Exercise of moral agency 道德能动性的运用

合集下载

哈佛公开课-公正课中英字幕第二课-食人惨案

哈佛公开课-公正课中英字幕第二课-食人惨案

第二讲《食人惨案》不得不那样做是吗\You have to do what you have to do?差不多吧不得已而为之\You got to do what you got to do pretty much.如果你已经19天没有进食\If you've been going 19 days without any food you know那么总得有人要作出牺牲\someone just has to take the sacrifice.有了他的牺牲其他人才能活下来\Someone has to make the sacrifice and people can survive.很好你叫什么名字\Alright that's good. What's your name?-马库斯-你有什么话要对马库斯说吗\- Marcus. - Marcus what do you say to Marcus?上一次我们以几个故事开头\Last time we started out last time with some stories几个在道德上两难的例子\with some moral dilemmas有电车事故的例子\about trolley cars也有器官移植医生\and about doctors and healthy patients手握健康病人生杀大权的例子\vulnerable to being victims of organ transplantation.在讨论中我们注意到两点\We noticed two things about the arguments we had 一点与我们的讨论方式有关\one had to do with the way we were arguing.我们首先在特定情况下作出判断\We began with our judgments in particular cases.然后试图阐明作出这些判断的\We tried to articulate the reasons or the principles理由或原则\lying behind our judgments.当我们面临新的情况时\And then confronted with a new case我们重新检验这些原则\we found ourselves reexamining those principles根据新的情况修正这些理由或原则\revising each in the light of the other.然后我们发现\And we noticed the built in pressure要在特定案例之下自圆其说我们的判断\to try to bring into alignment our judgments about particular cases校正我们一再确认的原则难度越来越大\and the principles we would endorse on reflection.我们也注意到了这些争论的本质\We also noticed something about the substance of the arguments已经初见端倪\that emerged from the discussion.我们发现有时我们倾向于\We noticed that sometimes we were tempted to 依据行为所产生的后果\locate the morality of an act in the consequences in the results以及对外界的影响判断其是否道德\in the state of the world that it brought about.我们称之为后果主义道德推理\And we called this consequentiality moral reasoning.同时注意到在某些情况下\But we also noticed in some cases不仅行为的后果会使我们动摇\we weren't swayed only by the result.有时我们中许多人认为行为的后果固然重要\Sometimes many of us felt that not just consequences但行为的道德本质或是特性也同样重要\but also the intrinsic quality or character of the act matters morally.有些人认为\Some people argued某些行为反正就是绝对错误的\that there are certain things that are just categorically wrong即便该行为产生了好的结果\even if they bring about a good result即便能牺牲一人挽救五人性命\even if they saved five people at the cost of one life.从而对比了后果主义与绝对主义道德原则之间的差别\So we contrasted consequentiality moral principles with categorical ones.从今天到接下来的几天里我们将要剖析\Today and in the next few days we will begin to examine后果主义道德理论中最具影响的一个版本\one of the most influential versions of consequentiality moral theory.即功利主义哲学\And that's the philosophy of utilitarianism.杰里米·边沁18世纪英国政治哲学家\Jeremy Bentham the 18th century English political philosopher首次对功利主义道德论做出了系统的定义\gave first the first clear systematic expression to the utilitarian moral theory边沁的核心观点非常简单\And Bentham's idea his essential idea is a very simple one.充满了道德上的直观感染力\With a lot of morally intuitive appeal其观点如下\Bentham's idea is the following正确的选择公正的选择\the right thing to do; the just thing to do就是最大化功利\is to maximize utility.那这个"功利"是什么意思呢\What did he mean by utility?他认为功利等于快乐减去痛苦\He meant by utility the balance of pleasure over pain功利主义认为快乐和痛苦都是可以计算的幸福减去苦难\happiness over suffering.在此基础上他提出了功利最大化的原则\Here's how he arrived at the principle of maximizing utility.边沁通过观察得出\He started out by observing that all of us所有人类均受两大至高无上的因素所支配\all human beings are governed by two sovereign masters:痛苦与快乐\pain and pleasure.人的本性就是趋乐避苦的\We human beings like pleasure and dislike pain.所以我们应以道德为基准\And so we should base morality不管是在考虑个人行为时\whether we're thinking about what to do in our own lives还是作为立法者或普通公民\or whether as legislators or citizens考虑如何立法时\we're thinking about what the laws should be.于公于私最正确的选择都该是\The right thing to do individually or collectively is制作人:心舟QQ:1129441083即为全方位地最大化地提升幸福\to maximize act in a way that maximizes the overall level of happiness.边沁的功利主义有时被总结为一句口号\Bentham's utilitarianism is sometimes summed up with the slogan为最多的人谋求最大的幸福\"The greatest good for the greatest number."有了这条最基本的功利原则\With this basic principle of utility on hand让我们检验一下这条原则\let's begin to test it and to examine it是否适用于另一案例\by turning to another case another story而这一次就不再是假定的事件了\but this time not a hypothetical story是个真实的故事\a real life story女王诉达德利和斯蒂芬斯案\the case of the Queen versus Dudley and Stevens. 这是19世纪英国的一则法律案例\This was a 19th century British law case众多法学院争论不休的著名案例\that's famous and much debated in law schools.这则案例是这样的我先概述一下\Here's what happened in the case. I'll summarize the story然后假设你们就是陪审团会怎么来裁定\then I want to hear how you would rule imagining that you were the jury.当时的报纸是这么描述事件背景的\A newspaper account of the time described the background.最惨绝人寰的海难\A sadder story of disaster at sea"木犀草号"幸存者的骇人经历\was never told than that of the survivors of the yacht Mignonette.他们的船在南大西洋\The ship floundered in the South Atlantic距好望角1300英里处沉没了\1300 miles from the Cape.全体船员一行四人达德利是船长\There were four in the crew Dudley was the captain斯蒂芬斯是大副布鲁克斯是水手\Stevens was the first mate Brooks was a sailor都是品德高尚的人至少报上是这么说的\all men of excellent character or so the newspaper account tells us.第四名船员是船上的侍者\The fourth crew member was the cabin boy理查德·派克17岁\Richard Parker 17 years old.他是孤儿没有家人\He was an orphan he had no family这是他首次出海远航\and he was on his first long voyage at sea.据报道他不顾朋友的反对\He went the news account tells us rather against the advice of his friends.带着充满希望的野心\He went in the hopefulness of youthful ambition憧憬此次征程能将他铸造成为男人\thinking the journey would make a man of him.然而事与愿违\Sadly it was not to be.这则案例的实际情况毫无争议\The facts of the case were not in dispute.大浪导致翻船"木犀草号"沉没\Wave hit the shipand Mignonette went down. 四人逃上了救生艇\The four crew members escaped to a lifeboat.仅有的食物就是两罐腌萝卜没有淡水\The only food they had were two cans of preserved turnips no fresh water.头三天他们什么也没吃\For the first three days they ate nothing.第四天他们开了一罐腌萝卜来吃\On the fourth day they opened one of the cans of turnips and ate it.第五天他们抓到了一只海龟\The next day they caught a turtle.就着另一罐腌萝卜\Together with the other can of turnips这只海龟让他们又撑了几天\the turtle enabled them to subsist for the next few days.随后的八天内他们弹尽粮绝了\And then for eight days they had nothing.没有食物和饮用水\No food. No water.想象一下如果你是当事人你会怎么做\Imagine yourself in a situation like that what would you do?他们是这样做的\Here's what they did.现在派克正蜷缩在救生艇的角落\By now the cabin boy Parker is lying at the bottom of the lifeboat in the corner因为他不顾众人劝阻饮用了海水\because he had drunk seawater against the advice of the others他生病了而且似乎快死了\and he had become ill and he appeared to be dying.在第19天船长达德利\So on the 19th day Dudley the captain建议大家应该抽签\suggested that they should all have a lottery通过抽签决定谁先死来救其他的人\that they should draw lots to see who would die to save the rest.布鲁克斯拒绝了他不赞成抽签\Brooks refused. He didn't like the lottery idea. 不知道他是因为不愿意冒这个险呢\We don't know whether this was because he didn't want to take the chance还是因为他信奉绝对主义道德原则\or because he believed in categorical moral principles.反正最终没有进行抽签\But in any case no lots were drawn.又过了一天依然没有船只的影子\The next day there was still no ship in sight 于是达德利叫布鲁克斯转过头去\so Dudley told Brooks to avert his gaze并示意斯蒂芬斯最好杀掉派克\and he motioned to Stevens that the boy Parker had better be killed.达德利为派克做了祷告并告诉派克他的时辰到了\Dudley offered a prayer he told the boy his time had come然后就用小刀割破他的颈静脉杀死了他\and he killed him with a pen knife stabbing him in the jugular vein.虽然良心上极力拒绝但布鲁克斯\Brooks emerged from his conscientious objection最终还是加入了这骇人的"盛宴"\to share in the gruesome bounty.整整四天他们三个\For four days the three of them靠派克的尸体和血液为食\fed on the body and blood of the cabin boy.真实的故事最后他们得救了\True story. And then they were rescued.达德利日记里描述的得救情形委婉得让人震惊\Dudley describes their rescue in his diary with staggering euphemism.他写道第24天我们正在吃早餐\Quote "On the 24th day as we were having our breakfast终于有船来了\a ship appeared at last."一艘德国船搭救了这三名幸存者\The three survivors were picked up by a German ship.把他们带回了英国的法尔茅斯\They were taken back to Falmouth in England并在那被逮捕接受审判\where they were arrested and tried.布鲁克斯成了目击证人达德利和斯蒂芬斯则成了被告\Brooks turned state's witness. Dudley and Stevens went to trial.他们对事实供认不讳\They didn't dispute the facts.但他们声称此行为是迫不得已\They claimed they had acted out of necessity;他们这样辩护\that was their defense.辩称"牺牲一人保全三人"是更好的结果\They argued in effect better that one should die so that three could survive.但控方并不为之所动\The prosecutor wasn't swayed by that argument.他认为谋杀就是谋杀所以此案被送上法庭\He said murder is murder and so the case went to trial.现在假设你们就是陪审团\Now imagine you are the jury.为了简化讨论过程撇开法律问题不谈\And just to simplify the discussion put aside the question of law假设你们作为陪审团只需裁定\let's assume that you as the jury are charged with deciding他们的所作所为在道德上是否是允许的\whether what they did was morally permissible or not.有多少会投"无罪" 认为道德上是允许的\How many would vote 'not guilty' that what they did was morally permissible?多少会投"有罪" 认为道德上是不允许的\And how many would vote 'guilty' what they did was morally wrong?绝大多数认为有罪\A pretty sizeable majority.现在来听听大家的理由\Now let's see what people's reasons are先从少数派开始\and let me begin with those who are in the minority.先听听为达德利和斯蒂芬斯作出的辩护\Let's hear first from the defense of Dudley and Stevens.你为什么会在道德上赦免他们\Why would you morally exonerate them?理由是什么\What are your reasons?你来\Yes.我认为此行为应该受到道德上的谴责\I think it is morally reprehensible但我认为道德上应该受到谴责\but I think that there is a distinction between what's morally reprehensible并不等同于法律上应当承担责任\and what makes someone legally accountable. 换言之正如法官常说的\In other words as the judge said情有可原未必不可法外容情\what's always moral isn't necessarily against the law当然我不认为一句情有可原\and while I don't think that necessity就能为盗窃谋杀以及其他违法行为正名\justifies theft or murder or any illegal act但有时情有可原的程度\at some point your degree of necessity确实可能法外容情赦免你的罪行\does in fact exonerate you from any guilt. 很好其他人呢还有谁来辩护\Okay. Good. Other defenders. Other voices for the defense.为他们行为来点道德辩护\Moral justifications for what they did.你来\Yes.谢谢我只是认为\Thank you. I just feel like在那样的绝境下为了生存你不得不那样做\in the situation that desperate you have to do what you have to do to survive.不得不那样做\You have to do what you have to do.对差不多吧不得已而为之\Yeah you've got to do what you've got to do. Pretty much.如果你已经19天没有进食\If you've been going 19 days without any food那么总得有人要作出牺牲\you know someone just has to take the sacrifice必须有人牺牲其他人才能活下来\someone has to make the sacrifice and people can survive.此外假定他们活了下来\And furthermore from that let's say they survive回家以后成为对社会更加有益的公民\and then they become productive members of society比如创建了无数的慈善机构\who go home and start like a million charity organizations或者诸如此类的\and this and that and this and that.-最终他们造福了所有人-对\- I mean they benefited everybody in the end. - Yeah.当然没人知道他们接下来的情况\So I mean I don't know what they did afterwards他们也可能回去杀了更多人我不知道\they might have gone and like killed more people I don't know.-那边在说什么-也许他们成了杀手\- What? - Maybe they were assassins.那万一他们回家后结果成了杀手呢\What if they went home and they turned out to be assassins?那万一是杀手的话这个问题...\What if they went home and turned out to be assassins?你肯定想知道他们要杀谁\You do want to know who they assassinated.那倒是的确实是这样\That's true too. That's fair. That's fair.我的确会想知道他们要杀谁\I would want to know who they assassinated.好的你回答得不错你叫什么名字\All right. That's good. What's your name? -马库斯-马库斯好了\- Marcus. - Marcus. All right.我们已经听了多种版本的辩护了\We've heard a defense a couple of voices for the defense.现在要听听控方的说法\Now we need to hear from the prosecution.大多数人都认为他们的行为是错误的为什么\Most people think what they did was wrong. Why?-你来-首先我想的就是\- Yes. - One of the first things that I was thinking was 他们已经很长时间没吃东西了\they haven't been eating for a really long time 也许已经影响到他们的精神状况\maybe they're mentally like affected可以借此作为辩护\and so then that could be used as a defense可以辩称他们当时精神状况不太正常\a possible argument that they weren't in the proper state of mind所以他们的决定可能并非出于本意\they weren't making decisions they mightotherwise be making.而如果只能用这样的辩词\And if that's an appealing argument说只有人精神状况不正常才会干出那种事\that you have to be in an altered mindset to do something like that这也就意味着那些觉得该论证有说服力的人们\it suggests that people who find that argument convincing其实是认为他们行为是不道德的\do think that they were acting immorally.但我想知道的是你是怎么想的\But what do you- I want to know你是怎么想的才会为他们辩护\what you think. You defend them.不好意思你是投的"有罪" 是吧\I'm sorry you vote to convict right?对我认为他们的行为在道德上不算正当\Yeah I don't think that they acted in a morally appropriate way.为什么你会怎么辩护\And why not? What do you say?比如马库斯他就为他们辩护\here's Marcus he just defended them.他说的你也听到了\He said...you heard what he said.对\Yes.在那种情况下你只能不得已而为之\That you've got to do what you've got to do in a case like that.-对-你怎么反驳马库斯呢\- Yeah. -What do you say to Marcus?世上没有任何情况允许\That there's no situation that would allow人类来主宰别人的命运或决断他人的生死\human beings to take the idea of fate or the other people's lives in their own hands我们没有那样的权力\that we don't have that kind of power.很好谢谢\Good. Okay. Thank you.你叫什么名字\And what's your name?布丽特\Britt.布丽特好的还有谁\Britt. Okay. Who else?你有何看法站起来说\What do you say? Stand up.我想知道达德利和斯蒂芬斯\I'm wondering if Dudley and Steven是否征得过派克的同意取他的性命\had asked for Richard Parker's consent in you know dying是否那样就能赦免他们的谋杀罪名\if that would exonerate them from an act of murder是否这样道德上就是正当的\and if so is that still morally justifiable?非常有趣好的征得同意\That's interesting. All right. Consent.等等你叫什么名字\Wait wait hang on. What's your name?凯思琳\Kathleen.凯思琳说假设他们那样做了\Kathleen says suppose they had that那该是什么样的情形呢\what would that scenario look like?故事里达德利手拿小刀\So in the story Dudley is there pen knife in hand没有做祷告或是在做祷告前\but instead of the prayer or before the prayer他说派克介意我们杀你吗\he says "Parker would you mind?"我们实在太饿了\"We're desperately hungry"马库斯对此感同身受啊\as Marcus empathizes with我们实在太饿了反正你也活不久了\"we're desperately hungry. You're not going to last long anyhow."对你就牺牲下自己吧\"Yeah. You can be a martyr."你就牺牲下自己吧怎么样派克\"Would you be a martyr? How about it Parker?"这样的话你会怎么想这在道德上是正当的吗\Then what do you think? Would it be morally justified then?假设派克在半昏迷状态下说了好的\Suppose Parker in his semi-stupor says "Okay."我认为这在道德上是不正当的但我在想...\I don't think it would be morally justifiable but I'm wondering if --即使那样也不是正当的-对\- Even then even then it wouldn't be? - No.你认为即便是派克同意了\You don't think that even with consent这在道德上也是不正当的\it would be morally justified?有没人赞同凯思琳这个"征得同意"的观点\Are there people who think who want to take up Kathleen's consent idea有谁认为派克同意道德上就是正当的\and who think that that would make it morally justified?如果你认为是正当的请举起手来\Raise your hand if it would if you think it would.非常有趣\That's very interesting.为什么派克同意了在道德上就会不同呢\Why would consent make a moral difference?为什么呢你来\Why would it? Yes.我只是认为如果这就是他的本意\Well I just think that if he was making his own original idea是他主动要求被杀的\and it was his idea to start with只有在这种情况下\then that would be the only situation我才认为无论从哪方面来说都是恰当的\in which I would see it being appropriate in any way因为那样的话就不能说派克是被迫的\because that way you couldn't make the argument that he was pressured毕竟当时是3对1的局面派克不占优势\you know it's three-to-one or whatever the ratio was.-对-我认为如果是他自己决定献出生命\- Right. - And I think that if he was making a decision to give his life如果是他自己提出要牺牲自己\and he took on the agency to sacrifice himself 也许有人会赞颂这种行为\which some people might see as admirable而其他人也许会反对这个决定\and other people might disagree with that decision.所以如果是他自己提出的\So if he came up with the idea除非他是在这种情况下的同意\that's the only kind of consent才能确信说道德上没问题\we could have confidence in morally then it would be okay.否则考虑到当时情况\Otherwiseit would be kind of coerced consent他可能是被迫同意的\under the circumstancesyou think.有没有人认为即便是派克同意了\Is there anyone who thinks that even the consent of Parker也不能为他们的谋杀行径正名\would not justify their killing him?有人这么想吗你来\Who thinks that? Yes.站起来告诉我们理由\Tell us why. Stand up.我认为派克之所以会被杀\I think that Parker would be killed with the hope是因为其他人抱着可能被营救的希望\that the other crew members would be rescued否则根本没有确定的理由要杀死派克\so there's no definite reason that he should be killed因为你根本不知道自己何时会得救\because you don't know when they're going to get rescued即使你杀了他那也无济于事\so if you kill him it's killing him in vain不然岂不是在得救之前你必须一直杀人\do you keep killing a crew member until you're rescued最终无人可杀因为到头来人都死光了\and then you're left with no one because someone's going to die eventually?这情形的道德逻辑似乎是这样\Well the moral logic of the situation seems to be that就是他们一直拣软柿子捏\that they would keep on picking off the weakest maybe逐个杀掉直至获救\one by one until they were rescued.而在本案中他们比较幸运\And in this caseluckily获救时起码还有三个是活着的\they were rescued when three at least were still alive.那如果派克的确同意了\Now if Parker did give his consent你觉得杀他是正当的吗\would it be all right do you think or not?-不还是错误的-告诉我们理由为什么是错的\- No it still wouldn't be right. - And tell us why it wouldn't be all right.首先我认为食人有违伦理\First of all cannibalism I believe is morally incorrect你不管怎样都不该吃人\so you shouldn't be eating human anyway.这么说来食人在道德上是不能容忍的\So cannibalism is morally objectionable as such即便是在这种只能坐以待毙的情况下\so then even on the scenario of waiting until someone died依然是不能容忍的对吗\still it would be objectionable.对就我个人来讲\Yes to me personally我觉得这完全取决于一个人的道德修养\I feel like it all depends on one's personal morals而不是我们在这坐着说得清楚的\and like we can't sit here and just当然这只是我一家之言\like this is just my opinion其他人肯定会反对但是...\of course other people are going to disagree but 这个到时再说先看他们的反对意见是什么\Well we'll see let's see what their disagreements are再来看他们的理由是否能说服你\and then we'll see if they have reasons that can persuade you or not.我们来试试好吧\Let's try that. All right.认为派克同意就属正当的\Now is there someone who can explain有没人能解释一下\those of you who are tempted by consent为什么派克同意了在道德上就有所不同呢\can you explain why consent makes such a moral difference?那抽签那个主意呢能被视作为同意吗\What about the lottery idea? Does that count as consent?还记得一开始时达德利曾提议抽签吗\Remember at the beginning Dudley proposed a lottery假设他们都同意了抽签\suppose that they had agreed to a lottery有多少人认为这样就可以接受\then how many would then say it was all right? 假设抽签时派克输了\Suppose there were a lottery cabin boy lost接下来的故事继续展开\and the rest of the story unfolded有多少人认为这样在道德上就是允许的\then how many people would say it was morally permissible?认为抽签了就能视为无罪的人数上升了\So the numbers are rising if we had a lottery.我们来听听支持抽签\Let's hear from one of you会在道德上有所不同的人是怎么说的\for whom the lottery would make a moral difference.为什么\Why would it?就我的认知我觉得最重要的一点\I think the essential element in my mind之所以说他们构成犯罪\that makes it a crime is the idea是他们认为某种程度上自己命比派克更重要\that they decided at some point that their lives were more important than his而这正是一切犯罪的动机\and that I mean that's kind of the basis for really any crime.就好比是我的需要与欲望比你的更重要\Right? It's like my needs my desires are more important than yours所以要优先考虑我\and mine take precedent.但如果他们每人都同意抽签决定\And if they had done a lottery where everyone consented谁应该牺牲\that someone should die就像是所有的人都同意牺牲自己来救其他人\and it's sort of like they're all sacrificing themselves to save the rest.这样就可以接受是吗\Then it would be all right?是有点怪异但...\A little grotesque but但在道德上就是可以接受的\But morally permissible?-对-你叫什么名字\- Yes. - And what's your name?-马特-马特如此说来\- Matt. - So Matt for you真正困扰你的不是食人\what bothers you is not the cannibalism而是缺乏正当的程序\but the lack of due process.非要这样说也行\I guess you could say that.对吧有没谁同意马特的说法\Right? And can someone who agrees with Matt 再来说说为什么通过抽签\say a little bit more about why a lottery让你觉得在道德上可以接受\would make it in your view morally permissible. 你说\Go ahead.就我的理解从始至终\The way I understood it originally was that一直困扰我们的争端就是\that was the whole issue is that从没有人去征得过派克的意见\the cabin boy was never consulted没人告诉他即将有什么遭遇\about whether or not something was going tohappen to him就连最初提出的抽签\even with the original lottery他是否有份参与\whether or not he would be a part of that他们径直决定他应该是被牺牲的那个\it was just decided that he was the one that was going to die.-对就是这么个情况-对\- Right that's what happened in the actual case. - Right.但如果他们抽签了他们也都同意这一程序\But if there were a lottery and they'd all agreed to the procedure那你认为就没问题是吧\you think that would be okay?对因为这样所有人都知道会有人死\Right because then everyone knows that there's going to be a death而不是像之前派克被完全蒙在鼓里\whereas the cabin boy didn't know that this discussion was even happening根本没有人预先警告他\there was no forewarning for him to know that可能抽到是我死\"Hey I may be the one that's dying."好吧假设每个人都赞同抽签\All right. Now suppose everyone agrees to the lottery抽签结果是派克输了\they have the lottery the cabin boy loses但他改主意了\and he changes his mind.你既然已经做了决定就相当于是口头契约\You've already decided it's like a verbal contract.你就不能反悔了已成定局了\You can't go back on that you've decided木已成舟了\the decision was made.抽签前你就知道你可能抽到牺牲自己救别人\If you know that you're dying for the reason of others to live.如果是别人抽到了那别人也得去死\If someone else had died you know that you would consume them so对但你可能会说"我知道但我后悔了"\Right. But then you could say "I know but I lost".我只是觉得最大的道德问题\I just think that that's the whole moral issue就是根本没人征得过派克的意见\is that there was no consulting of the cabin boy 最可怕的是\and that's what makes it the most horrible他当时是完全被蒙在鼓里的\is that he had no idea what was even going on.如果他知道是怎么回事\That had he known what was going on至少会让人稍微可以理解一点\it would be a bit more understandable.很好我现在想听的是...\All right. Good. Now I want to hear -现在有人认为这行为是道德上允许的\so there are some who think it's morally permissible但只有20%的人\but only about 20%以马库斯为代表\led by Marcus.还有人认为\Then there are some who say真正的问题在于没有征得同意\the real problem here is the lack of consent不管是没有征得同意抽签用公平程序进行\whether the lack of consent to a lottery to a fair procedure或者是凯思琳所说没有征得派克的同意杀他\or Kathleen's idea lack of consent at the moment of death.如果有征得同意\And if we add consent更多的人就愿意认为\then more people are willing这在道德上是正当的\to consider the sacrifice morally justified.我现在想听听是否有人认为\I want to hear now finally from those of you即便是征得了同意即便是有了抽签\who think even with consent even with a lottery即便派克最终还是答应了\even with a final murmur of consent by Parker杀死派克依然还是错误的\at the very last moment it would still be wrong.为什么是错误的我想听听理由\And why would it be wrong? That what I want to hear.你来\Yes.我从始至终一直比较倾向绝对主义道德推理\The whole time I've been leaning off towards the categorical moral reasoning我想我有可能\and I think that there's a possibility会同意抽签的观点\I'd be okay with the idea of a lottery。

从忠恕之道的角度分析当代中国道德滑坡现象

从忠恕之道的角度分析当代中国道德滑坡现象

从忠恕之道的角度分析当代中国道德滑坡现象姚雪【摘要】忠恕之道是儒家思想贯穿始终的重要内容,是“仁”的核心,能够彰显出我国古代文化的内涵与底蕴。

面对现代社会中的道德滑坡现象,可以从公民自身出发来贯彻践行忠恕之道,并且使公民自身道德修养和外部环境二者形成一种良性循环,为社会不断注入新鲜的活力,使其获得长久的发展。

%The doctrine of “Chung-Shu” has been an important part of Confucianism and the key to“Benevolence”, which reflects the essence of ancient Chinese culture. Currently, faced with the moral landslide phenomenon, it is conducive to uphold the doctrine of Chun-Shu”, make balance between civilian moral cultivation and outer atmosphere, and improve the individual and overall thought moral level.【期刊名称】《保定学院学报》【年(卷),期】2013(000)005【总页数】5页(P121-125)【关键词】道德建设;忠恕之道;仁;公民道德修养;德育【作者】姚雪【作者单位】保定学院政法系,河北保定 071000【正文语种】中文【中图分类】G416一、忠恕之道的内涵众所周知,中国传统文化的主流是儒家文化。

儒家文化中蕴含着丰富的伦理道德思想,其中孔子的“仁”学思想体系便是其精髓。

而忠恕之道就是儒家“仁”学思想体系中重要的组成部分,是践行“仁”这一核心的基本方式和行为准则。

忠恕之道有着非常深刻的内涵及丰富的理论意蕴,而且,无论是在遥远的古代还是在当今社会,忠恕之道都有着广阔的发掘空间,对我们当今社会的思想道德建设有着极为重要的意义。

原因作文英语作文

原因作文英语作文

原因作文英语作文Certainly! Below is an essay on the topic of "Reasons" in English, with a word count of more than 800 words.---。

The Intricacies of Reason: Understanding the Motivational Forces Behind Human Actions。

Reason, a concept that has intrigued philosophers, psychologists, and thinkers across generations, plays a pivotal role in shaping human behavior and decisions. While the dictionary defines reason as the basis or cause for an action, its implications and applications in real-life scenarios are far more complex and multifaceted. This essay delves into the intricacies of reason, exploring its diverse manifestations and the profound influence it exerts on our lives.At its core, reason serves as the intellectualfoundation for our actions, providing a logical framework that guides our choices and decisions. When faced with a dilemma or confronted with a challenging situation, individuals often rely on reason to analyze the available options, weigh the pros and cons, and arrive at a reasoned judgment. This analytical process, driven by reason, enables us to make informed decisions, minimizing impulsive actions and irrational choices that may lead to undesirable outcomes.Moreover, reason serves as a powerful tool for problem-solving and innovation. By harnessing the power of reason, humans have been able to unravel the mysteries of the universe, develop groundbreaking technologies, and devise innovative solutions to complex problems. The scientific method, a systematic approach to inquiry grounded in reason and empirical evidence, has been instrumental in advancing human knowledge and understanding, fueling progress and driving civilization forward.However, the influence of reason extends beyond the realm of intellectual deliberation and problem-solving; italso plays a crucial role in shaping our beliefs, values, and worldview. Our reasoning processes are deeply intertwined with our cultural, social, and personal experiences, influencing our perceptions, attitudes, and interpretations of the world around us. As such, reason serves as a lens through which we make sense of our experiences, construct meaning, and navigate the complexities of human existence.Furthermore, reason serves as a moral compass, guiding our ethical judgments and moral decisions. By appealing to reason, individuals can evaluate the consequences of their actions, assess the moral implications of their choices, and strive to act in accordance with ethical principles and values. In this sense, reason empowers individuals to exercise moral agency, promoting integrity, responsibility, and ethical conduct in personal and social contexts.Despite its undeniable importance and utility, reasonis not without its limitations and challenges. While reason enables us to make rational judgments and informed decisions, it is susceptible to biases, cognitivedistortions, and logical fallacies that can distort our perceptions, cloud our judgment, and lead to flawed reasoning. Moreover, reason alone is insufficient for addressing the complexities and nuances of human experience, as it often fails to account for the emotional, intuitive, and subjective aspects of human cognition and behavior.Additionally, the pursuit of reason can sometimes leadto intellectual rigidity and closed-mindedness, stifling creativity, innovation, and open dialogue. When individuals become overly reliant on reason and dismissive ofalternative perspectives, they risk becoming entrenched in their beliefs, resistant to change, and intolerant of diversity. In such cases, reason can become a double-edged sword, capable of both enlightening and restricting human understanding and progress.In conclusion, reason is a multifaceted and complex phenomenon that plays a central role in shaping human behavior, decisions, and worldview. While reason serves as an invaluable tool for intellectual deliberation, problem-solving, and moral decision-making, it is not without itslimitations and challenges. As we strive to harness the power of reason to enhance our understanding, improve our lives, and advance human civilization, it is essential to recognize and address the inherent complexities and potential pitfalls associated with the pursuit of reason. By cultivating a balanced and reflective approach to reasoning, embracing diversity and openness, andintegrating reason with empathy, intuition, and creativity, we can unlock the full potential of reason and foster a more enlightened, compassionate, and harmonious world.。

人工智能的未来:伦理和法律考量的英语作文

人工智能的未来:伦理和法律考量的英语作文

人工智能的未来:伦理和法律考量的英语作文The Future of Artificial Intelligence: Ethical and Legal ConsiderationsAs technology continues to evolve at an unprecedented pace, the field of artificial intelligence (AI) has become a global phenomenon, promising both unprecedented opportunities and challenges. The future of AI is not only about technological advancements; it also necessitates a thorough examination of the ethical and legal implications it brings.First and foremost, ethical considerations are paramount in the development and deployment of AI. As AI systems become increasingly sophisticated and autonomous, the question of moral agency and responsibility arises. Who or what is accountable for the decisions made by AI? How do we ensure that AI acts in a manner that aligns with our ethical values? These are complex questions that require careful thought and ongoing dialogue among stakeholders.Moreover, the ethical implications of AI extend beyond the realm of technology. As AI systems are integrated into our daily lives, they have the potential to impact social relationships, economic disparities, and even the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals. It is crucial thatwe consider these broader societal impacts and ensure that AI is developed and used in a way that is fair, inclusive, and respectful of human dignity.On the legal front, the rapid development of AI has presented numerous challenges. Existing legal frameworks are often inadequate to address the novel issues that arise from AI. For instance, how do we regulate the use of AI in areas such as healthcare, transportation, and law enforcement? What legal protections should be afforded to individuals whose data is used to train AI systems? These are questions that require urgent attention from policymakers and legal scholars.In conclusion, the future of AI is a double-edged sword. It promises to revolutionize our world in ways we can only imagine, but it also brings with it significant ethical and legal challenges. It is essential that we approach the development and deployment of AI with a cautious yet open mind, ensuring that we balance the potential benefits with the necessary ethical and legal considerations.人工智能的未来:伦理和法律思考随着技术以前所未有的速度不断发展,人工智能领域已成为一种全球性现象,既有前所未有的机遇,也有前所未有的挑战。

伦理道德英语小作文

伦理道德英语小作文

伦理道德英语小作文Ethical Considerations: A Reflection on the Foundations of Moral ConductThe realm of ethics and morality has long been a subject of deep contemplation and debate. Philosophers, theologians, and thinkers throughout history have grappled with the fundamental questions of what constitutes right and wrong, and how we, as individuals and as a society, should navigate the complexities of moral decision-making. In an era marked by rapid technological advancements, globalization, and shifting societal norms, the importance of cultivating a strong ethical foundation has become increasingly evident.At the heart of ethical considerations lies the recognition that our actions, both individual and collective, have the power to profoundly impact the lives of others. The choices we make, the values we uphold, and the principles we choose to guide our behavior all contribute to the broader tapestry of human experience. It is this interconnectedness that underscores the significance of ethical deliberation and the need to foster a deeper understanding of the moral underpinnings of our existence.One of the cornerstones of ethical discourse is the notion of moral philosophy, which delves into the philosophical foundations of right and wrong. Thinkers such as Aristotle, Immanuel Kant, and John Stuart Mill have made invaluable contributions to the field, articulating diverse perspectives on the nature of moral reasoning and the criteria by which we can evaluate the morality of our actions.Aristotle's concept of virtue ethics, for instance, emphasizes the cultivation of moral character and the pursuit of excellence in accordance with reason and moderation. He posits that the ultimate goal of human existence is eudaimonia, a state of flourishing and well-being that is achieved through the cultivation of virtues such as courage, temperance, and justice. This approach underscores the importance of developing moral habits and cultivating a deep understanding of the human condition.In contrast, Kant's deontological ethics focuses on the inherent duties and obligations that we have as moral agents. Kant's categorical imperative, which states that we should act only in ways that we would will to become universal laws, highlights the importance of moral principles and the recognition of the intrinsic worth of each individual. This perspective emphasizes the notion of moral autonomy and the idea that ethical behavior is not merely a matter of consequences, but rather a matter of upholding fundamental moral duties.Meanwhile, the utilitarian approach championed by thinkers like John Stuart Mill emphasizes the maximization of overall well-being and the minimization of suffering as the primary ethical criterion. This consequentialist perspective encourages us to consider the broader impact of our actions and to strive for the greatest good for the greatest number of people.While these philosophical frameworks offer valuable insights, the practical application of ethical principles can be complex and context-dependent. Navigating the nuances of moral dilemmas often requires a delicate balance between competing values, a deep understanding of the potential consequences of our actions, and a willingness to engage in critical self-reflection.In the modern era, the ethical landscape has become increasingly multifaceted, with emerging technologies, globalization, and shifting social norms presenting new ethical challenges. The rise of artificial intelligence, for instance, has raised important questions about the moral implications of autonomous decision-making, the preservation of human agency, and the equitable distribution of the benefits and risks associated with technological progress.Similarly, the growing awareness of global interconnectedness has amplified the need to consider the ethical dimensions of our actionson a broader scale. Issues such as environmental sustainability, income inequality, and international human rights have become central to the ethical discourse, highlighting the importance of cultivating a global ethical consciousness.Ultimately, the pursuit of ethical conduct is not a simple or straightforward endeavor. It requires a deep commitment to self-examination, a willingness to engage in open and respectful dialogue, and a recognition of the inherent complexity of the human experience. By embracing the rich tapestry of ethical perspectives and striving to develop a nuanced understanding of the moral foundations of our actions, we can work towards the creation of a more just, equitable, and compassionate world.。

科尔伯格的道德认知发展理论对我国当代德育的启示

科尔伯格的道德认知发展理论对我国当代德育的启示

科尔伯格的道德认知发展理论对我国当代德育的启示张倩【摘要】道德认知发展论是美国道德心理学家劳伦斯·科尔伯格在吸收20世纪初杜威的进步主义德育研究和皮亚杰的儿童道德认知发展理论基础上所创立的当代西方学校德育流派中最有影响的德育理论,至今仍被各国道德理论家和德育工作者广泛应用于实践中,并被证明是有效的。

中国当前道德教育存在高调低效的特征,而科尔伯格的道德认知理论为我们改变这种状况提供了诸多启示,我们应变传统的灌输型德育模式为引导型模式,确立学生在德育中的主体地位,培养和提高学生的道德判断能力。

%Moral cognitive development theory is the most influential moral theory in the modern western moral education schools, founded by Lawrence Kohlberg, a famous American moral psychologist, by assimilating John Dewey' s progressive research on moral education and Jean Piaget' s theory on development of children' s moral cognition. Lawrence Kohlberg' s theory has been widely and effectively practiced by moral theorists and educators all over the world. In China, the contemporary moral education is featured by lofty tone but low efficiency. Lawrence Kohlberg' s moral cognitive development theory has brought us a lot of revelations on changing this situation. This paper suggests that the traditional stuffed moral educational mode be changed to the guided one. The student -centered teaching mode is also advocated to foster and improve students' moral judgment.【期刊名称】《唐都学刊》【年(卷),期】2012(028)006【总页数】4页(P14-17)【关键词】科尔伯格;道德认知发展论;中国;当代德育;启示【作者】张倩【作者单位】广东外语外贸大学英语教育学院,广州510420 广东外语外贸大学外国文学文化研究中心,广州510420【正文语种】中文【中图分类】B82-05道德认知发展理论是当代西方学校德育流派中最有影响的德育理论,其代表人物是美国道德心理学家劳伦斯·科尔伯格。

美国小学德育课程模式历史转型及启示

美国小学德育课程模式历史转型及启示美国自拓荒殖民到建国以来,就非常重视德育,在积极拓疆殖业的历史发展中,小学德育课程模式也同时经历了从单纯移植到建立国家德育体系,并随社会变革使德育课程模式逐步向现代转型,再到从小学德育的世纪改革走向综合德育课程模式新兴的演进历程。

(一)德目主义课程模式形成与世俗德育体系建立这一时期美国小学德育课程模式经历了三个发展阶段。

1.早期移植欧洲模式。

美国在拓荒殖民之初就开始重视德育,但课程模式仍沿袭欧洲旧习,开设宗教课,学习内容主要是圣经及符合教理的伦理规范、历代君王治国训诫和古贤箴言及人生信条之类,学习方式重灌输和做礼拜等。

2.形成本土世俗课程模式。

早期美国小学德育课程模式转型得益于美国独立建国运动和19世纪初的公共教育运动。

从1805年纽约市成立公立学校联合会,(注:滕大春.美国教育史[M].北京:人民教育出版社,1994.157)到19世纪30年代麻省的公共教育狂飙行动,公共教育的发展促使德育课程发生重大转型。

一是美国公立小学中开设了有关国家法规及国家观念、国民意识等内容的课程,宗教教育开始让位于国家教育;二是公立学校开始倡导各种世俗道德课程,明确提出培养勤勉、负责的公民和具有美德的人,在德育方法上,强调培养个人道德行为和自我约束,通过练习来引导和强化学生的自制、勤奋、诚实等美德,倡导用艺术、史诗、讲故事等形式对学生进行道德教育。

3.建立传统德育课程模式。

19世纪60年代南北战争后全面推进的资本主义运动,促进了美国学校德育改革,其主要特征:一是建立起一个维护资本主义制度、推行资本主义思想体系和道德伦理观念的德育体系;二是重视国家法规教育,在学校教育中全面贯彻合众国政治主张,宣传国家政策和宪法等;三是培养为国家服务的公民和时代精英;四是把宗教教育融入世俗德育体系之中,为国家发展服务。

与世俗德育的发展相适应,美国小学在继承传统德育的基础上,从道德读本逐渐发展起德目主义美德课程模式。

道德两难,难在哪里

道德兩難,難在哪裡?羅秉祥教授香港浸會大學宗教及哲學系主任、應用倫理學研究中心主任一、天理vs.人欲德育在生命教育中應扮演重要角色,這點無需闡述。

值得討論的是,隨著年紀的不同,學校的德育該如何進行?本文會以道德兩難為焦點,分析道德兩難令人感到為難的不同因素,顯示道德成長及道德教育的不同向度。

道德教育的第一階段,當然是分辨善惡及對錯,因此兒童文學中充斥了善惡對立,正邪二分的元素。

對成人來說,趨善避惡,取對捨錯,存天理,滅人欲,仍是道德生活的第一要務。

再者,這個道德生活的認知層面通常被視為不困難的,因為人皆有良知。

「良心」及「良知」兩個辭都是孟子所提出(《孟子〃告子上》《孟子〃盡心上》),孟子認為良知的特色尌是「不慮而知」。

王陽明更把良知比喻為一個指南針1,意謂人皆天生有能力直接準確分辨是非黑白。

在這個階段的道德生活,困難不在認知,而在實踐。

人在認清是非、對錯、善惡、好壞後,能克服引誘,培養堅強意志,擇善固執,嫉惡如仇。

二、天理vs.天理道德成長的第二階段,關鍵不再是天理與人欲的衝突,而是天理與天理的衝突,義務與義務的衝突;面對這道德的魚與熊掌,人該如何取捨?美國道德心理學者郭耳保(Lawrence Kohlberg)看到如何處理道德兩難對道德生活的影響;因此,他創立的道德發展理論,其方法論尌是建基於不同年紀的孩童及青少年,如何化解一些共同的道德兩難(如Heinz應否盜藥救妻等)2。

他透過1「爾那一點良知,是爾自家底準則。

爾意念著處,他是便知是,非便知非,更瞞他一些不得。

爾只要不欺他,實實落落依著他做去,善便存,惡便去。

……真是個詴金石,指南針。

」(陳榮捷:《王陽明傳習錄詳注集評》,第206、208條)2「在歐洲某地,有個婦人瀕臨死亡的邊緣,因為她得了一種特別的癌症,是十分難以醫治。

醫生說有一種藥可能會治好這種絕症,那是同鎮的一個藥劑師最近發現的一種鐳元素的藥劑。

雖然這種藥調製貣來花費很貴,但是藥劑師卻要出價十倍于藥價成本才肯出售。

中西方道德的差异英语作文

中西方道德的差异英语作文Morality is a complex and multifaceted concept that has been the subject of extensive philosophical and cultural discourse throughout human history. While there are universal principles and values that transcend geographical and cultural boundaries, there are also significant differences in the way morality is perceived and practiced in the Eastern and Western worlds. These differences can be attributed to a variety of historical, cultural, and philosophical factors, and they have important implications for how individuals and societies approach ethical decision-making and navigate moral dilemmas.One of the key distinctions between Eastern and Western moral frameworks is the emphasis on individualism versus collectivism. Western moral philosophy, particularly in the European tradition, has tended to place a strong emphasis on the rights and autonomy of the individual. Thinkers such as Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill have championed the idea of individual moral agency and the primacy of individual liberty and self-determination. In this view, moral choices are fundamentally rooted in the individual's ability torationally deliberate and make autonomous decisions.In contrast, Eastern moral traditions, particularly those influenced by Confucianism and Buddhism, tend to place a greater emphasis on the interdependence of individuals within a broader social and cosmic order. The Confucian concept of filial piety, for example, underscores the importance of fulfilling one's duties and obligations within the family and community, rather than solely pursuing individual interests. Similarly, the Buddhist principle of non-attachment and the recognition of the inherent interconnectedness of all things challenge the Western notion of the autonomous self.Another key difference lies in the emphasis on virtue and character development versus the focus on rules and consequences. Western moral philosophy, particularly in the Aristotelian and Kantian traditions, has placed a strong emphasis on the development of virtuous character traits, such as courage, temperance, and justice, as the foundation for moral behavior. The goal is to cultivate individuals who habitually act in accordance with moral principles, rather than simply following a set of predetermined rules.In contrast, Eastern moral traditions, particularly those influenced by Taoism and Buddhism, tend to place a greater emphasis on the importance of following the natural order and aligning one's actions with the universal principles of harmony and balance. Rather thanfocusing on the development of specific virtues, the emphasis is on cultivating a state of inner tranquility and awareness that allows one to respond appropriately to the constantly changing circumstances of life.These differences in moral orientation also manifest in the way ethical dilemmas are approached and resolved. In the Western tradition, the focus is often on identifying and applying the appropriate moral principles or rules to a given situation, with the goal of arriving at a clear-cut decision that can be justified on rational grounds. The emphasis is on the objective rightness or wrongness of an action, based on its consequences or its adherence to moral rules.In the Eastern tradition, however, the emphasis is often on finding a holistic and contextual solution that takes into account the broader web of relationships and the need to maintain social harmony. The goal is not necessarily to arrive at a definitive answer, but to navigate the moral landscape with a sense of flexibility, nuance, and sensitivity to the unique circumstances of each situation.These differences in moral orientation can also be seen in the way different cultures approach issues of justice, punishment, and conflict resolution. In the Western tradition, the emphasis is often on the need to uphold the rule of law and to mete out punishment to thosewho violate societal norms. The goal is to maintain a sense of order and to deter future transgressions.In the Eastern tradition, however, the emphasis is often on the importance of forgiveness, reconciliation, and the restoration of social harmony. The focus is not necessarily on punishing the offender, but on finding a way to reintegrate them back into the community and to address the underlying causes of the conflict.These differences in moral orientation have important implications for how individuals and societies navigate ethical dilemmas and make decisions that have far-reaching consequences. While there is no universal consensus on the "right" approach to morality, the recognition of these cultural differences can help to foster greater understanding and respect between Eastern and Western worldviews, and to inspire more nuanced and holistic approaches to moral decision-making.Ultimately, the differences between Eastern and Western moral frameworks reflect the rich diversity of human experience and the multifaceted nature of the moral universe. By engaging with these differences and exploring the unique insights and perspectives that each tradition offers, we can deepen our understanding of the human condition and work towards a more just, harmonious, and ethically-grounded global community.。

德育教育中麦金太尔善观念的运用

德育教育中麦金太尔善观念的运用Abstract:Mac Intyre' s concept of goodness is a theoretical criticism of modern moral philosophy which emphasizes abstract human nature over pluralistic personality, factual basis over value reference and external norms over intrinsic value. It is a value system constructed from three aspects: behavior practice, narrative self and community life. The concept of practice, the concept of humanity and the concept of community, which are enshrined in the concept of goodness, provide theoretical references for the current development of the education of practical significance, ideals and beliefs and collectivism in China.Keyword:concept of goodness; intrinsic value; narrative self; community life; moral education;摩尔在《伦理学原理》中是这样定义伦理学的, "伦理学, 是对于什么是善的"而作的一般探究11。

毫无疑问, 善观念既是备受道德哲学关注的研究对象, 又是社会生活的重要主题, 同时对善的不断思索与探究, 构成了伦理学蓬勃发展的内生动力。

  1. 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
  2. 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
  3. 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。

Exercise of moral agency 道德能动性的运用In areas of functioning involving achievement strivings and cultivation of competencies, the standards that are selected as a mark of adequacy are progressively raised as knowledge and skills are acquired and challenges are met.在功能领域包括努力完成和能力的培养,标准被选择像获得知识技能和面对挑战一样被足够先进地培养的标志一样。

In the exercise of moral agency the internal standards that serve as the basis for regulating one’s conduct are more firmly established.在道德能动性的实践中,像管理一个人的行为举止的基础一样的国内的标准更加坚实稳固地被提出。

A complete theory of moral agency must link moral reasoning to moral action.一个完整的道德能动性理论必须将道德论证与道德行为联系在一起。

This requires an agentic theory of morality rather than one confined mainly to cognitions about morality.这需要一个具有道德观特征的理论而不是一个主要局限于对道德观的认知的理论。

An agentic theory specifies the mechanisms by which people come to live in accordance with moral standards.这个具有此特征的理论具体说明了一个人们依照道德标准来生活的机制。

In social cognitive theory, moral reasoning is translated into actions through self-regulatory mechanisms rooted in moral standards and self- sanctions by which moral agency is exercised.在社会认知理论中,道德论证被解释成通过植根于道德标准的自我调节行动和被道德能动性实践过的自我制裁。

After people adopt a standard of morality, their negative self-sanctions for actions that violate their personal standards, and their positive self-sanctions for conduct faithful to their moral standards serve as the regulatory influences.人们接受了一个道德观的标准后,他们消极的自我制裁活动侵犯了他们的个人标准,并且他们为了带领支持者接受他们的道德标准的积极的自我制裁活动像监管影响一样被提供。

In the face of situational inducements to behave in inhumane ways, people can choose to behave otherwise by exerting self-influence.面对诱因即将表现为残忍的方式的情形下,人们可以选择运用自我影响来表现另一方面。

Self-sanctions keep conduct in line with personal standards.自我制裁持续和个人标准一起串联地传导。

This capacity for self-influence gives meaning to moral agency.这种对自我影响的容纳能力赋予了道德能动性意义。

The moral self is thus embedded in a broader socio-cognitive self theory encompassingself-organizing, proactive, self-reflective and self-regulative mechanisms (Bandura, 1986, in press).道德自身因此陷入了一个较广泛的社会认知自身理论包括自我组织的、有前瞻性的、自我反思的和自动调节的机制。

These self-referent processes provide the motivational as well as the cognitive regulators of moral conduct.这些自我参照的过程体现了和道德行为监管者一样的积极性。

The exercise of moral agency has dual aspects – inhibitive and proactive.道德能动性的实践有双重方面——抑制的和采取主动的。

The inhibitive form is manifested in the power to refrain from behaving inhumanely.抑制的形式是显露在权力(or能量)中来遏制不人道的行为。

The proactive form of morality is expressed in the power to behave humanely.采取主动的道德观形式是表现在权力中来表现得人道。

In the latter case, individuals invest their sense of self-worth so strongly in humane convictions and social obligations that they act against what they regard as unjust or immoral even though their actions may incur heavy personal costs (Bandura, in press).在后一种情况下,每一个个体调查他们对自我价值的感觉在人道的肯定和社会的义务方面非常强烈,他们违反那些他们认为不合理或不道德的东西即使他们的行动有可能引致非常沉重的个人成本。

Moral standards do not function as invariant internal regulators of conduct, however.然而,道德准则不想国内的行为监管者一样起作用。

Self-regulatory mechanisms do not operate unless they are activated, and there are many processes by which moral self-sanctions can be disengaged from inhumane conduct (Bandura, 1986, 1991b) .自动调节的机制不能运转除非他们被激活,并且道德的自我制裁中有很多进程可以从非人道的行为中被分离。

The disengagement may center on the reconstrual of the conduct itself by portraying it as serving worthy purposes; on obscuring the sense of personal agency through displacement and diffusion of responsibility so that the perpetrators can minimize their role in causing harm; in distorting or minimizing the injurious outcomes that flow from their actions; or on how victims are regarded by dehumanizing and blaming them for their maltreatment.这种脱离也许以行为自身的重建为中心用提供值得赞赏的目的一样描绘它;通过被迫迁徙和分散责任搞混个人能动性的感觉,因此犯罪者可以轻视他们在导致伤害中的作用;歪曲或轻视这些有害的从他们的行动中流动出来的结果;或者在受害者如何因为他们的虐待被视为丧失人性并且责怪他们。

Through selective activation and disengagement of moral self-sanctions, otherwise considerate people can do extraordinarily cruel things (Bandura, 1990; Kelman &Hamilton, 1989; Reich, 1990).通过认真选择的活动和道德自我制裁的分离,另一方面考虑周到的人们可以做非常残酷的事情。

Large-scale inhumanities in military, social, political and business spheres generally operate through a supportive network of legitimate enterprises run by otherwise considerate people who contribute to detrimental activities by disconnected subdivision of functions and diffusion of responsibility (Bandura, in press).军事、社会、政治和商业领域大范围的残酷的行为通常通过一个合理的企业中一些别有用心的以无系统的分离的功能和责任扩散去促成有害的活动人运作的一个提供帮助的网络。

Edmund Burke’s aphorism that ‘‘The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing’’ needs a companion adage that ‘‘The triumph of evil requires a lot of good people doing a bit of it in a morally disengaged way with indifference to the human suffering they collectively cause.’’Edmund Burke的格言“邪恶的成就唯一必须的东西是为好人不做任何事情”需要一个成对的格言“邪恶的成就需要很多好人做一点邪恶的事用一个道德上的传播和对他们共同造成的人类的痛苦漠不关心。

相关文档
最新文档