(完整word版)哈佛大学公开课《公平与正义》第2集中英文字幕

Funding for this program

is provided by:

本节目的赞助来自... ...

Additional funding provided by:

另外的赞助来自... ...

Last time,

we argued about

上次,我们谈到

the case of

The Queen v. Dudley & Stephens,

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 lifeboat in mind,

带着针对这个案件所展开的一些讨论

the arguments for and against

what Dudley and Stephens did in mind,

带着支持和反对Dudley和Stephens所做的吃人行为的讨论, let's turn back to the philosophy,

the utilitarian philosophy of Jeremy Bentham.

让我们回头来看看Bentham的功利主义哲学.

Bentham was born in England in 1748.

At the age of 12, he went to Oxford.

Bentham于1748年出生于英国.12岁那年,他去了牛津大学. 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岁就取得了律师资格

but he never practiced law.

但他没有从事于律师行业.

Instead, he devoted his life to

jurisprudence and moral philosophy.

相反,他毕生致力于法理学和道德哲学.

Last time, we began to consider

Bentham's version of utilitarianism.

上一次,我们开始考虑Bentham版本的功利主义. The main idea is simply stated

and it's this:

简单来说其主要思想就是：

The highest principle of morality,

whether personal or political morality,

道德的最高原则,无论个人或政治道德,

is to maximize the general welfare,

or the collective happiness,

就是将公共福利,或集体的幸福最大化,

or the overall balance

of pleasure over pain;

或在快乐与痛苦的平衡中倾向快乐;

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是由如下推理来得出这个原则的：

We're all governed

by pain and pleasure,

我们都被痛苦和快乐所控制,

they are our sovereign masters,

and so any moral system

他们是我们的主宰,所以任何道德体系

has to take account of them.

都要考虑到这点.

How best to take account?

By maximizing.

如何能最好地考虑这一点?通过最大化.

And this leads to the principle of the

greatest good for the greatest number.

从此引出的的原则就是将最大利益给最多数的人的.

What exactly should we maximize?

我们究竟该如何最大化?

Bentham tells us happiness,

or more precisely, utility -

Bentham告诉我们幸福,或者更准确地说,实用- maximizing utility as a principle

not only for individuals

最大化效用作为一个原则不仅适用于个人

but also for communities

and for legislators.

而且还适用于社区及立法者.

"What, after all, is a community?"

Bentham asks.

“毕竟,什么是社区?”Bentham问道.

It's the sum of the individuals

who comprise it.

它是构成这个社区的所有个体的总和.

And that's why in deciding

the best policy,

这就是为什么在决定最好的政策,

in deciding what the law should be,

in deciding what's just,

在决定法律应该是什么样,在决定什么是公正时, citizens and legislators

should ask themselves the question

公民和立法者应该问自己的问题

if we add up all of the benefits

of this policy

如果我们把这项政策所能得到的所有利益

and subtract all of the costs,

the right thing to do

减去所有的成本,正确的做法

is the one that maximizes the balance

of happiness over suffering.

就是将幸福与痛苦之间的平衡最大化地倾向幸福. That's 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,我想看看你们是否同意它,

and it often goes,

this utilitarian logic,

往往有云：功利主义的逻辑,

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,

它的内涵是用一个价值

usually a dollar value,

to stand for utility on the costs

通常是由美元,来代表不同提案的效用

and the benefits

of various proposals.

这效用是基于成本和效益得出的

Recently, in the Czech Republic,

there was a proposal

最近,在捷克共和国,有一个提案

to increase the excise tax on smoking.

Philip Morris, the tobacco company,

对吸烟增加货物税.Philip Morris烟草公司,

does huge business

in the Czech Republic.

该公司在捷克共和国有着大笔生意.

They commissioned a study,

a cost-benefit analysis

他们委托了一个研究,

of smoking in the Czech Republic,

and what their cost-benefit

关于吸烟在捷克共和国的成本效益分析.

analysis found was the government

gains by having Czech citizens smoke.

他们的分析发现,捷克政府将会因公民吸烟而收益.

Now, how do they gain?

现在,他们如何收益?

It's true that there are

negative effects to the public finance

确实,捷克政府的公共财政体系

of the Czech government

because there are increased health care

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, costs for people who develop

smoking-related diseases.

从而受到负面影响.

On the other hand,

there were positive effects

另一方面,这也有积极效应

and those were added up

on the other side of the ledger.

并且这些积极效益累加到了账簿的另一面

The positive effects included,

for the most part,

积极效益包括,在大多数情况下,

various tax revenues that the

government derives from the sale

政府通过卷烟产品而获得的各种税收收入,

of cigarette products,

but it also included

但也包括

health care savings to the

government when people die early,

政府因为吸烟人群过早死亡而省下的医疗储蓄,例如pension savings -- you don't have to

pay pensions for as long -

养老金储蓄-不必支付退休金了-

and also, savings in

housing costs for the elderly.

还有,老年人住房费用.

And when all of the costs

and benefits were added up,

当把所有的成本和效益都分别加起来,

the Philip Morris study found

that there is a net public finance gain

Philip Morris公司的研究发现,捷克共和国会有一个in the Czech Republic

of $147,000,000,

$147,000,000的公共财政净增益,

and given the savings in housing,

in health care, and pension costs,

并鉴于节省了住房费用,医疗保健费用,养老金费用, the government enjoys savings

of over $1,200 for each person

who dies prematurely due to smoking.

每个因吸烟而过早死亡的人都为政府节省了$1,200.

Cost-benefit analysis.

成本效益分析.

Now, those among you

who are defenders of utilitarianism

现在,你们中间,那些功利主义的捍卫者

may think that this is an unfair test.

可能认为这是一种不公平的测试.

Philip Morris was pilloried

in the press

Philip Morris公司在新闻界遭到了嘲笑

and they issued an apology

for this heartless calculation.

他们也因为这个无情的计算而发表了道歉.

You may say that what's missing here

is something that the utilitarian

你可能会说,功利主义在这里可以轻易弥补一个疏漏can easily incorporate,

namely the value to the person

它没有正确评估人的价值

and to the families of those who die

from lung cancer.

以及那些因为肺癌而死亡的人的家属的损失.

What about the value of life?

如何评估生命价值?

Some cost-benefit analyses incorporate

a measure for the 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.

其中最有名的要数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年代.

Do you remember

what the Ford Pinto was,

你还记得Ford Pinto是,

a kind of car?

Anybody?

什么样的车么?谁能记得?

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

但它也有问题,车后座的油箱

was at the back of the car

and in rear collisions,

少数情况下,碰撞会导致

the fuel tank exploded

and some people were killed

油箱爆炸并且有些人会因此死去

and some severely injured.

还有人因此严重受伤.

Victims of these injuries

took Ford to court to sue.

这些受害者将福特告到法院.

And in the court case,

it turned out that Ford

而在诉讼案件,人们发现福特原来had long since known about the

vulnerable fuel tank

早已知道油箱的脆弱

and had done a cost-benefit analysis

to determine whether it would be

并且已做了成本效益分析,以确定是否

worth it to put in

a special shield that would

值得来放入一个特殊的盾牌

protect the fuel tank

and prevent it from exploding.

用来保护油箱并防止它爆炸.

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Ford Pinto安全的每部件费用,

they calculated at $11.00 per part.

他们算出,要每部件$ 11.00.

And here's -- this was the cost-benefit

analysis that emerged in the trial.

这里-这就是当时审判中出示的成本效益分析.

Eleven dollars per part

at 12.5 million cars and trucks

每件11美元,乘以12.5万辆轿车和卡车

came to a total cost of

$137 million to improve the safety.

得到一个总成本,需要13700万美元来改善安全性.

But then they calculated the benefits

of spending all this money

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on a safer car

and they counted 180 deaths

(如果不花这笔钱来改善安全,)假设会导致180人死亡and they assigned a dollar value,

$200,000 per death,

他们对此用美元价值来代替,每个死去的人赔偿$ 200,000

180 injuries, $67,000,

and then the costs to repair,

180人受伤的赔偿为每人$67,000,然后是维修受损车的费用,

the replacement cost

for 2,000 vehicles,

2 000辆车,

it would be destroyed without

the safety device $700 per vehicle.

由于没有安装安全设施,每辆车将会需要$700来维修.

So the benefits turned out to be

only $49.5 million

结论是总效益只有$49.5 million(相对于修复安全隐患总成本需要$137 million)

and so they didn't

install the device.

因此他们没有安装那个安全设备.

Needless to say,

when this memo of the

毫无疑问,福特汽车公司的这个成本效益分析备忘录

Ford Motor Company's cost-benefit

analysis came out in the trial,

在审判中出现时,

it appalled the jurors,

who awarded a huge settlement.

震惊了陪审团,也因此裁定了福特公司巨大的赔偿金额.

Is this a counterexample to the

utilitarian idea of calculating?

这是一个功利主义计算的反例么?

Because Ford included a measure

of the value of life.

因为福特引入了对生命价值的评估.

Now, who here wants to defend

cost-benefit analysis

好,这里有谁想针对这一明显反例

from this apparent counterexample?

来捍卫成本效益分析?

Who has a defense?

谁来辩护?

Or do you think this

completely destroys the whole

或者你认为这一反例已经完全摧毁了

utilitarian calculus?

Yes?

功利主义计算? 你来

Well, I think that once again,

they've made the same mistake

嗯,我想再次指出,他们犯了同样的错误

the previous case did,

that they assigned a dollar value

和以前的情况一样,他们对人的生命赋予

to human life,

and once again,

一个美元为单位的价值,同样的,

they failed to take account

things like suffering

他们没有考虑到家属的痛苦和损失

and emotional losses by the families.

诸如此类的因素.

I mean, families lost earnings

but they also lost a loved one

我的意思是,家庭损失了收入来源,但他们也失去了爱人and that is more valued

than $200,000.

这些的价值远远超过$200,000的.

Right and -- wait, wait, wait,

that's good. What's your name?

好的-等等,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

因此,Julie, 如果$200,000 是个太低的金额, because it doesn't include the

loss of a loved one

因为它不包括失去爱人

and the loss of those years of life,

what would be -

以及那些在没有亲人的岁月里的损失,你认为

what do you think

would be a more accurate number?

更准确的金额是多少?

I don't believe I could give a number.

I think that this sort of analysis

我不认为, 我可以对此给出一个金额. 我认为这类分析shouldn't be applied to issues

of human life.

不适用于人类生命相关的问题.

I think it can't be used monetarily.

我认为不能用金钱来衡量.

So they didn't just put

too low a number, Julie says.

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.

他们压根就不应该用金额来衡量.

All right, let's hear someone who -

You have to adjust for inflation.

好吧,让我们听听还有谁-

You have to adjust for inflation. (这个金额)要根据通货膨胀进行调整.

All right, fair enough.

好吧,很公平.

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 what's your name?

你的名字是?

Voytek

Voytek

Voytek says we have to

allow for inflation.

Voytek说,我们必须允许通货膨胀.

We should be more generous.

我们应该更慷慨些.

Then would you be satisfied

that this is the right way of

然后,你认为这就是考虑这个问题的

thinking about the question?

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, I'm not sure

我们需要有一个金额,我不确定

what that number would be,

but I do agree that

合适的金额是多少,但我同意

there could possibly

be a number put on the human life.

对人类生命定一个金额是可行的.

All right, so Voytek says,

and here, he disagrees with Julie.

好的,Voytek说,他不同意Julie.

Julie says we can't put a number

on human life

朱莉认为,我们不能在成本效益分析中

for the purpose of a

cost-benefit analysis.

对人的生命定一个金额.

Voytek says we have to because

we have to make decisions somehow.

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. What do other people

think about this?

其他人觉得呢?

Is there anyone prepared

to defend cost-benefit analysis

这里有人打算为能足够准确的成本效益分析辩护么?

here as accurate as desirable?

Yes? Go ahead.

好?请继续.

I think that if Ford

and other car companies

我认为, 如果福特和其他汽车公司

didn't use cost-benefit analysis,

they'd eventually go out of business

没有使用成本效益分析,他们会最终歇业

because they wouldn't be able to be

profitable and millions of people

因为他们将无法盈利,(从而导致)数百万的人

wouldn't be able to use their cars

to get to jobs,

将无法使用这些汽车去上班,

to put food on the table,

to feed their children.

(没钱)购买餐桌上的食物,(没钱)来喂养孩子.

So I think that if cost-benefit

analysis isn't employed,

因此,我认为, 如果不利用成本效益分析,

the greater good is sacrificed,

in this case.

在这种情况下,(我们将会)牺牲更大的利益.

All right, let me add.

What's your name?

好吧,让我来补充. 你叫什么名字?

Raul.

Raul.

Raul, there was recently a study done

about cell phone use by a driver

Raul,最近有一项研究表明,关于开车时驾驶者使用手机when people are driving a car,

and there was a debate

有一场辩论, 关于这种行为

whether that should be banned.

是否应被禁止.

Yeah.

是啊。

And the figure was that

some 2,000 people die as a result

结论是每年大约有2000人

of accidents each year

using cell phones.

因此而死亡.

And yet, the cost-benefit analysis

which was done by the

然而,哈佛风险分析中心

Center for Risk Analysis

at Harvard found that

(针对此事)所做的成本效益分析发现

if you look at the benefits

of the cell phone use

如果你看看使用手机所得到的好处

and you put some value on the life,

it comes out about the same

如果你将生命设定一个金额,结论也是相同的. because of the enormous

economic benefit of enabling people

因为它能够使驾驶者能够充分利用时间

to take advantage of their time,

not waste time, be able to make deals

来获得巨大的经济利益,不需要浪费时间,就可以进行交易and talk to friends and so on

while they're driving.

与朋友交谈等等.

Doesn't that suggest that

it's a mistake to try to put

这是不是表明,在涉及生命的问题中

monetary figures on

questions of human life?

试图用货币数字来衡量是个错误的尝试?

Well, I think that if the

great majority of people try to

嗯,我认为, 如果大多数人试图

derive maximum utility

out of a service,

获得最大的效用,

like using cell phones and the

convenience that cell phones provide,

例如用手机和手机所提供的便利,

that sacrifice is necessary

for satisfaction to occur.

这种牺牲是必要的.

You're an outright utilitarian.

你是一个彻底的功利主义者.

Yes. Okay.

是的.好吧.

All right then, one last question, Raul.

- Okay.

那么好吧,最后一个问题,Raul. -好.

And I put this to Voytek,

what dollar figure should

我问Voytek同样的问题, 在决定是否应该禁止使用手机时, be put on human life to decide

whether to ban the use of cell phones?

对人类生命的合理金额评估应该是多少?

Well, I don't want to

arbitrarily calculate a figure,

嗯,我不想武断地说出一个金额,

I mean, right now.

I think that -

我的意思是,现在.我认为-

You want to take it under advisement?

你想要深思熟虑吗?

Yeah, I'll take it under advisement.

是的,我要好好考虑一下.

But what, roughly speaking, would it be?

You got 2,300 deaths. - Okay.

但是,粗略地讲,将会是多少? (例如)有2,300人死亡. -好. You got to assign a dollar value

to know whether you want

你必须指定一个金额,才能知道是否应该。