:20:27,780
 因为，至少在我看来
 It's theft because, or at least, in my opinion and by
269
00:20:28,120 --> 00:20:33,690
 自由主义认为，公平获得金钱，这笔钱就属于他
 the libertarian opinion he earned that money fairly and it belongs to him.
270
00:20:33,780 --> 00:20:36,370
 因此，从他身上取走就可以定义为盗窃
 So to take it from him is by definition theft.
271
00:20:40,600 --> 00:20:42,120
 好吧，让我们听听
 All right, let's hear if there is…
  
272
00:20:43,760 --> 00:20:48,260
 有谁愿意回应Joe？好的。
 Who wants to reply to Joe? Yes, go ahead.
273
00:20:49,720 --> 00:20:53,230
 我不认为，你有99块滑板
 I don't think this is necessarily a case in which you have 99 skateboards
274
00:20:53,480 --> 00:20:54,760
 而政府
 and the government…
 
275
00:20:55,050 --> 00:20:57,560
 或者，你有一个100块滑板，而政府取走其中的99块
 or you have a hundred skateboards and the government is taking 99 of them.
276
00:20:57,740 --> 00:21:01,350
 这就像，你拥有比365块还多的滑板
 It's like you have more skateboards than there are days in a year.
277
00:21:01,659 --> 00:21:03,780
 或者，你拥有多到你自己也用不完的滑板
 You have more skateboards that you're going to be able to use
278
00:21:04,010 --> 00:21:08,610
 而政府就拿走其中的一部分。
 in your entire lifetime and the government is taking part of those.
279
00:21:08,710 --> 00:21:12,010
 我认为，如果你生活在一个社会中
 And I think that if you are operating in a society in which
280
00:21:12,179 --> 00:21:15,290
 如果政府不进行收入再分配
 the government's not – in which the government doesn't
  
281
00:21:15,399 --> 00:21:18,280
 而允许某些人聚集这么多的财富
 redistribute wealth, then that allows for people to amass
282
00:21:18,450 --> 00:21:22,900
 一些人拥有的，从一开始就比这些人少
 so much wealth that people who haven't started from this very
283
00:21:23,050 --> 00:21:26,840
 而我们的假设是，一开始大家都是平均
 the equal footing in our hypothetical situation, that doesn't exist
284
00:21:27,050 --> 00:21:30,350
 但在现实社会里这不存在
 in our real society get undercut for the rest of their lives.
285
00:21:31,330 --> 00:21:35,070
 所以你担心，如果没有某种程度的再分配
 So you're worried that if there isn't some degree of redistribution
286
00:21:35,280 --> 00:21:38,520
 就不会有真正的
 of some or left at the bottom, there will be no genuine
287
00:21:38,750 --> 00:21:40,430
 机会平等。
 equality of opportunity.
288
00:21:41,020 --> 00:21:46,300
 好的，认为税收是一种盗窃，
 All right, the idea that taxation is theft,
289
00:21:48,129 --> 00:21:50,640
 Nozick更进一步地说。
 Nozick takes that point one step further.
290
00:21:50,870 --> 00:21:55,310
 他也认为这是盗窃。但他比Joe更为苛刻
 He agrees that it's theft. He's more demanding than Joe.
291
00:21:55,700 --> 00:21:59,960
 Joe说，这是盗窃，但在某种极端的情况也许是合理的
 Joe says it is theft, maybe in an extreme case it's justified,
292
00:22:00,250 --> 00:22:07,590
 也许，父母为了养活自己自己的家而偷一块面包
 maybe a parent is justified in stealing a loaf of bread to feed his
293
00:22:07,689 --> 00:22:09,470
 是有道理的
 or her hungry family.
294
00:22:09,970 --> 00:22:12,220
 所以，Joe，你会怎么称自己
 So Joe I would say, what would you call yourself,
295
00:22:12,320 --> 00:22:14,600
 一个有同情心的准自由主义者？
 a compassionate quasi-libertarian?
296
00:22:17,909 --> 00:22:20,920
 Nozick说，如果你仔细想想，
 Nozick says, if you think about it,
297
00:22:21,620 --> 00:22:26,200
 税收等同于拿走别人的收入。
 taxation amounts to the taking of earnings.
298
00:22:29,320 --> 00:22:38,100
 换句话说，它意味着窃取我的劳动成果。
 In other words, it means taking the fruits of my labor.
299
00:22:39,250 --> 00:22:44,510
 但如果国家有权把我的收入或我的劳动成果拿走
 But if the state has the right to take my earning or the fruits of my labor,
300
00:22:45,990 --> 00:22:53,570
 这等于说，国家占有我的劳动成果的一部分
 isn't that morally the same as according to the state the right
301
00:22:53,850 --> 00:22:57,330
 在道义上是正确？
 to claim a portion of my labor?
302
00:23:00,960 --> 00:23:11,020
 所以，实际上，税收等同于强迫劳动
 So taxation actually is morally equivalent to forced labor
303
00:23:11,169 --> 00:23:17,470
 因为这种强迫劳动，剥夺了我的休息，我的时间，我的劳动
 because forced labor involves the taking of my leisure, my time,
304
00:23:17,570 --> 00:23:27,370
 就像征税拿走我的劳动成果一样
 my efforts, just as taxation takes the earnings that I make with my labor.
305
00:23:29,510 --> 00:23:35,030
 因此，对于Nozick和其他自由主义者来说
 And so, for Nozick and for the libertarians,
306
00:23:35,230 --> 00:23:43,800
 再分配的税收是一种盗窃，但这不仅是盗窃
 taxation for redistribution is theft, as Joe says, but not only theft is
307
00:23:44,010 --> 00:23:50,730
 它相当于剥削了我的时间和劳动
 morally equivalent to laying claim to certain hours of a person's
308
00:23:50,820 --> 00:23:56,880
 在道义上，它等同于强迫劳动
 life and labor, so it's morally equivalent to forced labor.
309
00:23:57,200 --> 00:24:00,050
 如果国家有权占有我的劳动成果
 If the state has a right to claim the fruits of my labor,
310
00:24:00,149 --> 00:24:06,480
 这意味着，有名义来剥夺我的劳动成果
 that implies that it really has an entitlement to my labor itself.
311
00:24:06,840 --> 00:24:09,170
 什么是强迫劳动？
 And what is forced labor?
312
00:24:11,120 --> 00:24:17,000
 Nozick指出，强迫劳动就像奴役
 Forced labor, Nozick points out, is what, is slavery,
313
00:24:19,899 --> 00:24:26,150
 因为我并不是唯一能支配我的劳动的
 because if I don't have the right, the sole right to my own labor,
314
00:24:26,870 --> 00:24:31,160
 这实际上等于，政府或社会
 then that's really to say that the government or the
315
00:24:31,649 --> 00:24:35,760
 就相当于是我的合伙人一样
 political community is a part owner in me.
316
00:24:36,980 --> 00:24:40,590
 而这意味着什么？
 And what does it mean for the state to be a part owner in me?
317
00:24:41,629 --> 00:24:46,200
 这意味着我是一个奴隶，
 If you think about it, it means that I'm a slave,
318
00:24:46,460 --> 00:24:48,580
 我不拥有自己。
 that I don't own myself.
319
00:24:49,570 --> 00:24:55,560
 那么，从这里我们推理出
 So what this line of reasoning brings us to is the fundamental principle
320
00:24:57,460 --> 00:25:00,830
 自由主义的一个根本原则
 that underlies the libertarian case for rights.
321
00:25:01,639 --> 00:25:03,630
 这一原则是什么？
 What is that principle?
322
00:25:03,840 --> 00:25:06,510
 我拥有和支配我自己。
 It's the idea that I own myself.
323
00:25:07,600 --> 00:25:13,170
 如果你真的重视个人权利，我们就能支配自己
 It's the idea of self possession if you want to take right seriously.
324
00:25:14,230 --> 00:25:18,310
 如果你不想把整个社会的当作是个人利益的集合
 If you don't want to just regard people as collections of preferences,
325
00:25:19,120 --> 00:25:27,330
 这引出一个基本的道德理念：
 the fundamental moral idea to which you will be lead is the idea
326
00:25:27,419 --> 00:25:31,870
 我们是自己的主人
 that we are the owners or the propietors of our own person,
327
00:25:32,939 --> 00:25:36,580
 这就是功利主义的问题所在
 and that's why utilitarianism goes wrong.
328
00:25:39,260 --> 00:25:42,220
 这也是为什么，取走健康病人的器官是错误的
 And that's why it's wrong to yank the organs from that healthy patient.
329
00:25:43,310 --> 00:25:47,390
 因为，你把这个病人看作是属于你或属于整个社会
 You're acting as if that patient belongs to you or to the community.
330
00:25:48,220 --> 00:25:50,260
 但其实，我们属于我们自己
 But we belong to ourselves.
331
00:25:51,720 --> 00:25:55,280
 同理，立法来保护我们自己
 And that's the same reason that it's wrong to make laws
332
00:25:55,500 --> 00:25:59,580
 立法来告诉我们要如何生活
 to protect us from ourselves or to tell us how to live,
333
00:26:00,290 --> 00:26:03,820
 要求我们培养哪些美德，这些都是错误的
 to tell us what virtues we should be governed by,
334
00:26:04,669 --> 00:26:09,120
 这也是为什么，从富人身上征税来帮助穷人是错误的
 and that's also why it's wrong to tax the rich to help the poor
335
00:26:09,300 --> 00:26:11,760
 哪怕它是公益事业
 even for good causes, even to help those
336
00:26:11,990 --> 00:26:14,870
 能帮助那些因飓风Katrina而流离失所的人
 who are displaced by the Hurricane Katrina.
337
00:26:15,750 --> 00:26:17,790
 你可以让他们捐钱给慈善机构
 Ask them to give charity.
338
00:26:17,889 --> 00:26:21,470
 但如果你征税，就是在强迫他们劳动。
 But if you tax them, it's like forcing them to labor.
339
00:26:21,939 --> 00:26:25,840
 你能让乔丹不要参加下周的比赛
 Could you tell Michael Jordan he has to skip the next week's games
340
00:26:25,939 --> 00:26:30,490
 改去帮助因飓风Katrina而流离失所的人吗？
 and go down to help the people displaced by Hurricane Katrina?
341
00:26:30,800 --> 00:26:32,420
 在道义上，这是一样的。
 Morally, it's the same.
342
00:26:36,439 --> 00:26:38,640
 因此，你很有可能会输掉。
 So the stakes are very high.
343
00:26:40,199 --> 00:26:45,010
 到目前为止，我们已经听到了一些反对自由主义的观点。
 So far we've heard some objections to the libertarian argument.
344
00:26:45,710 --> 00:26:49,320
 但如果你想反对它，你必须要驳倒
 But if you want to reject it, you have to break in to
345
00:26:49,419 --> 00:26:52,590
 拿走我的收入就像是
 this chain of reasoning which goes, taking my earnings
346
00:26:52,820 --> 00:26:57,420
 剥夺了我的劳动
 is like taking my labor, but taking my labor
347
00:26:57,600 --> 00:27:00,530
 这相当于让我成为了奴隶
 is making me a slave.
348
00:27:00,679 --> 00:27:04,240
 如果你不同意这一观点，你必须肯定
 And if you disagree with that, you must believe in
349
00:27:04,340 --> 00:27:06,510
 自我支配的原则。
 the principle of self possession.
350
00:27:06,840 --> 00:27:11,810
 那些不同意的同学，收集你们的反对意见
 Those who disagree, gather your objections
351
00:27:12,149 --> 00:27:14,090
 我们将在下次讨论
 and we'll begin with them next time.
352
00:27:17,090 --> 00:27:20,090
 阿基米德曾说
 {\r\fn微软雅黑\fs12\fscx130\fscy130\3c&HFF8000&}
353
00:27:20,090 --> 00:27:24,090
 “给我一个支点，我能撬起整个地球”
 {\r\fn微软雅黑\fs12\fscx130\fscy130\3c&HFF8000&}
354
00:27:24,090 --> 00:27:29,090
 如果你有好的研究想法
  
355
00:27:29,090 --> 00:27:34,090
 希望别人推你一把
  
356
00:27:34,090 --> 00:27:39,090
 “一五一十” 资助行动 也许能帮到你
 详情可留意www.aprilseason.com
  
357
00:27:39,090 --> 00:27:45,090
 你需要的也许就是这个支点
 {\r\fn微软雅黑\fs12\fscx130\fscy130\3c&HFF8000&}
358
00:27:53,340 --> 00:27:55,880
 上次，我们讨论到自由主义。
 We were talking last time about libertarianism.
359
00:27:57,970 --> 00:28:00,950
 我想回顾支持和反对
 I want to go back to the arguments for and against
360
00:28:01,070 --> 00:28:03,060
 收入再分配的论点
 the redistribution of income.
361
00:28:04,889 --> 00:28:10,510
 我们先谈一谈，"最小国家"（Nozick提出的一个的概念）
 But before we do that, just one word about the minimal state,
362
00:28:11,500 --> 00:28:14,350
 自由主义经济学家 Milton Friedman
 Milton Friedman, the libertarian economist,
363
00:28:15,100 --> 00:28:19,700
 许多我们认为是理所当然归政府管的
 he points out that many of the functions that
364
00:28:19,879 --> 00:28:24,610
 他却认为不应该归政府管
 we take for granted as properly belonging to government don't.
365
00:28:26,020 --> 00:28:27,230
 这是家长式的。
 They are paternalist.
366
00:28:27,330 --> 00:28:29,370
 他举了一个关于社会保障的例子
 One example he gives is social security.
367
00:28:30,800 --> 00:28:36,190
 他说，为了我们的退休生活而准备积蓄
 He says it's a good idea for people to save for their retirement
368
00:28:37,310 --> 00:28:40,660
 是个好主意，但这种做法是错误的
 during their earning years but it's wrong.
369
00:28:41,429 --> 00:28:48,120
 不管大家是否愿意，政府迫使每个人
 It's a violation of people's liberty for the government to force everyone
370
00:28:49,300 --> 00:28:54,160
 为退休而提前积蓄一点钱
 whether they want to or not to put aside some earnings today
371
00:28:54,959 --> 00:28:57,030
 侵犯了个人的权利
 for the sake of their retirement.
372
00:28:57,240 --> 00:29:01,080
 如果一些人想碰碰运气，希望今天就过得好一点
 If people want to take the chance or if people want to live big today
373
00:29:01,310 --> 00:29:07,300
 宁愿退休时生活贫穷，这是他们的选择。
 and live a poor retirement, that should be their choice.
374
00:29:07,399 --> 00:29:11,580
 他们应自由地作出判断，接受这些风险。
 They should be free to make those judgments and take those risks.
375
00:29:12,600 --> 00:29:17,100
 因此，即使是社会保障，国家也是不应该干涉的
 So even social security would still be at odds with the minimal state
376
00:29:17,379 --> 00:29:20,360
 Milton Friedman主张
 that Milton Friedman argued for.
377
00:29:21,429 --> 00:29:24,860
 有时，像警察、消防，我们认为属于集体的事情
 It sometimes thought that collective goods like police protection
378
00:29:25,240 --> 00:29:32,140
 会不可避免地让某些人搭了便车
 and fire protection will inevitably create the problem of free riders
379
00:29:32,399 --> 00:29:34,520
 除非它们是公开提供。
 unless they're publicly provided.
380
00:29:37,600 --> 00:29:42,780
 但我们有办法来防止搭便车。
 But there are ways to prevent free riders.
381
00:29:43,030 --> 00:29:46,870
 有办法来限制看起来像是公众利益的
 There are ways to restrict even seemingly collective goods
382
00:29:47,050 --> 00:29:48,910
 例如消防
 like fire protection.
383
00:29:50,320 --> 00:29:54,060
 我读了一篇文章，一则关于私人消防公司的文章
 I read an article a while back about a private fire company,
384
00:29:54,260 --> 00:29:57,320
 在阿肯色州的一个叫Salem的消防公司
 the Salem Fire Corporation, in Arkansas.
385
00:29:58,020 --> 00:30:01,160
 你可以到Salem消防公司申请
 You can sign up with the Salem Fire Corporation,
386
00:30:01,550 --> 00:30:05,340
 每年支付一定的费用，如果你的房子着火了，
 pay a yearly subscription fee, and if your house catches on fire,
387
00:30:05,550 --> 00:30:07,250
 他们会来救火。
 they will come and put out the fire.
388
00:30:08,600 --> 00:30:11,950
 但他们不会把每个人就出来
 But they won't put out everybody's fire.
389
00:30:12,419 --> 00:30:17,150
 他们只会帮助那些报了名的顾客灭火
 They will only put it out if it's a fire in the home
390
00:30:17,250 --> 00:30:21,330
 或者火势蔓延威胁到
 of a subscriber or if it starts to spread and to threaten
391
00:30:21,510 --> 00:30:23,740
 另外一个顾客的家
 the home of a subscriber.
392
00:30:24,220 --> 00:30:27,460
 这篇新闻报道了一个屋主的故事
 The newspaper article just told the story of a home owner
393
00:30:27,699 --> 00:30:33,350
 这个房主在过去都订了这家公司的服务
 who had subscribed to this company in the past but failed
394
00:30:33,600 --> 00:30:35,170
 但没有及时的续约
 to renew his subscription.
395
00:30:35,270 --> 00:30:36,690
 当他的房子着火后
 His house caught on fire.
396
00:30:37,080 --> 00:30:39,490
 Salem消防公司的卡车来了
 The Salem Fire Corporation showed up with its trucks
397
00:30:39,720 --> 00:30:41,630
 只是袖手旁观，看着房子烧毁
 and watched the house burn,
398
00:30:42,220 --> 00:30:44,390
 为的是确保火势没有扩散
 just making sure that it didn't spread.
399
00:30:44,730 --> 00:30:49,830
 有人问消防队长。实际上他也不是真正的消防队长。
 The fire chief was asked, well, he wasn't exactly the fire chief.
400
00:30:50,030 --> 00:30:51,840
 我猜他是CEO。
 I guess he was the CEO.
401
00:30:52,780 --> 00:30:56,390
 有人问，你怎么能站在消防设备旁边
 He was asked how can you stand by with fire equipment and allow
402
00:30:56,620 --> 00:30:58,240
 看着别人的家被烧毁了？
 a person's home to burn?
403
00:30:59,649 --> 00:31:03,490
 他回答说，我们一旦核实，火势没有危及到我们的会员的家
 He replied, once we verified there was no danger to a member's property,
404
00:31:03,699 --> 00:31:07,730
 根据我们的规定，我们没有选择，只能旁观
 we had no choice but to back off according to our rules.
405
00:31:07,899 --> 00:31:11,060
 如果我们去扑灭所有的火灾，他说
 If we responded to all fires, he said, there would be no incentive
406
00:31:11,300 --> 00:31:12,920
 大家就没必要去订我们的服务了。
 to subscribe.
407
00:31:13,649 --> 00:31:16,660
 在这种情况下，房主试图在在火灾现场
 The homeowner in this case tried to renew his subscription
408
00:31:16,889 --> 00:31:18,280
 当场续约
 at the scene of the fire.
409
00:31:18,659 --> 00:31:21,800
 但该公司的负责人拒绝。
 But the head of the company refused.
410
00:31:22,610 --> 00:31:26,220
 你不能先毁坏你的车，接着去买保险
 You can't wreck your car, he said, and then buy insurance for it later.
411
00:31:27,340 --> 00:31:30,450
 因此，即使是一些我们认为是
 So even public goods that we take for granted
412
00:31:30,629 --> 00:31:32,860
 政府理所当然应该负责的公众事物
 that's being within the proper province of government
413
00:31:33,139 --> 00:31:36,910
 在原则上，它们也是可以被分离出来
 can many of them in principle be isolated,
414
00:31:37,179 --> 00:31:39,670
 专门只给那些交了钱的人服务
 made exclusive to those who pay.
415
00:31:40,840 --> 00:31:44,010
 这一切都与公众财产
 That's all to do with the question of collective goods
416
00:31:44,240 --> 00:31:48,240
 和自由主义反对的家长式有关 。
 and the libertarians injunction against paternalism.
417
00:31:50,139 --> 00:31:54,580
 但让我们先回到收入再分配的问题。
 But let's go back now to the arguments about redistribution.
418
00:31:54,689 --> 00:32:02,640
 现在，自由主义的关于“最小国家”的基本问题
 Now, underlying the libertarian's case for the minimal state
419
00:32:04,010 --> 00:32:08,250
 是强制。但强制错在哪里？
 is a worry about coercion, but what's wrong with coercion?
420
00:32:09,310 --> 00:32:11,900
 自由主义给了这样一个答案：
 The libertarian offers this answer:
421
00:32:14,379 --> 00:32:21,990
 为了大众的福祉，而利用一些人是错误的
 To coerce someone, to use some person for the sake of the general welfare
422
00:32:23,629 --> 00:32:32,150
 因为它质疑了一个基本事实，即我们拥有和支配我们自己
 is wrong because it calls into question the fundamental fact that we own ourselves
423
00:32:33,370 --> 00:32:37,350
 质疑了我们自我支配、自由占有的这一道德事实
 the fundamental moral fact of self possession or self ownership.
424
00:32:39,280 --> 00:32:45,870
 自由主义反对再分配的论点始于
 The libertarian's argument against redistribution begins with
425
00:32:46,149 --> 00:32:48,560
 我们能支配自己这一基本思想
 this fundamental idea that we own ourselves.
426
00:32:50,219 --> 00:32:57,460
 Nozick说，如果整个社会都到比尔盖茨
 Nozick says that if the society as a whole can go to Bill Gates
427
00:32:58,350 --> 00:33:03,790
 或者乔丹那里，通过税收拿去他们的财富
 or go to Michael Jordan and tax away a portion of their wealth,
428
00:33:04,719 --> 00:33:10,340
 那样的话，我们等于是说我们的社会财产就在
 what the society is really asserting is a collective property right
429
00:33:10,620 --> 00:33:16,080
 比尔盖茨或者乔丹那里。
 in Bill Gates or in Michael Jordan.
430
00:33:17,129 --> 00:33:22,070
 这违反了一个基本原则：我们属于我们自己
 But that violates the fundamental principle that we belong to ourselves.
431
00:33:23,629 --> 00:33:29,280
 我们已经听过了反对自由主义的一些意见。
 Now, we've already heard a number of objections to the libertarian argument.
432
00:33:31,290 --> 00:33:38,900
 我想今天要听一下支持自由主义的声音
 What I would like to do today is to give the libertarians among us
433
00:33:39,300 --> 00:33:45,030
 让他们有机会回应这一些反对的声音
 a chance to answer the objections that have been raised and some have been
434
00:33:45,129 --> 00:33:50,720
 一些人已经表明了立场，同意到这里来
 some have already identified themselves and have agreed to come and make
435
00:33:51,010 --> 00:33:54,590
 给那些反对自由主义的意见
 the case for libertarianism to reply to the objections
436
00:33:54,820 --> 00:33:56,080
 一个回应
 that have been raised.
437
00:33:56,649 --> 00:33:59,890
 举起你的手，如果你是其中一位自由主义者
 So raise your hand if you are among the libertarians
438
00:34:00,100 --> 00:34:05,200
 准备来支持自由主义，回应那些异议
 who's prepared to stand up for the theory and respond to the objections.
439
00:34:05,899 --> 00:34:07,130
 你是？
 You are?
440
00:34:07,409 --> 00:34:08,150
 Alex Harris。
Alex Harris.
 
441
00:34:08,400 --> 00:34:11,590
 我是那位在博客挺有名的Alex Harris
 Alex Harris, who's been a star on the web blog.
442
00:34:11,880 --> 00:34:13,500
 好吧，Alex，到这里来
 All right, Alex, come here.
443
00:34:13,680 --> 00:34:14,760
 站起来。走到这里。
 Stand up. Come.
444
00:34:15,140 --> 00:34:17,680
 我们将在这里建立一个自由主义者的角落。
 We'll create a libertarian corner over here.
445
00:34:18,930 --> 00:34:21,260
 还有谁？
 And who else?
446
00:34:21,360 --> 00:34:26,950
 还有其他想加入自由主义的？你叫什么名字？
 Other libertarians who will join. What's your name?
447
00:34:27,210 --> 00:34:29,380
 John？
John. John?
 
448
00:34:29,560 --> 00:34:31,290
 John Sheffield。
Sheffield. John Sheffield.
 
449
00:34:31,390 --> 00:34:33,200
 还有谁愿意加入？
 Who else wants to join?
450
00:34:34,549 --> 00:34:37,870
 其他勇敢的自由主义者
 Other brave libertarians who are prepared to take on
451
00:34:38,259 --> 00:34:40,560
 是的，你叫什么名字？Julia Rotto。
 Yes, what's your name? Julia Rotto.
452
00:34:40,770 --> 00:34:44,610
 Julia Rotto。到我们这边来
 Julia Rotto. Julia, come join us over there.
453
00:34:45,450 --> 00:34:48,330
 现在，当自由主义者这边
 Now, while the – while team libertarian
  
454
00:34:53,259 --> 00:34:55,430
 Julie, John, Alex。
Julie, John, Alex.
 
455
00:34:55,529 --> 00:34:58,300
 当自由主义者在这里聚集时，
 While team libertarian is gathering over there,
456
00:34:58,560 --> 00:35:03,060
 让我总结一下，在课堂上和在网站上
 let me just summarize the main objections that I've heard
457
00:35:03,390 --> 00:35:05,410
 我所听到的主要的反对意见。
 in class and on the website.
458
00:35:07,339 --> 00:35:13,330
 我来到这边
 Objection number one– and here I'll come down to
 
459
00:35:13,420 --> 00:35:15,360
 我想对着这边的自由主义者们
 I wanna talk to team libertarian over here.
460
00:35:16,350 --> 00:35:21,760
 反对意见一：穷人更需要钱。
 So objection number one is that the poor need the money more.
461
00:35:22,640 --> 00:35:28,210
 这点很明显。穷人不仅需要钱，而且比盖茨和乔丹
 That's an obvious objection, a lot more than -- thanks –
 
462
00:35:28,370 --> 00:35:31,740
 更需要钱
 than do Bill Gates and Michael Jordan.
463
00:35:32,779 --> 00:35:40,260
 反对意见二：税收不能算是奴隶
 Objection number two, it's not really slavery to tax because
464
00:35:41,430 --> 00:35:46,340
 至少在一个民主社会里，它不算是奴隶
 at least in a democratic society it's not a slave holder.
465
00:35:47,700 --> 00:35:50,790
 这是个人民大会，代表民主
 It's congress. It's a democratic—
 
466
00:35:50,880 --> 00:35:52,610
 Alex已经笑了
 you're smiling, Alex, already.
467
00:35:52,839 --> 00:35:54,730
 你确信你可以回答所有这些问题？
 You're confident you can reply to all of these?
468
00:35:56,790 --> 00:36:00,450
 因此，经过大家同意的税收不算是非强制性
 So taxation by consent of the governed is not coercive.
469
00:36:01,100 --> 00:36:06,640
 反对意见三：一些人表示，像盖茨这类的成功人
 Third, some people have said don't the successful like Gates
470
00:36:07,240 --> 00:36:11,370
 他们的成功归功于对社会，他们有义务通过缴纳来回馈社会
 owe a debt to society for their success that they repay by paying taxes.
471
00:36:11,779 --> 00:36:13,400
 谁愿意来回应第一点
 Who wants to respond to the first one,
472
00:36:13,740 --> 00:36:15,630
 穷人更需要钱？
 the poor need the money more?
473
00:36:16,009 --> 00:36:17,530
 好的，你是吧？John
 All right, and you're? John.
474
00:36:17,790 --> 00:36:20,750
 John。好的，John
 John. All right, John, what's the, here I'll hold it.
475
00:36:20,900 --> 00:36:23,860
 好的。穷人更需要钱。
 All right. The poor need the money more.
476
00:36:24,060 --> 00:36:27,330
 这是相当明显的。我可以使用这笔钱。
 That's quite obvious. I could use the money.
477
00:36:27,430 --> 00:36:29,240
 我当然不会介意，如果比尔盖茨
 You know, I certainly wouldn't mind if Bill Gates give
478
00:36:29,490 --> 00:36:30,300
 给我1百万
 me a million dollars.
479
00:36:30,410 --> 00:36:31,980
 我的意思是，我会要一千。
 I mean, I'd take a thousand.
480
00:36:32,230 --> 00:36:36,080
 但在某些方面，你要明白
 But at some point you have to understand that
481
00:36:36,180 --> 00:36:40,020
 重新分配财富并没有
 the benefits of redistribution of wealth don't justify the initial
482
00:36:40,250 --> 00:36:41,870
 让一开始大家财产平均
 violation of the property right.
483
00:36:42,060 --> 00:36:44,470
 如果你看看，穷人更需要钱这个观点
 If you look at the argument the poor need the money more,
484
00:36:44,670 --> 00:36:47,860
 这个说法并没有违背
 at no point in that argument do you contradict the fact that
485
00:36:47,960 --> 00:36:50,940
 我们经过推断、大家都同意的原则
 we've extrapolated from, agreed upon principles
486
00:36:51,220 --> 00:36:52,400
 即我们拥有和支配自己这一原则
 that people own themselves.
487
00:36:52,609 --> 00:36:56,380
 我们推断出，我们有财产支配权，因此
 We've extrapolated that people have property rights and so whether or not
488
00:36:56,609 --> 00:36:59,250
 不管税收是否是一件好事，甚至
 it would be a good thing or a nice thing or even
489
00:36:59,529 --> 00:37:01,810
 对一些人的生存来说，是一件必须的事情
 a necessary thing for the survival of some people,
490
00:37:01,990 --> 00:37:04,400
 我们并没有看到，通过税收就能不违背
 we don't see that that justifies the violation of the right
491
00:37:04,680 --> 00:37:06,410
 我们已经推断出来的原则
 that we've logically extrapolated.
492
00:37:06,529 --> 00:37:07,240
 好的。
 Good. Okay.
493
00:37:07,370 --> 00:37:10,430
 因此，我的意思是，仍然存在着这样一个机构
 And so that also, I mean, there still exist this institution
494
00:37:10,630 --> 00:37:12,750
 譬如私人的慈善事业
 of like individual philanthropy.
495
00:37:12,850 --> 00:37:14,370
 Milton Friedman 做了一个论断
 Milton Friedman makes this argument-
496
00:37:14,630 --> 00:37:17,690
 好的，比尔盖茨捐钱给慈善机构，如果他愿意的话
 All right, so Bill Gates can give to charity if he wants to.
497
00:37:17,819 --> 00:37:18,560
 对。
 Right.
498
00:37:18,940 --> 00:37:22,310
 但是，如果胁迫他这样做的话，仍然是错误的
 But it would still be wrong to coerce him.
499
00:37:22,569 --> 00:37:23,750
 没错。
 Exactly.
500
00:37:24,009 --> 00:37:25,630
 为了满足穷人的需要。
 To meet the needs of the poor.
501
00:37:25,810 --> 00:37:27,020
 没错。
 Exactly.
502
00:37:27,200 --> 00:37:30,860
 你们两个对这个回答满意吗？
 Are the two of you happy with that reply?
503
00:37:31,060 --> 00:37:33,360
 有没有要补充的？好的，Julie？
 Anything to add? All right, go ahead. Julie?
504
00:37:33,520 --> 00:37:37,470
 Julie，是的。我想我还可以补充一点。没关系。
 Julia, yes. I think I can also add, it's okay.
505
00:37:37,640 --> 00:37:40,860
 我想我可以补充一点，需要 和 应得
 I guess I could add that there's a difference between needing something
506
00:37:40,990 --> 00:37:42,300
 之间是有区别的
 and deserving something.
507
00:37:42,400 --> 00:37:44,340
 我的意思是，在一个理想的社会里每个人的需求将会得到满足
 I mean, in an ideal society everyone's needs would be met
508
00:37:44,540 --> 00:37:48,230
 但我们在这里争论的是，什么是我们应该得到的
 but here we're arguing what do we deserve as a society and, yeah.
509
00:37:48,750 --> 00:37:53,220
 这些利益并不是穷人应该得到的
 And the poor don't deserve don't deserve the benefits
510
00:37:53,400 --> 00:37:56,230
 通过征税，用乔丹的钱来帮助他们
 that would flow from taxing Michael Jordan to help them.
511
00:37:56,430 --> 00:38:00,880
 根据我们已经讨论过的，我不认为
 Based on what we've covered here I don't think you deserve
512
00:38:01,100 --> 00:38:02,200
 这样的东西是我们应得的
 something like that.
513
00:38:02,410 --> 00:38:05,050
 好吧，让我再推你把，Julia。
 All right, let me push you a little bit on that, Julia.
514
00:38:05,440 --> 00:38:11,090
 飓风Katrina的受害者正急需帮助
 The victims of Hurricane Katrina are in desperate need of help.
515
00:38:11,420 --> 00:38:17,540
 你会说，他们是不值得
 Would you say that they don't deserve help that would come
516
00:38:17,770 --> 00:38:21,220
 从联邦政府的税收得到救助吗？
 from the federal government through taxation?
517
00:38:21,500 --> 00:38:24,330
 好吧，这是一个较难回答的问题。
 Okay, that's a difficult question.
518
00:38:24,509 --> 00:38:30,030
 我认为，在这种情况下他们需要帮助，但这些帮助不是他们本来应得的
 I think this is a case where they need help, not deserve it, but I think,
519
00:38:30,310 --> 00:38:34,130
 如果你有一定程度的需要，来维持你的生活
 again, if you had a certain level of requirements to meet sustenance,
520
00:38:34,220 --> 00:38:35,920
 你需要帮助，例如，如果你没有足够的粮食
 you're gonna need help, like, if you don't have food
521
00:38:36,029 --> 00:38:38,020
 或没有地方住，这情况叫需要
 or a place to live, that's a case of need.
522
00:38:38,299 --> 00:38:41,360
 因此，需要是一回事，应得是另一回事。
 So need is one thing and deserve is another.
523
00:38:41,460 --> 00:38:42,330
 没错。
 Exactly.
524
00:38:42,430 --> 00:38:46,010
 好的。谁想回应？
 All right. Who would like to reply?
525
00:38:51,569 --> 00:38:52,720
 是。
 Yes.
526
00:38:53,580 --> 00:38:56,250
 让我们回到你刚才所说的第一点
 Going back to the first point that you made about the
527
00:38:56,460 --> 00:38:57,930
 个人的财产权
 property rights of individual.
528
00:38:58,410 --> 00:39:00,820
 产权是由政府提出和执行的
 The property rights are established and enforced by the government,
529
00:39:01,049 --> 00:39:05,860
 我们选取了代表
 which is a democratic government, and we have representatives
530
00:39:06,120 --> 00:39:07,770
 来实现这些权利。
 to enforce those rights.
531
00:39:07,980 --> 00:39:11,040
 如果你生活在一个遵循这些规则的社会里
 If you live in a society that operates under those rules,
532
00:39:11,210 --> 00:39:16,940
 那么，就应该由政府来决定
 then it should be up to the government to decide how
533
00:39:17,170 --> 00:39:22,740
 这些资源、税收怎么分配
 those resources[inaudible]taxation are distributed because it is
534
00:39:23,069 --> 00:39:24,120
 因为它是经过政府的同意。
 through the consent of the government.
535
00:39:24,279 --> 00:39:25,560
 如果你不同意，你可以选择不生活
 If you disagree with it, you don't have to live
536
00:39:25,759 --> 00:39:27,570
 在这样的社会里
 in that society where that operates.
537
00:39:27,670 --> 00:39:28,900
 好，告诉我你的名字。
 All right, good, so, and tell me your name.
538
00:39:29,190 --> 00:39:30,210
 Raul.
Raul.
 
539
00:39:30,410 --> 00:39:34,850
 Raul指出，其实，Raul引出了第二点
 Raul is pointing out, actually, Raul is invoking point number two.
540
00:39:35,040 --> 00:39:39,170
 如果税收是经过被统治者的同意
 If the taxation is by the consent of the governed,
541
00:39:40,160 --> 00:39:42,930
 它就不是强迫的。它是合理的。
 it's not coerced. It's legitimate.
542
00:39:44,470 --> 00:39:47,870
 比尔盖茨和乔丹是美国公民。
 Bill Gates and Michael Jordan are citizens of the United States.
543
00:39:48,049 --> 00:39:52,130
 他们投票选出了国会。他们和与大家一样
 They get to vote for congress. They get to vote their
544
00:39:52,230 --> 00:39:55,110
 投票决定了这些政策
 policy convictions just like everybody else.
545
00:39:56,220 --> 00:39:58,630
 谁想继续？John吗？
 Who would like to take that one on? John?
546
00:39:59,020 --> 00:40:04,070
 基本上，在这种情况下自由主义者是在反对
 Basically, what the libertarians are objecting to in this case is
547
00:40:04,270 --> 00:40:06,470
 中间的80%决定了最上层的10%
 the middle 80 percent deciding what the top ten percent
548
00:40:06,670 --> 00:40:08,010
 而这样做是为了底层的10%
 are doing for the bottom ten percent.
549
00:40:08,210 --> 00:40:10,640
 等一等，John。多数决定少数
 Wait, wait, wait, John. Majority.
550
00:40:10,750 --> 00:40:12,190
 你不相信民主？
 Don't you believe in democracy?
551
00:40:12,890 --> 00:40:14,380
 但在某个点上
 Well, right, but at some point --
552
00:40:14,480 --> 00:40:16,050
 难道你不相信，我是指，你说的80%
 Don't you believe in, I mean, you say 80 percent,
553
00:40:16,279 --> 00:40:18,450
 10%。多数人的规则是什么？
 10 percent majority. Majority rule is what?
554
00:40:18,690 --> 00:40:19,820
 有多数人决定
 The majority.
555
00:40:19,990 --> 00:40:20,730
 没错，但 -
 Exactly, but --
556
00:40:20,990 --> 00:40:22,930
 在一个民主国家里。你是支持民主的，是吧？
 In a democracy. Aren't you for democracy?
557
00:40:23,150 --> 00:40:24,300
 是的，我支持民主的，但
 Yes, I'm for democracy, but
558
00:40:25,529 --> 00:40:26,630
 等一下。
 Hang on, hang on, hang on.
559
00:40:26,730 --> 00:40:28,590
 民主统治和暴民统治不是同一件事情。
 Democracy and mob rule aren't the same thing.
560
00:40:28,770 --> 00:40:30,030
 暴民统治？
 Mob rule?
561
00:40:30,210 --> 00:40:31,550
 暴民统治，正是。
 Mob rule, exactly.
562
00:40:31,799 --> 00:40:34,160
 在一个开放的社会，你可以
 In an open society you have a recourse to address that
563
00:40:34,390 --> 00:40:35,650
 通过你选出来的代表来解决它
 through your representatives.
564
00:40:35,799 --> 00:40:39,590
 而如果大多数人都同意的
 And if the majority of the consent of those who are governed
565
00:40:39,799 --> 00:40:42,100
 你却不同意
 doesn't agree with you, then you know,
566
00:40:42,330 --> 00:40:46,460
 如果你生活在这样的民主社会里，你就得
 you're choosing to live in a society and you have to operate
567
00:40:46,660 --> 00:40:49,200
 服从多数人做出的决定
 under what the majority the society concludes.
568
00:40:49,430 --> 00:40:50,640
 好的，Alex谈到了民主。
 All right, Alex, on democracy.
569
00:40:50,870 --> 00:40:53,020
 那怎么办？
 What about that?
570
00:40:53,299 --> 00:40:56,360
 事实上，从我那五十万分之一选出来的
 The fact that I have one, you know, five hundred thousandth
571
00:40:56,770 --> 00:41:00,090
 一个议会代表所表决的
 of the vote for one representative in congress is not the same thing
572
00:41:00,250 --> 00:41:04,330
 和作为我个人来决定怎么使用我的财产权
 as my having the ability to decide for myself how
573
00:41:04,430 --> 00:41:05,770
 这两者不是同一件事
 to use my property rights.
574
00:41:06,100 --> 00:41:09,940
 我就像是杯水车薪，你知道
 I'm a drop in the bucket and, you know, well --
575
00:41:10,150 --> 00:41:11,300
 我可能会在投票中输掉
 You might lose the vote.
576
00:41:11,480 --> 00:41:12,550
 没错。
 Exactly.
577
00:41:12,790 --> 00:41:13,420
 他们可能会 -
 And they might take --
578
00:41:13,620 --> 00:41:14,250
 我的意思是，
 And I will. I mean,
579
00:41:14,350 --> 00:41:16,520
 我并不能决定，我是否应该
 I don't have the decision right now of whether or not
580
00:41:16,680 --> 00:41:17,360
 纳税
 to pay taxes.
581
00:41:17,460 --> 00:41:21,360
 如果我不想交税，我就得坐牢，或者把我驱逐出国
 If I don't, I get locked in jail or they tell me to get out of the country.
582
00:41:21,560 --> 00:41:27,360
 不过，Alex，让我举一个关于民主的小例子。
 But, Alex, Alex, let me make a small case for democracy.
583
00:41:27,549 --> 00:41:30,010
 看看你会怎么说
 And see what you would say.
584
00:41:30,470 --> 00:41:33,350
 我们生活在一个民主的社会，
 Why can't you, we live in a democratic society with
585
00:41:33,580 --> 00:41:34,710
 有言论自由。
 freedom of speech.
586
00:41:34,890 --> 00:41:40,220
 你为什么不走上竞选的讲台，去说服你的同胞
 Why can't you take to the Hustings, persuade your fellow citizens
587
00:41:40,549 --> 00:41:44,110
 说纳税是不公正的，然后试着去取得大多数人的同意呢？
 that taxation is unjust and try to get a majority?
588
00:41:44,500 --> 00:41:47,430
 我不认为，我们得说服2.8亿人
 I don't think that people should be, should have to
589
00:41:47,560 --> 00:41:50,360
 仅仅为了行使我们的权利
 convince 280 million others simply in order to exercise
590
00:41:50,460 --> 00:41:54,150
 来保护自己的所有权。
 their own rights, in order to not have their self ownership violated.
591
00:41:54,660 --> 00:41:56,050
 我认为，我们没必要得说服2.8亿人
 I think people should be able to do that without having
592
00:41:56,310 --> 00:41:58,560
 才能做到这一点
 to convince 280 million people.
593
00:41:58,810 --> 00:42:00,620
 这是否意味着，你反对民主？
 Does that mean you are against democracy as a whole?
594
00:42:00,799 --> 00:42:01,590
 我 - 没有。
 I -- no.
595
00:42:01,740 --> 00:42:03,910
 我相信在一个非常有限的民主里
 I just believe in a very limited form of democracy
596
00:42:04,089 --> 00:42:07,570
 用宪法来限制
 whereby we have a constitution that severely limits the scope
597
00:42:07,670 --> 00:42:10,370
 哪些地方需要由民主决定。
 of what decisions can be made democratically.
598
00:42:10,650 --> 00:42:13,660
 好，所以你说，民主是好的
 All right, so you're saying that democracy is fine
599
00:42:13,940 --> 00:42:16,220
 但涉及基本权利的地方，可以不用民主决定
 except where fundamental rights are involved.
600
00:42:16,319 --> 00:42:17,290
 是。
 Yes.
601
00:42:17,569 --> 00:42:20,060
 我认为，你可能会赢
 And I think you could win.
602
00:42:20,310 --> 00:42:23,370
 如果你站上竞选的讲台。让我对你刚才所说的
 If you're going on the Hustings, let me add one element
603
00:42:23,470 --> 00:42:24,990
 补充一点
 to the argument you might make.
604
00:42:25,380 --> 00:42:30,500
 你可以说，放下经济的辩论，撇开税收
 You can say put aside the economic debates, taxation.
605
00:42:31,130 --> 00:42:34,140
 假设个人的宗教信仰自由受到了干涉
 Suppose the individual right to religious liberty were
606
00:42:34,370 --> 00:42:38,550
 那么，Alex，在竞选台上
 at stake, then, Alex, you could say, on the Hustings.
607
00:42:38,830 --> 00:42:42,310
 当然，大家也认同，我们不应该投票决定
 Surely, you would all agree that we shouldn't put the right to
608
00:42:42,520 --> 00:42:44,410
 个人的自由
 individual liberty up to a vote.
609
00:42:45,549 --> 00:42:50,230
 是啊，正是这样，这就是为什么我们需要
 Yeah, that's exactly right, and that's why we have a
610
00:42:50,330 --> 00:42:51,250
 修正宪法
 constitutional amendments.
611
00:42:51,529 --> 00:42:53,340
 以及为什么修改宪法这么难
 and why do we make it so hard to amend our constitution.
612
00:42:53,330 --> 00:42:57,040
 所以，你会说，私有财产权
 So you would say that the right to private property,
613
00:42:57,900 --> 00:43:00,940
 乔丹想保住他自己所赚取的财富
 the right of Michael Jordan to keep all the money he makes
614
00:43:01,040 --> 00:43:05,510
 至少避免在收入再分配中流失
 at least to protect it from redistribution is the same
615
00:43:05,609 --> 00:43:10,190
 和拥有言论自由，宗教信仰自由
 kind of right with the same kind of weight as the right
616
00:43:10,279 --> 00:43:13,520
 争取大多数人的利益
 to freedom of speech, the right to religious liberty,
617
00:43:13,680 --> 00:43:16,790
 是同等的重要
 rights that should trump what the majority wants.
618
00:43:17,020 --> 00:43:18,070
 对。
 Absolutely.
619
00:43:18,330 --> 00:43:20,160
 我们之所以有言论自由的权利，是因为
 The reason why we have a right to free speech is because
620
00:43:20,370 --> 00:43:23,740
 我们有权利支配自己，表达我们的意见
 we have a right to own ourselves, to exercise our voice
621
00:43:23,950 --> 00:43:25,810
 通过我们选择的任何方式
 in any way that we choose.
622
00:43:25,980 --> 00:43:27,060
 好，好。
 All right, good.
623
00:43:27,339 --> 00:43:28,570
 好的，所以我们
 All right, so there we—
 
624
00:43:28,670 --> 00:43:31,080
 好的，谁想回应这个关于民主的论点
 All right, who would like to respond to that argument
625
00:43:31,339 --> 00:43:36,020
 好吧，在那里。站起来。
 about democracy being- Okay, up there. Stand up.
626
00:43:37,690 --> 00:43:41,220
 我认为，宗教和经济不是同一回事。
 I think comparing religion economics it's not the same thing.
627
00:43:41,400 --> 00:43:44,410
 比尔盖茨之所以能赚这么多钱，是因为
 The reason why Bill Gates is able to make so much money is because
628
00:43:44,560 --> 00:43:48,140
 我们生活在一个经济和社会稳定的社会里。
 we live in an economically and socially stable society.
629
00:43:48,240 --> 00:43:51,480
 如果政府不通过税收，为那10%的穷人提供救济
 And if the government didn't provide for the poor as ten percent
630
00:43:51,710 --> 00:43:55,480
 那么我们就需要更多的钱
 as you say through taxation, then we would need more money
631
00:43:55,580 --> 00:43:58,820
 需要更多警察来预防犯罪。所以，不管怎样
 for police to prevent crime and so, either way,
632
00:43:59,000 --> 00:44:01,330
 这样就需要征收更多的税来维持
 there would be more taxes taken away to provide
633
00:44:01,620 --> 00:44:06,010
 你们刚才所提到的，政府有必要提供的公众服务
 what you guys call the necessary things that the government provides.
634
00:44:06,240 --> 00:44:06,900
 你叫什么名字？
 What's your name?
635
00:44:07,080 --> 00:44:08,650
 安娜。
 Anna.
636
00:44:08,850 --> 00:44:10,240
 安娜，让我问你这个。
 Anna, let me ask you this.
637
00:44:10,470 --> 00:44:17,240
 宗教信仰自由的基本权利和
 Why is the fundamental right to religious liberty different
638
00:44:17,440 --> 00:44:22,720
 右边的Alex所说的私有财产权、
 from the right Alex asserts as a fundamental right
639
00:44:23,710 --> 00:44:27,080
 保住我的收入的基本权利，两者有什么不同？
 to private property and to keep what I earn?
640
00:44:27,890 --> 00:44:29,230
 两者有何分别？
 What's the difference between the two?
641
00:44:29,930 --> 00:44:31,420
 因为你不会，
 Because you wouldn't have-
642
00:44:32,359 --> 00:44:35,730
 如果社会不安定，你就很难赚钱
 You wouldn't be able to make money, you wouldn't be able to own property
643
00:44:35,910 --> 00:44:39,150
 也就无法拥有财产
 if there wasn't that socially, like, if society wasn't stable,
644
00:44:39,540 --> 00:44:41,770
 这和信仰自由的权利完全不同
 and that's completely different from religion.
645
00:44:42,049 --> 00:44:44,380
 信仰是个人的事情，你可以
 That's like something personal, something that you can practice
646
00:44:44,480 --> 00:44:48,400
 在自己家里进行你的信仰。或者像我进行我信仰
 on your own in your own home or like me practicing my religion
647
00:44:48,660 --> 00:44:49,760
 但不会影响旁边的人
 is not going to affect the next person.
648
00:44:49,990 --> 00:44:52,160
 但如果我是穷人，我十分绝望，
 But if I'm poor and I'm desperate,
649
00:44:52,370 --> 00:44:57,180
 我可能会犯罪来养活我的家人，这就会影响其他人
 like I might commit a crime to feed my family and that can affect others.
650
00:44:57,440 --> 00:44:58,540
 好，谢谢你。
 Okay, good, thank you.
651
00:44:59,790 --> 00:45:04,520
 偷面包错误来养活自己挨饿的家
 Would it be wrong for someone to steal a loaf of bread
652
00:45:05,330 --> 00:45:09,120
 是错误的？是吗？
 to feed his starving family? Is that wrong?
653
00:45:09,400 --> 00:45:11,310
 我认为是。这是 -
 I believe that it is. This is --
654
00:45:11,490 --> 00:45:14,000
 让我们对你们三个人做个简单的调查
 Let's take a quick poll of the three of you.
655
00:45:14,230 --> 00:45:15,570
 你觉得是，这是错误的。对。
 You say, yes, it is wrong. Yes.
656
00:45:15,879 --> 00:45:16,510
 John呢？
 John?
657
00:45:16,770 --> 00:45:17,950
 它违反了财产权。是错误的。
 It violates property rights. It's wrong.
658
00:45:18,200 --> 00:45:20,690
 哪怕是为了养活家庭？
 Even to save a starving family?
659
00:45:20,970 --> 00:45:23,720
 我的意思，养活家有其他办法
 I mean there are definitely other ways around that
660
00:45:23,819 --> 00:45:27,120
 但如果认为可以偷面包，就不行。等一下
 and by justifying, no, hang on, hang on,
661
00:45:27,299 --> 00:45:28,270
 你在笑
 before you laugh at me.
662
00:45:31,480 --> 00:45:37,420
 在为盗窃行为辩护前
 Before justifying the act of stealing,
663
00:45:37,740 --> 00:45:41,740
 你必须想到，我们已经认可的那些权利
 you have to look at violating the right that we've already agreed exists,
664
00:45:42,060 --> 00:45:45,230
 自我占有和支配权，我的意思，
 the right of self possession and the possession of, I mean,
665
00:45:45,450 --> 00:45:46,110
 自己的东西。
 your own things.
666
00:45:46,210 --> 00:45:47,390
 我们同意有产权。
 We agree on property rights.
667
00:45:47,460 --> 00:45:48,330
 好的，我们都觉得是偷窃。
 All right, we agree at stealing.
668
00:45:48,430 --> 00:45:49,320
 是的，我们觉得是偷窃。
 Yeah, we agree at stealing.
669
00:45:49,500 --> 00:45:50,370
 所以，这和产权无关
 So property rights is not the issue.
670
00:45:50,620 --> 00:45:51,200
 好的，但 -
 All right, but --
671
00:45:51,460 --> 00:45:54,760
 为什么这是错的呢，为了养活你挨饿的家？
 So why is it wrong to steal even to feed your starving family?
672
00:45:54,859 --> 00:45:58,230
 和我在一开始问过的问题
 Sort of the original argument that I made in the very first
673
00:45:58,330 --> 00:45:59,070
 有点类似
 question you asked.
674
00:45:59,160 --> 00:46:04,360
 行为的后果并不能为行为本身辩护
 The benefits of an action don't justify, don't make the action just.
675
00:46:04,990 --> 00:46:06,690
 Julia，你刚在是说？
 Do what, what would you say, Julia?
676
00:46:06,900 --> 00:46:09,440
 为了养家，偷了面包是对的吗
 Is it all right to steal a loaf of bread to feed a
677
00:46:09,670 --> 00:46:15,420
 为了救活你的孩子去偷药？
 starving family or to steal a drug that your child needs to survive?
678
00:46:17,450 --> 00:46:19,670
 我想，老实话，我不反对这样做
 I think, I'm okay with that, honestly.
679
00:46:20,140 --> 00:46:21,400
 即使从自由主义的观点来看，
 Even from the libertarian standpoint,
680
00:46:21,580 --> 00:46:24,510
 我想，如果说你可以
 I think that, okay, saying that you can just take money
681
00:46:24,660 --> 00:46:27,620
 从那些富人身上任意拿钱
 arbitrarily from people who have a lot to go to this pool
682
00:46:27,819 --> 00:46:29,760
 去帮助这些有需要的人，但
 of people who need it, but you have an individual
683
00:46:30,040 --> 00:46:33,880
 这些需要别人帮助的人，他们有义务自己救活自己
 who's acting on their own behalf to kind of save themselves and then
684
00:46:34,089 --> 00:46:36,730
 我想，像你提到的，像自我支配这个观念
 I think you said they, for any idea like self possession,
685
00:46:37,379 --> 00:46:39,730
 穷人也有权自己保护自己，自己养活自己
 they are also in charge of protecting themselves and keeping themselves
686
00:46:40,020 --> 00:46:42,820
 因此，即使是站在自由主义的立场
 alive so, therefore, even for a libertarian standpoint,
687
00:46:43,049 --> 00:46:44,100
 偷窃可能也是对的
 that might be okay.
688
00:46:44,359 --> 00:46:45,830
 好的，这很好，这很好。
 All right, that's good, that's good.
689
00:46:45,980 --> 00:46:48,570
 那么，对于反对意见三呢？
 All right, what about number three up here?
690
00:46:48,900 --> 00:46:52,330
 是不是有这样一种情况
 Isn't it the case that the successful,
691
00:46:52,529 --> 00:46:55,070
 那些成功人、有钱人，他们有责任
 the wealthy, owe a debt.
692
00:46:55,299 --> 00:46:56,640
 他们能有今天，不是完全靠自己。
 They didn't do that all by themselves.
693
00:46:56,839 --> 00:47:01,420
 他们得和其他人合作，他们对社会有亏欠
 They had to cooperate with other people that they owe a debt
694
00:47:01,620 --> 00:47:04,210
 而这种亏欠，用税收的形式来还
 to society and that that's expressed in taxation.
695
00:47:04,420 --> 00:47:05,390
 Julia，你想继续说吗？
 You wanna take that on, Julia?
696
00:47:05,490 --> 00:47:09,700
 这一次，我觉得，从他们如何致富的这个意义上说
 Okay, this one, I believe that there is not a debt to society
697
00:47:09,930 --> 00:47:11,870
 这些人并没有亏欠社会什么
 in the sense that how did these people become wealthy?
698
00:47:12,120 --> 00:47:14,010
 他们做了一些社会肯定的事
 They did something that society valued highly.
699
00:47:14,270 --> 00:47:18,140
 社会就给予和供应他们
 I think that society has already been giving, been providing for them
700
00:47:18,290 --> 00:47:21,640
 如果真有的话，我认为这些都被可以抵消
 if anything, I think it's… everything is {\fn微软雅黑\fs12\3c&HFF8000&}cancelled out.
 {\r\fn微软雅黑\fs12\3c&HFF8000&}
701
00:47:21,680 --> 00:47:25,860
 他们为社会作出一点贡献，社会也回应他们
 They provided a service to society and society responded by somehow
702
00:47:26,069 --> 00:47:27,480
 他们获得了自己的财富
 they got their wealth, so I think that --
703
00:47:27,740 --> 00:47:28,480
 说具体一点
 So be concrete.
704
00:47:28,580 --> 00:47:31,480
 像迈克尔乔丹
 In the case of Michael Jordan, some…
 
705
00:47:31,690 --> 00:47:33,680
 来说明你的观点。
 I mean, to illustrate your point.
706
00:47:33,859 --> 00:47:37,160
 有一批人在帮助他赚钱，他的队友
 There were people who helped him make the money, the teammates,
707
00:47:37,359 --> 00:47:40,260
 那位教会他打球的教练
 the coach, people who taught him how to play.
708
00:47:40,420 --> 00:47:44,810
 但是，我们都付了钱给他们，他们都得到了报偿
 But they've, you're saying, but they've all been paid for their services.
709
00:47:45,009 --> 00:47:48,670
 没错，大家也从观看乔丹打球当中
 Exactly, and society derived a lot of benefit and pleasure from watching
710
00:47:48,830 --> 00:47:49,980
 得到很多欢乐
 Michael Jordan play.
711
00:47:50,210 --> 00:47:53,320
 我认为，这就是他给社会的回报
 I think that that's how he paid his debt to society.
712
00:47:53,549 --> 00:47:54,520
 好，好。
 All right, good.
713
00:47:54,620 --> 00:47:57,390
 有谁想继续说下去？是的
 Who would, anyone likes to take up that point? Yes.
714
00:47:57,600 --> 00:48:03,010
 我认为，我们的一个假设有问题
 I think that there's a problem here with that we're assuming
715
00:48:03,299 --> 00:48:06,540
 我们假设，当生活在一个社会里，我们能自我支配
 that a person has self possession when they live in a society.
716
00:48:06,750 --> 00:48:09,520
 我觉得，当你在这个社会里生活，你不得不放弃这项权利
 I feel like when you live in a society, you give up that right.
717
00:48:09,620 --> 00:48:13,390
 我的意思是，从法律上说，如果有人得罪了我
 I mean, technically, if I want to personally go out and kill someone
718
00:48:13,620 --> 00:48:15,190
 因为我有权自我支配，所以我想把这个人给杀了
 because they offend me, that is self possession.
719
00:48:15,580 --> 00:48:17,860
 但因为我生活在一个社会里，我不能这样做。
 Because I live in a society I cannot do that.
720
00:48:18,210 --> 00:48:21,610
 我认为这相当于说，因为我有更多的钱
 I think it's kind of equivalent to say because I have more money,
721
00:48:21,790 --> 00:48:23,750
 我有资源来帮助其他人
 I have resources that can save people's lives,
722
00:48:24,040 --> 00:48:26,680
 政府是不是就可以从我身上拿钱呢？
 is it not okay for the government to take that from me?
723
00:48:26,859 --> 00:48:30,340
 因为我生活在一个社会里，只能在一定程度上自我支配
 Self possession only to a certain extent because I'm living in a society
724
00:48:30,620 --> 00:48:32,660
 我必须考虑到周围的人
 where I have to take account of the people around me.
725
00:48:32,839 --> 00:48:34,100
 你叫什么名字？
 So are you question, what's your name?
726
00:48:34,299 --> 00:48:35,300
 维多利亚。
 Victoria.
727
00:48:35,509 --> 00:48:40,610
 维多利亚，你是在质疑自我支配这个基本前提？
 Victoria, are you questioning the fundamental premise of self possession?
728
00:48:40,779 --> 00:48:41,910
 是。
 Yes.
729
00:48:42,509 --> 00:48:44,450
 我认为，你并没有真正的自我支配
 I think that you don't really have self possession
730
00:48:44,650 --> 00:48:47,480
 如果你选择了在这个社会里生活，因为你不能忽略
 if you choose to live in a society because you cannot just discount
731
00:48:47,710 --> 00:48:49,100
 你周围的人
 the people around you.
732
00:48:49,430 --> 00:48:54,400
 好吧，我想让这些自由主义者们，对最后一点
 All right, I want to quickly get the response of the libertarian
733
00:48:54,580 --> 00:48:56,780
 做个简短的回应
 team to the last point.
734
00:48:57,000 --> 00:49:02,330
 最后一点，也许像维多利亚州说的
 The last point builds on, well, maybe it builds on Victoria's
735
00:49:02,440 --> 00:49:08,240
 我们并没有支配和拥有自己，因为
 suggestion that we don't own ourselves because it says that Bill Gates
736
00:49:08,420 --> 00:49:13,100
 比尔盖茨 、乔丹都很富有
 is wealthy, that Michael Jordan makes a huge income,
737
00:49:13,359 --> 00:49:17,330
 但这并不完全靠他们一个人的努力
 isn't wholly their own doing.
738
00:49:17,540 --> 00:49:20,910
 这还靠运气，所以我们不能说
 It's the product of a lot of luck and so we can't claim that they
739
00:49:21,190 --> 00:49:24,670
 在道义上，并不是所有钱都是他们应得的
 morally deserve all the money they make.
740
00:49:24,819 --> 00:49:26,340
 谁想回应这点？Alex？
 Who wants to reply to that? Alex?
741
00:49:26,549 --> 00:49:30,660
 你当然证明说...
 You certainly could make the case that it is not…
 
742
00:49:31,150 --> 00:49:33,400
 他们的富有不适用于他们是否心地善良，
 their wealth is not appropriate to the goodness in their hearts,
743
00:49:33,600 --> 00:49:36,190
 这并不是一个和道德有关的问题
 but that's not really the morally relevant issue.
744
00:49:36,370 --> 00:49:39,670
 这里的论点在于，他们是通过自由交换的过程
 The point is that they have received what they have through
745
00:49:39,870 --> 00:49:43,530
 人们自愿地和他们交换
 the free exchange of people who have given them their holdings,
746
00:49:43,759 --> 00:49:46,040
 通常是为了换取一些服务
 usually in exchange for providing some other service
747
00:49:46,270 --> 00:49:47,140
 很好
 Good enough.
748
00:49:47,290 --> 00:49:50,480
 我尝试总结一下，从这次讨论中学到的
 I want to try to sum up what we've learned from this discussion,
749
00:49:50,690 --> 00:49:55,740
 首先，让我们感谢John，Alex和Julia的出色表现
 but, first, let's thank John, Alex, and Julia for a really wonderful job.
750
00:50:02,569 --> 00:50:07,020
 在讨论快结束的时候，维多利亚
 Toward the end of the discussion just now Victoria challenged
751
00:50:07,819 --> 00:50:11,480
 质疑自由主义推理的一个前提
 the premise of this line of reasoning that's libertarian logic.
752
00:50:12,109 --> 00:50:16,820
 她指出，也许我们并不能支配自己
 Maybe, she suggested, we don't own ourselves after all.
753
00:50:18,509 --> 00:50:24,130
 如果你不赞同，自由主义者反对再分配的观点
 If you reject the libertarian case against redistribution,
754
00:50:25,509 --> 00:50:32,620
 似乎我们能打破自由主义的逻辑
 there would seem to be an incentive to break in to the libertarian line
755
00:50:32,720 --> 00:50:38,130
 在最一开始，在最温和的层次上
 of reasoning at the earliest, at the most modest level,
756
00:50:38,879 --> 00:50:43,140
 这就是为什么很多人争议
 which is why a lot of people disputed that taxation
757
00:50:43,660 --> 00:50:46,040
 认为税收在道义上等同于强迫劳动。
 is morally equivalent to forced labor.
758
00:50:47,399 --> 00:50:55,060
 但对于自由主义的大前提
 But what about the big claim, the premise, the big idea
759
00:50:55,420 --> 00:50:56,990
 和基本观点呢？
 underlying the libertarian argument?
760
00:50:58,080 --> 00:51:04,330
 我们是否真的能支配自己，还是我们可以推翻这个想法
 Is it true that we own ourselves or can we do without that idea
761
00:51:05,399 --> 00:51:13,820
 而且仍然能像自由主义者们所要的那样
 and still avoid what libertarians want to avoid creating a society
762
00:51:13,990 --> 00:51:20,920
 反对建立一个所谓的“正义”社会，为了一部分人的利益
 in an account of justice where some people can be just used
763
00:51:22,170 --> 00:51:28,390
 就可以从另外一部分人拿钱
 for the sake of other people's welfare or even for the sake of the general good?
764
00:51:29,450 --> 00:51:37,580
 自由主义批判功利主义把个人当作
 Libertarians combat the utilitarian idea of using people as means
765
00:51:37,970 --> 00:51:41,870
 谋取大众利益的工具
 for the collective happiness by saying the way to put a stop
766
00:51:42,040 --> 00:51:47,580
 他们评判的理由是
 to that utilitarian logic of using persons is to resort to
767
00:51:47,870 --> 00:51:52,320
 一个听起来很有说服力的想法：
 the intuitively powerful idea that we are the proprietors
768
00:51:52,490 --> 00:51:54,350
 我们是自己的主人
 of our own person.
769
00:51:57,069 --> 00:52:00,730
 这是Alex、Julia、John、Robert Nozick这一派的观点
 That's Alex and Julia and John and Robert Nozick.
770
00:52:03,460 --> 00:52:07,910
 如果我们质疑我们是否能自我支配
 What are the consequences for a theory of justice and
771
00:52:08,120 --> 00:52:15,030
 那我们需要一个怎么样的关于正义的理论？
 in account of rights of calling into question the idea of self possession?
772
00:52:15,819 --> 00:52:19,430
 难道我们又回到功利主义
 Does it mean that we're back to utilitarianism and using people
773
00:52:19,640 --> 00:52:23,200
 把所有人的利益加起来，最后决定把那个胖子推下桥？（第一集）
 and aggregating preferences and pushing the fat man off the bridge?
774
00:52:28,180 --> 00:52:35,810
 并非是Nozick本人发展出自我支配这个概念
 Nozick doesn't himself fully develop the idea of self possession.
775
00:52:35,879 --> 00:52:38,840
 他借用了早期的哲学家洛克
 He borrows it from an earlier philosopher, John Locke.
776
00:52:40,480 --> 00:52:48,090
 当自然物（例如风、花草）最后变为私人财产
 John Locke accounted for the rise of private property from the state of nature
777
00:52:48,240 --> 00:52:53,260
 洛克解释这一现象所用的逻辑，跟Nozick
 by a chain of reasoning very similar to the one that Nozick
778
00:52:53,490 --> 00:52:55,060
 和其他自由主义者用的类似
 and the libertarians use.
779
00:52:56,420 --> 00:53:06,060
 洛克说，经过我们劳动加工之后，那些不属于任何人的自然物，
 John Locke said private property arises because when we mix our labor with things,
780
00:53:06,920 --> 00:53:12,570
 就变成了归我们所有，变成私有财产
 unowned things, we come to aquire a property right in those things.
781
00:53:13,859 --> 00:53:15,300
 而其原因是什么？
 And the reason?
782
00:53:16,060 --> 00:53:18,180
 原因是我们能拥有我们自己的劳动成果
 The reason is that we own our own labor,
783
00:53:18,279 --> 00:53:20,140
 而这背后的原因何在？
 and the reason for that?
784
00:53:21,310 --> 00:53:24,920
 因为我们是我们自己的主人
 We are the proprietors, the owners of our own person.
785
00:53:25,910 --> 00:53:32,860
 因此，为了研究自由主义声称的
 And so in order to examine the moral force of the libertarian claim
786
00:53:33,089 --> 00:53:37,400
 我们拥有自己，我们必须转向
 that we own ourselves, we need to turn to
787
00:53:37,660 --> 00:53:42,160
 英国政治哲学家洛克，看看他是怎么解释
 the English political philosopher, John Locke, and examine his account
788
00:53:42,569 --> 00:53:47,540
 私有财产的所有权和自我支配权。这也是我们下次的讨论。
 of private property and self ownership and that's what we'll do next time.
789
00:53:48,540 --> 00:53:53,540
 任尔选择，给尔所选。（选择的后果自负）
 From each as they choose, to each as they are chosen.----Robert Nozick
790
00:54:08,540 --> 00:54:15,540
 英文字幕：
 http://forum-network.org
xiaolai
 中文字幕：
 何_何
791
00:54:15,540 --> 00:54:25,540
 4月将推出
 耶鲁心理学入门课程