1. 新增扫二维码功能，可直接扫 VeryCD 网站影片页面的二维码，便能在应用上打开；
2. 新增支持 B 站视频（哔哩哔哩），满屏的弹幕更欢乐；
1. 新增支持 B 站视频（哔哩哔哩），满屏的弹幕更欢乐；
2. 在影片封面上展示在线视频的清晰度；
您的位置：
网友评论：
希望楼主单独提供中英双字幕的文件下载
同时载入两种字幕 位置不好调啊
感谢楼主，下了就顶。
然后支持951楼的建议，麻烦楼主
这是好资源!一定要顶起来~可以看到名师的课堂，建议中国名师课堂也有资源
谢谢楼主的分享，希望能下载到后7集的资源。
000:00:00,100 --& 00:00:03,000Captions proofread by @xiaolai, 译注：以下“[]”内为译者为信达之雅所加。不要太崇拜哥。100:00:30,009 --& 00:00:31,790Today, we turn今天，我们将200:00:33,750 --& 00:00:35,630to the question of distributive justice.探讨[社会资源、机遇]分配的公正性[议题]。300:00:36,850 --& 00:00:39,340How should income in wealth and power在财产与权力的收获方面、400:00:39,620 --& 00:00:41,430and opportunities be distributed?以及在机遇[等资源]的获取方面，如何分配[才算公正]？500:00:41,870 --& 00:00:43,390According to what principles?[在判断的时候，]应该参考什么[哲学]原则呢？600:00:44,980 --& 00:00:48,510John Rawls offers a detailed answer to that question.约翰·罗尔斯给出了细致的答案来对应这个问题。[(美国哲学家马里兰州巴尔的摩，～,马萨诸塞州 列克星敦)康奈尔大学()和哈佛大学(1979～)任教，著作主要涉及伦理学及政治哲学。在《正义论》(1971)中，提出了另类功利主义的观点，引出了对正义的迥异定义。他宣称若人们在“无知的借口”背后不得不选定正义的原则，即会限制他们认知自己在社会中所扮演的角色，而使得他们不去寻求利益的最大化，反而保护自身自由、防卫自己以免得到可能最坏结果。故他们仅制裁只对最坏情况有益的不公平（如财富上），因这种不平等对激励所有人的利益是必须的。]700:00:49,470 --& 00:00:51,510And we're going to examine and assess his answer我们将会检验与考虑他的回答800:00:51,720 --& 00:00:52,900to that question, today.今天[看他是如何]应对这个问题的。900:00:53,760 --& 00:00:57,290We put ourselves in a position to do so last time.我们亲自置身其中，来检验这一回答。上次[也这么]验过了。1000:00:59,629 --& 00:01:02,400By trying to make sense of why he thinks试图探究他为什么认为1100:01:04,780 --& 00:01:08,810that principles of justice正义的原则1200:01:11,229 --& 00:01:15,230are best derived from a hypothetical contract.最好得出[的方法是对照]假设的合约。1300:01:17,080 --& 00:01:19,590And what matters is that the hypothetical contract重要的是，假设的合约1400:01:19,880 --& 00:01:23,720be carried out in an original position of equality,在原有基础上是平等的，1500:01:24,610 --& 00:01:27,540behind, what Rawls calls, the veil of ignorance.[而在平等]背后，按罗尔斯号称，是愚昧的面纱。1600:01:29,860 --& 00:01:31,200So that much is clear?[到现在]这么[乱哄哄一坨的开场白还算表达]清楚了吗？1700:01:36,310 --& 00:01:40,020Alright, then let's turn to the principles好[不乱搞]了，让我们开始[探究]原则，1800:01:41,060 --& 00:01:44,070that Rawls says would be chosen罗尔斯号称需要选用的，1900:01:46,679 --& 00:01:48,200behind the veil of ignorance.在愚昧的面纱背后的原则。[既然他不乱了，译者也就此不搞了。]2000:01:52,660 --& 00:01:55,120First, he considered some of the major alternatives.首先，他提出了关于一些重要抉择的思考问题。2100:01:56,059 --& 00:01:57,940What about utilitarianism?想想看功利主义？2200:01:59,119 --& 00:02:01,580Would the people in the original position人民在最初始的阶段2300:02:02,380 --& 00:02:04,790choose to govern their collective lives选择支配他们的集体生活2400:02:06,270 --& 00:02:08,910utilitarian principles, the greatestgood for the greatest number?按照功利主义原则，暨照顾多数？2500:02:09,489 --& 00:02:13,700No, they wouldn't, Rawls says.不，Rawls认为人们不应该那样。2600:02:14,400 --& 00:02:15,970And the reason is,因为，2700:02:17,609 --& 00:02:20,380that behind the veil of ignorance, everyone knows在愚昧的面纱背后，每个人都知道2800:02:21,450 --& 00:02:25,580that once the veil goes up, and real life begins,一旦面纱遮起，现实生活开启，2900:02:29,390 --& 00:02:33,990we will each want to be respected with dignity.我们每个人都希望有尊严受尊重。3000:02:36,370 --& 00:02:38,910Even if we turn out to be a member of a minority.即时是在我们不巧是少数的情况下。3100:02:40,359 --& 00:02:42,170We don't want to be oppressed.我们不希望被压榨。3200:02:45,090 --& 00:02:47,180And so we would agree所以由此，我们会同意3300:02:49,450 --& 00:02:52,980to reject utilitarianism, and instead to adopt去反对功利主义，相反的，要适用3400:02:53,190 --& 00:02:57,040as our first principle, equal basic liberties.我们的首要原则，即基本自由。3500:02:57,970 --& 00:02:59,780Fundamental rights to freedom of speech,烟沦自由的基本权利，3600:03:00,140 --& 00:03:04,040freedom of assembly, religious liberty,忌讳自由，总角自由，3700:03:04,190 --& 00:03:06,280freedom of conscience and the like.良知自由的权利等等。3800:03:07,820 --& 00:03:10,120We wouldn't want to take the chance我们不会想要押宝于3900:03:11,109 --& 00:03:12,680that we would wind up我们不会像4000:03:12,910 --& 00:03:17,820as members of an oppressed or a despised minority被压榨或鄙视的少数派那样，4100:03:20,200 --& 00:03:23,600with the majority tyrannizing over us.被多数派骑着叫嚣乎东西、挥突乎南北。[哎，摒不住还是要发挥了下]4200:03:25,030 --& 00:03:28,010And so Rawls says utilitarianism would be rejected.所以Rawls要反对功利主义。4300:03:32,840 --& 00:03:36,550&Utilitarianism makes the mistake&, Rawls writes,Rawls书中写道，功利主义错误地大大地，4400:03:37,619 --& 00:03:41,230&of forgetting, or at least not taking seriously,他们忘记，或至少忽视了，4500:03:41,489 --& 00:03:43,660the distinction between persons.&人与人之间差异的存在。4600:03:45,200 --& 00:03:47,420And in the original positionbehind the veil of ignorance,在愚昧面纱背后最原本的是，4700:03:47,549 --& 00:03:51,190we would recognize thatand reject utilitarianism.我们本来是会去反对功利主义的。4800:03:52,299 --& 00:03:55,180We wouldn't trade off ourfundamental rights and liberties我们本来是不会出卖我们基本的权益与自由，4900:03:55,459 --& 00:03:57,580for any economic advantages.来换取经济利益。5000:03:57,820 --& 00:04:00,460That's the first principle.这，才是首要原则。5100:04:03,720 --& 00:04:09,110Second principle has to do withsocial and economic inequalities.第二原则是有关社会与经济的不平等性的。5200:04:09,329 --& 00:04:10,670What would we agree to?我们有什么共识？5300:04:12,209 --& 00:04:13,780Remember, we don't know whether we're going to记住，我们最初是不会晓得我们最终5400:04:13,980 --& 00:04:15,860wind up rich or poor.是会使富裕还是贫穷的的。5500:04:16,539 --& 00:04:18,420Healthy or unhealthy.也不晓得，会是健康与否。5600:04:19,240 --& 00:04:21,590We don't know what kind of familywe're going to come from.我们不知道我们出生的家庭会是如何的。5700:04:22,890 --& 00:04:24,980Whether we're going to inherit millions我们是富二代呢，5800:04:25,400 --& 00:04:29,170or whether we will come from an impoverished family.还是低保家庭子女。5900:04:31,300 --& 00:04:33,530So we might, at first thought,所以，我们一开始会想，6000:04:35,670 --& 00:04:42,180say, &Well let's require an equaldistribution of income and wealth.&比如说，让我们先追求收入与财富的平等分配吧。6100:04:45,099 --& 00:04:47,190Just to be on the safe side.可以先保持在安全范围内。6200:04:47,370 --& 00:04:49,540But then we would realize,但是之后我们会发现，6300:04:51,469 --& 00:04:54,840that we could do better than that.其实我们可以做更好的事。6400:04:55,229 --& 00:04:58,600Even if we're unlucky and wind up at the bottom.就算我们不幸地出生贫寒。6500:05:00,690 --& 00:05:06,310We could do better if we agree toa qualified principle of equality.我们依然可以做得更好如果我们尊重平等的原则的话。6600:05:07,430 --& 00:05:09,890Rawls calls it &the Difference Principle&.RAWLS称之为“差异原则”。6700:05:10,700 --& 00:05:15,200A principle that says, onlythose social and economic原则就是，那些在社会[地位]与经济上的6800:05:15,320 --& 00:05:20,100inequalities will be permittedthat work to the benefit不平等的允许条件，只有若其能适用于6900:05:20,210 --& 00:05:21,650of the least well off.最不富裕人群的利益。7000:05:23,000 --& 00:05:28,390So we wouldn't reject allinequality of income and wealth.所以我们不会反对所有的收入与财富上的不平等。7100:05:28,620 --& 00:05:29,590We would allow some.我们会允许一些。7200:05:29,770 --& 00:05:31,860But the test would be,但是衡量[界定]是，7300:05:32,719 --& 00:05:36,090do they work to the benefit ofeveryone including those,[那些不平等现象]是否符合所有人[的利益]，7400:05:36,789 --& 00:05:38,830or as he specifies, the principle,按他[RAWLS]明确来说，是原则，7500:05:39,169 --& 00:05:42,540especially those at the bottom.尤其是那些最底层[人们的利益]。7600:05:45,810 --& 00:05:49,650Only those inequalities would beaccepted behind the veil of ignorance.只有[这样]那些不平等才会在愚昧面纱背后被接受。7700:05:49,849 --& 00:05:53,220And so Rawls argues, only thoseinequalities that work to the benefit因此，RAWLS主张说，那些不平等只有服从于7800:05:53,490 --& 00:05:56,260of the least well off, are just.最底层人民利益的，才能算是公正。7900:05:59,130 --& 00:06:01,700We talked about the examples of我们讨论过一些例子，8000:06:01,789 --& 00:06:05,030Michael Jordan making 31 million dollars a year.比如迈克尔乔丹年收入0.31亿美元，8100:06:05,450 --& 00:06:09,950Of Bill Gates having a fortunein the tens of billions.比如比尔盖茨富可敌国的财富。8200:06:12,240 --& 00:06:15,980Would those inequalities be permittedunder the difference principle?那这些不平等在差异原则下是否会允许呢？8300:06:16,500 --& 00:06:20,870Only if they were part of a system,those wage differentials,只有他们也是系统的一部分，他们收入的差异部分，8400:06:22,740 --& 00:06:25,930that actually work to theadvantage of least well off.真的也是对最底层人民适用的[，才算公正]。8500:06:26,500 --& 00:06:28,200Well, what would that system be?好，那么这个系统有什么要求？8600:06:30,450 --& 00:06:32,670Maybe it turns out that as a practical matter也许最终发现，在实用性方面，8700:06:32,849 --& 00:06:34,550you have to provide incentives你必须提供激励措施8800:06:34,810 --& 00:06:39,490to attract the right people to certain jobs.来将正确的人引到特定工作。8900:06:42,000 --& 00:06:45,240And when you do, having those people in those jobs当你这么做的时候，让那些人做那些工作，9000:06:46,510 --& 00:06:48,630will actually help those at the bottom.会的确帮到那些底层民众。9100:06:50,770 --& 00:06:55,090Strictly speaking, Rawls's argumentfor the difference principle严格来说，Rawls关于差异原则的主张9200:06:55,549 --& 00:06:58,190is that it would be chosenbehind the veil of ignorance.是说，那[原则]会在愚昧面纱背后选择。9300:06:59,729 --& 00:07:01,880Let me hear what you think about让我听听看你们怎么认为9400:07:03,490 --& 00:07:06,970Rawls's claim that these twoprinciples would be chosen罗尔斯称这两个原则的选择，9500:07:08,060 --& 00:07:09,450behind the veil of ignorance.是在愚昧面纱背后[做出的选择的]。9600:07:10,469 --& 00:07:14,050Is there anyone who disagreesthat they would be chosen?是否有人会反对选择那些[标准]？9700:07:15,539 --& 00:07:17,710Alright, let's start up in thebalcony, if that's alright.好，那么我们看看要么就先从楼座开始。9800:07:17,909 --& 00:07:18,540Go ahead.说。9900:07:18,750 --& 00:07:20,950OK, your argument dependsupon us believing that恩，你的主张是认为我们会10000:07:21,049 --& 00:07:25,520we would argue in said policy,or justice from a bottom.从[社会]底层考虑政策与正义。
10100:07:25,620 --& 00:07:27,270For the disadvantaged.为那些弱势群体。10200:07:27,530 --& 00:07:28,630And I just don't see froma proof standpoint,但我并没有看到信服的论证，10300:07:28,859 --& 00:07:30,300where we've proven that.即我们是否证明过了[从底层考虑的正确性]。10400:07:30,400 --& 00:07:31,270Why not the top?为什么不是从上层考虑呢？10500:07:31,370 --& 00:07:33,590Right, and what's your name? - Mike.好的，报出你的名字？- 麦克。10600:07:33,690 --& 00:07:35,370Mike, alright, good question.麦克，好的，很好的答案[你可以的]。10700:07:35,909 --& 00:07:39,680Put yourself behind the veil of ignorance.把你自己藏到愚昧的面纱背后。10800:07:40,510 --& 00:07:42,260Enter into the thought experiment.进入思想的试验田[包产到户，我一会就搞定你个小样]。10900:07:44,190 --& 00:07:45,810What principles would you choose?那么你会选择怎么样的原则呢？11000:07:46,520 --& 00:07:47,700How would you think it through?你怎么想通的？[你怎么可能想得通的？]11100:07:48,690 --& 00:07:50,970Well, I would say things like, even Harvard's existence[哼哼，你才小样]啊，比如哈佛的存在，11200:07:51,190 --& 00:07:53,000is an example of preaching toward the top.本身就是向高层布道的例子。11300:07:53,099 --& 00:07:54,850Because Harvard takes the top academics.因为哈佛只接收最好的学者。11400:07:55,060 --& 00:07:57,280And I didn't know when I wasborn how smart I would be.我出生的时候不知道我会有多神。11500:07:57,570 --& 00:08:00,340But I worked my life to getto a place of this caliber.但靠毕生努力才修得此粗壮[的那个什么]。11600:08:00,679 --& 00:08:03,220Now, if you had said Harvard's goingto randomly take 1600 people你要是说现在哈佛要随机选16百个人，11700:08:03,370 --& 00:08:06,200of absolutely no qualification,we'd all be saying,一点都没资质的，那么我们会说11800:08:06,289 --& 00:08:08,230&There's not much to work for.&“没奋斗目标啦。”11900:08:10,159 --& 00:08:11,940And so what principle would you choose?那么你会选择什么样的原则[来判断]呢?12000:08:13,159 --& 00:08:15,750In that situation I wouldsay a merit based one.这种情况，我会搞个优秀评价指数。12100:08:16,039 --& 00:08:19,100One where I don't necessarily know, butI would rather have a system that对之，我没什么完整体系的概念，12200:08:19,200 --& 00:08:21,010rewards me based on my efforts.不过是基于个人努力的成果评价[体系]。12300:08:22,460 --& 00:08:25,550So you, Mike, behind the veil of ignorance,那么，麦克，你躲在愚昧面纱的背后，12400:08:26,120 --& 00:08:28,290would choose a merit-based system,会选择一种优秀评价系统，12500:08:28,390 --& 00:08:30,560where people are rewardedaccording to their efforts?人们按照个人努力评价？12600:08:31,890 --& 00:08:33,720Alright, fair enough. What would you say?恩，蛮好。[一会收拾你]。那么你呢？12700:08:33,980 --& 00:08:34,930Go ahead.说。12800:08:35,370 --& 00:08:38,380My question is, if the merit-basedargument is based on我会问，如果优秀评价体系是基于12900:08:38,610 --& 00:08:42,740when everyone is at a level of equality?每个人都是在同一平等的水准上的？13000:08:42,970 --& 00:08:49,850Where from that position, you'rerewarded to where you get,是基于同一起跑线上的评价，13100:08:50,050 --& 00:08:55,460or is it regardless of whatadvantages you may have还是无论你拥有任何优势13200:08:55,560 --& 00:08:58,490when you began your educationto get where you are here?无论你一开始的教育就让你保持领先？13300:08:59,660 --& 00:09:01,960I think what the questionyou're asking is saying that我觉得你的问题是在问13400:09:02,170 --& 00:09:04,580if we want to look at,whatever, utilitarianism, policy,我们怎么认为，不管是功利主义，正在13500:09:04,680 --& 00:09:06,620do you want to maximize world wealth.你是否要最大化世界财富。13600:09:06,840 --& 00:09:09,430And I think a system that rewards merit我觉得优秀评价体系13700:09:09,720 --& 00:09:12,000is the one that we've prettymuch all established,是我们大多人一同建立的，13800:09:12,280 --& 00:09:14,190is what is best for all of us.就是对大部分人的最大利益。13900:09:14,420 --& 00:09:16,540Despite the fact that some of usmay be in the second percentile尽管有些人是2%的[少数派]，14000:09:16,819 --& 00:09:18,680and some may be in the 98th percentile.而有些人是98%de [多数派]14100:09:18,890 --& 00:09:22,680At the end of the day it liftsthat lowest based level,发展到最后，在最小程度上，14200:09:22,959 --& 00:09:27,410a community that rewards effortas opposed to an differences.社会氛围会反对任何差异。14300:09:28,110 --& 00:09:33,550But, I don't understand how you'rerewards someone's efforts但是我不明白你认可的人的努力14400:09:33,650 --& 00:09:36,890who clearly has had, notyou, but maybe myself,明显的，不是你可能是我，14500:09:37,120 --& 00:09:39,680advantages throughout, to get where I am here.在取得成果的道路上有明显的优势。14600:09:39,780 --& 00:09:41,720I mean, I can't say that somebody else我是说我不能说别人14700:09:41,900 --& 00:09:43,520who maybe worked as hard as I did可能是和我一样努力工作的14800:09:43,730 --& 00:09:46,140would have had the same opportunity to come就一定有和我一样的机会14900:09:46,240 --& 00:09:47,710to a school like this.能够进到这么好的学校。15000:09:47,910 --& 00:09:50,810Alright, let's look at that point.What's your name?好，让我们讨论下这个观点。报上名来？15100:09:51,069 --& 00:09:55,750Kate. -Kate, you suspect that the ability凯特。-凯特，你疑虑那些能力，15200:09:55,930 --& 00:10:01,260to get into top schools may largely depend那些能够进入顶尖学校的能力很大程度取决于15300:10:02,620 --& 00:10:06,570on coming from an affluent family.他们的背景，都来自富足家庭。15400:10:06,980 --& 00:10:10,510Having a favorable family background,拥有一个较好家庭出身，15500:10:10,709 --& 00:10:13,010social, cultural, economic advantages and so on?社会，文化，经济优势等等？15600:10:13,350 --& 00:10:14,820I mean, economic, but yes, social, cultural.我的意思，是的，经济，社会，文化。15700:10:14,920 --& 00:10:16,880All of those advantages, for sure.所有的那些优势，的确。15800:10:18,260 --& 00:10:22,550Someone did a study, of the 146 selective有人做了调查，在146所精选的15900:10:22,680 --& 00:10:25,270colleges and universities in the US.美国各大院校。16000:10:25,939 --& 00:10:27,770And they looked at the students然后他们研究这些学生们16100:10:28,030 --& 00:10:30,990in those colleges and universities在那些[顶尖]院校中，16200:10:31,980 --& 00:10:36,560to try to find out what their backgroundwas, their economic background.研究他们的经济背景。16300:10:38,250 --& 00:10:41,570What percentage do you think,come from the bottom quarter你知道吗，最底层生源16400:10:41,819 --& 00:10:43,890of the income scale?占总量的比重是多少吗？16500:10:45,540 --& 00:10:47,240You know what the figure is?你知道具体数据时多少吗？16600:10:47,439 --& 00:10:52,490Only three percent of students, at themost selective colleges and universities只有3%的学生，在那些顶尖院校的学生，16700:10:52,589 --& 00:10:54,340come from poor backgrounds.是来自贫寒家庭的。16800:10:55,020 --& 00:11:00,720Over 70 percent come from affluent families.超过70%的学生来自富足家庭。16900:11:01,890 --& 00:11:05,970Let's go one step further then,and try to address Mike's challenge.让我们再深一层考虑下，怎么应对麦克的疑议。17000:11:07,030 --& 00:11:11,950Rawls actually has two arguments, not one,罗尔斯其实有两个论点，不是一个，17100:11:12,280 --& 00:11:16,120in favor of his principles of justice.来支持他的公正的原则[理论]。17200:11:16,719 --& 00:11:19,310And in particular, of the difference principle.尤其是[他的]差异原则。17300:11:20,020 --& 00:11:22,060One argument is the official argument,一个论点是官方正式论点，17400:11:22,449 --& 00:11:24,940what would be chosen behindthe veil of ignorance.在无知面纱背后，应该怎么选择。17500:11:25,630 --& 00:11:27,960Some people challenge that argument, saying,有些人挑战那个论点，说，17600:11:28,610 --& 00:11:33,870&Maybe people would want to take their chances.也许人们情愿搏一搏概率。17700:11:35,010 --& 00:11:38,460Maybe people would be gamblersbehind the veil of ignorance.也许人们喜欢躲在无知面纱背后赌一把。17800:11:38,640 --& 00:11:41,390Hoping that they would wind up on top.&寄希望于他们能出身高贵。17900:11:42,120 --& 00:11:44,400That's one challenge that has been put to Rawls.这是一种对于罗尔斯的挑战。18000:11:44,780 --& 00:11:48,940But backing up the argument from the original position而从最初状态的角度来支持这项论点的，18100:11:49,219 --& 00:11:50,580is the second argument.是第二个论点。18200:11:51,420 --& 00:11:54,060And that is the straightforwardly moral argument.这个就直面道德论点了。18300:11:54,939 --& 00:11:56,560And it goes like this,是这么叙述的，18400:11:58,420 --& 00:11:59,570it says,说，18500:12:00,850 --& 00:12:03,990the distribution of income andwealth and opportunities收入、财富与机遇的分配18600:12:04,560 --& 00:12:08,690should not be based on factors不应基于18700:12:11,060 --& 00:12:13,600for which people can claim no credit.不能取信于人的因素上。18800:12:14,770 --& 00:12:19,210It shouldn't be based on factors that arearbitrary from a moral point of view.不能基于道德观点专断的因素上。18900:12:20,780 --& 00:12:28,230Rawls illustrates this by consideringseveral rival theories of justice.罗尔斯通过一些相对的公正理论来说明。19000:12:31,510 --& 00:12:35,250He begins with the theory of justice他开篇说的是一种公正理论19100:12:35,880 --& 00:12:37,820that most everyone these days would reject.一种现今绝大数人会反对的理论。19200:12:40,500 --& 00:12:42,070A feudal aristocracy.封建的贵族制度。19300:12:42,880 --& 00:12:49,180What's wrong with the allocation oflife prospects in a feudal aristocracy?在封建贵族制度中，人身前途的分配怎么错了？19400:12:50,110 --& 00:12:54,010Rawls says, well the thing that'sobviously wrong about it is罗尔斯说，明显的错误时，19500:12:54,209 --& 00:12:56,800that people's life prospectsare determined人们的人身前途是取决于19600:12:57,689 --& 00:12:59,310by the accident of birth.出身的偶然性的。19700:13:00,380 --& 00:13:04,150Are you born to a noble family orto a family of peasants and serfs?你是出身权归，还是农民奴隶家庭？19800:13:04,480 --& 00:13:06,420And that's it. You can't rise.就是那样，你不能选择。19900:13:06,620 --& 00:13:08,560It's not your doing where you wind up你的出身不是你的行为20000:13:08,660 --& 00:13:10,360or what opportunities you have.也不是你所拥有的机遇。
20100:13:12,890 --& 00:13:15,140But that's arbitrary from a moral point of view.而是道德规范的专断。20200:13:16,370 --& 00:13:20,450And so that objection to feudal aristocracy所以，针对封建贵族制度的反对意见是说，20300:13:21,510 --& 00:13:26,110leads, and historically has lead, people to say,历史上和现在都引导人们说，20400:13:26,680 --& 00:13:28,620careers should be open to talents.职业应该向有天赋的人开放。20500:13:28,800 --& 00:13:31,810There should be formal equality of opportunity应该有正式的机遇的平等20600:13:32,120 --& 00:13:34,970regardless of the accident of birth.即时出身偶然性的存在。20700:13:35,410 --& 00:13:39,330Every person should be free to strive, to work,每个人应该自由奋斗，择业，20800:13:39,540 --& 00:13:42,550to apply for any job in the society.申请社会中的任何工作。20900:13:43,010 --& 00:13:48,530And then, if you open up jobs,and you allow people to apply,然后，你放出工作，人们开始申请了，21000:13:49,020 --& 00:13:53,230and to work as hard as they can,then the results are just.然后一样的努力工作，然后结果才会公正。21100:13:54,900 --& 00:13:58,200So it's more or less the libertariansystem that we've discussed所以多少有些我们讨论过的自由主义体系的21200:13:58,400 --& 00:13:59,610in earlier weeks.意味在我们的议题里面。21300:14:00,430 --& 00:14:01,480What does Rawls think about this?罗尔斯对此又是怎么看的呢？21400:14:01,790 --& 00:14:03,360He says it's an improvement.他说，这是一种进步。21500:14:04,170 --& 00:14:07,440It's an improvement becauseit doesn't take as fixed这是一种进步因为这不限定21600:14:08,660 --& 00:14:09,870the accident of birth.出生的偶然性。21700:14:10,860 --& 00:14:13,110But even with formal equality of opportunity但是即使是正式的机遇平等，21800:14:13,780 --& 00:14:17,570the libertarian conceptiondoesn't extend that,自由主义概念并不超出，21900:14:17,810 --& 00:14:20,400doesn't extend its insight far enough.不超出其范围很远。22000:14:21,439 --& 00:14:25,000Because if you let everybody run the race,因为如果你让每个人跑步比赛，22100:14:26,500 --& 00:14:29,800everybody can enter the race,but some people start每个人都可以参与，但有些人开始22200:14:30,030 --& 00:14:33,460at different starting points,that race isn't going to be fair.的起跑点不同，那么竞赛就不公平。22300:14:35,540 --& 00:14:39,070Intuitively, he says, the mostobvious injustice of this system直觉上他说，这一体系最明显的不公平22400:14:39,280 --& 00:14:42,660is that it permits distributive sharesto be improperly influenced是其允许分配受到不恰当的影响22500:14:42,860 --& 00:14:45,690by factors arbitrary froma moral point of view.来源于专断的道德观念。22600:14:46,199 --& 00:14:48,290Such as, whether you got a good education or not.比如说，你是否有受到很好的教育。22700:14:49,780 --& 00:14:52,480Whether you grew up in a family that support you是否你成长的家庭很支持你22800:14:52,599 --& 00:14:54,510and developed in you a work ethic培养你的工作理念22900:14:54,740 --& 00:14:56,420and gave you the opportunities.并给你提供机遇。23000:14:57,849 --& 00:15:01,150So that suggests moving to a system of fair所以就说到了公正的体系23100:15:01,349 --& 00:15:03,760equality of opportunity.机遇平等的公正体系。23200:15:04,280 --& 00:15:07,600And that's really the system thatMike was advocating earlier on.而这正是麦克之前鼓吹的体系。[弄不倒你嘲笑你还不行么]23300:15:08,250 --& 00:15:10,580What we might call a merit-based system.就是我们可能称作为优秀评价体系。23400:15:11,040 --& 00:15:12,660A meritocratic system.是择优的体系。23500:15:13,500 --& 00:15:17,450In a fair meritocracy the societysets up institutions在一公平的择优体系中，社会建立起了制度，23600:15:17,680 --& 00:15:20,920to bring everyone to the same starting point把每个人都置于同一起跑线23700:15:21,860 --& 00:15:23,590before the race begins.在竞跑开赛前。23800:15:24,370 --& 00:15:26,590Equal educational opportunities.平等的教育机遇。23900:15:27,709 --& 00:15:30,540Head start programs, for example.比如起飞项目。24000:15:31,630 --& 00:15:34,770Support for schools in impoverished neighborhoods.对赤贫街道学校的支持。24100:15:36,540 --& 00:15:39,420So that everyone, regardless of their family background,这样，每个人不论家庭背景如何24200:15:40,849 --& 00:15:43,780has a genuinely fair opportunity.都有个相较平等的机遇。24300:15:44,709 --& 00:15:47,480Everyone starts from the same starting line.每个人都从同一个起跑线开始。24400:15:49,260 --& 00:15:52,920Well, what does Rawls thinkabout the meritocratic system?那么罗尔斯如何看待择优体系的呢？24500:15:56,130 --& 00:15:59,140Even that, he says, doesn't go far enough在他看来，即时那样，也不够24600:15:59,290 --& 00:16:03,060in remedying, or addressing,来补偿与应对的，24700:16:03,839 --& 00:16:05,750the moral arbitrariness在道德上的专政24800:16:07,520 --& 00:16:09,93000:16:07,520 --& 00:16:09,930of the natural lottery.只是自然界的抓阄结果。24900:16:11,280 --& 00:16:14,290Because if you bring everyoneto the same starting point因为如果你把每个人都放到同一起点25000:16:16,300 --& 00:16:19,310and begin the race, who's going to win the race?谁会赢呢？25100:16:19,410 --& 00:16:22,340Who would win?谁会赢?25200:16:23,120 --& 00:16:24,850To use the runners example.我们看看跑步运动员的例子。25300:16:26,089 --& 00:16:28,210The fastest runners would win.跑的最快的人赢。25400:16:30,140 --& 00:16:32,630But is it their doing但是他们做到了什么25500:16:33,020 --& 00:16:36,970that they happen to be blessedwith athletic prowess to run fast?什么让他们正好有飞奔的运动天分？25600:16:40,410 --& 00:16:46,160So Rawls says, &Even the principle of meritocracy,所以罗尔斯说，“即使是择优的原则，25700:16:47,120 --& 00:16:51,020where you bring everyone to the same starting point,当你把所有人都放到同一起跑线的话，25800:16:51,120 --& 00:16:54,470may eliminate the influence of socialcontingencies and upbringing,的确能降低社会的意外性与背景影响，25900:16:54,569 --& 00:16:57,760...but it still permits the distribution ofwealth and income to be determined但即使这样依然存在财富与收入的不平衡，26000:16:57,859 --& 00:17:02,180by the natural distribution of abilities and talents.&而造成不平衡的，是对能力与天赋的自然[随机]分配。26100:17:03,290 --& 00:17:06,400And so he thinks that the principle of eliminating所以他认为消除的原则26200:17:06,639 --& 00:17:09,880morally arbitrary influences in thedistribution of income and wealth消除收入与财产分配影响的道德专断的原则26300:17:10,110 --& 00:17:12,390requires going beyond要求超越26400:17:14,389 --& 00:17:17,950what Mike favors, the meritocratic system.麦克所倾向的，择优的体系。26500:17:19,490 --& 00:17:20,930Now, how do you go beyond?那么现在，你如何超越？26600:17:22,460 --& 00:17:24,500Do you bring everyone to the same starting point你把每个人都带到同一个起点26700:17:24,740 --& 00:17:25,950and you're still bothered by the fact that然后你依然会感到困惑26800:17:26,180 --& 00:17:28,740some are fast runners and some are not fast runners,事实上总有些跑的快，有些跑的慢，26900:17:29,310 --& 00:17:30,780what can you do?你能做什么？27000:17:31,710 --& 00:17:35,190Well, some critics of a more egalitarian conception[呵呵，]一些批评家[鼓吹]更进一步的平均主义概念27100:17:36,260 --& 00:17:40,340say the only thing you can do is handicap the fast runners.他们认为你唯一能做的就是妨碍那些跑的快的27200:17:41,460 --& 00:17:43,190Make them wear lead shoes.让他们穿铅鞋。27300:17:43,730 --& 00:17:45,170But who wants to do that?但是谁又会想要这么做呢？27400:17:46,470 --& 00:17:49,870That would defeat the whole point of running the race.[因为]那样会完全颠覆“赛”跑的本身意义。27500:17:51,300 --& 00:17:54,540But Rawls says, you don't have to have但是罗尔斯认为， 你不必须27600:17:54,649 --& 00:17:57,660a kind of leveling equality, if you want to go去推动一种平面上相等，即使你想要27700:17:57,760 --& 00:17:59,930beyond a meritocratic conception.超越择优的概念。27800:18:00,659 --& 00:18:03,490You permit, you even encourage,你可以允许，甚至可以鼓励，27900:18:04,180 --& 00:18:09,830those who may be gifted, to exercise their talents.那些有天赋的幸运儿，去发挥他们的才华。28000:18:09,930 --& 00:18:12,940But what you do, is you change the terms但是你做什么呢，你是否改变了条件28100:18:13,040 --& 00:18:16,280on which people are entitled to the fruits of决定人们是否有权享用其自身成果，28200:18:16,490 --& 00:18:18,430the exercise of those talents.由其基于自身天赋的努力[所取得的成果]。28300:18:19,250 --& 00:18:21,470And that really is what the difference principle is.而那就是标准真真正正的差异原则。28400:18:22,700 --& 00:18:24,980You establish a principle that says,你建立起了一个标准，规定说28500:18:25,159 --& 00:18:27,910people may benefit from their good fortune,人们可以通过其自身的好运气而受益，28600:18:29,629 --& 00:18:31,440from their luck in the genetic lottery,受益于遗传优势方面的好运，28700:18:32,860 --& 00:18:36,340but only on terms that work to the advantage of the least well off.但只能是基于为最底层人民谋福利的条件上。28800:18:36,600 --& 00:18:38,070And so, for example,因此，例如，28900:18:40,780 --& 00:18:44,650Michael Jordan can make 31 million dollars but,迈克尔乔丹可以年收0.31亿美元，但是29000:18:45,820 --& 00:18:50,060only under a system that taxes away a chunk of that只能是在税收掉其相当一部分收入的系统中[才行]，29100:18:50,520 --& 00:18:54,680to help those who lack the basketballskills that he's blessed with.用以帮助那些缺乏像他种篮球天赋的人。29200:18:56,010 --& 00:18:57,840Likewise, Bill Gates.比比如说，比尔盖茨。29300:18:57,940 --& 00:18:59,980He can make his billions.他可以运用他的巨额财富。29400:19:00,080 --& 00:19:02,780But he can't think that he somehow morally deserves但是他不能以为他自己是在道义上应得29500:19:03,010 --& 00:19:05,130those billions.那些财富。29600:19:06,120 --& 00:19:07,380&Those who have been favored by nature,那些被自然相中的人们29700:19:07,530 --& 00:19:12,030may gain from their good fortune but only on terms that improve可以获取财富，但只有在改善的前提下，29800:19:12,210 --& 00:19:14,430the situation of those who have lost out.&改善那些不那么有天赋的人的生存情况的前提下。29900:19:14,659 --& 00:19:16,620That's the difference principle.这，就是差异原则。30000:19:16,800 --& 00:19:19,730And it's an argument from moral arbitrarianists.而且，这也是道义主观主义者的论点。
30100:19:20,280 --& 00:19:24,280Rawls claims, that if you're botheredby basing distributive shares罗尔斯称，如果你受困于财富分配的基础30200:19:24,510 --& 00:19:26,680on factors arbitrary from a moral point of view,从道义的主观考虑因素，30300:19:26,940 --& 00:19:30,420you don't just reject a feudal aristocracy for a free market.你不仅仅为自由市场而反对封建专制。30400:19:32,919 --& 00:19:38,070You don't even rest content with a meritocratic system你不仅仅暂缓对于择优体系的满足30500:19:38,669 --& 00:19:41,230that brings everyone to the same starting point.那种让每个人的起点相同的择优体系。30600:19:42,770 --& 00:19:46,300You set up a system, where everyone, including those at the bottom,你建立起了一个系统，在此内，包括那些在底部的人们，30700:19:46,580 --& 00:19:50,240benefit from the exercise of the talents held by those能够受益于那些人努力发挥出其天赋，30800:19:50,370 --& 00:19:53,350who happen to be lucky.那些碰巧好运有天赋的人。30900:19:53,820 --& 00:19:55,940What do you think? Is that persuasive?那么你怎么想？这种说法令人信服吗？31000:19:58,600 --& 00:20:01,900Who finds that argument unpersuasive?谁觉得上述论点不太有道理？31100:20:02,050 --& 00:20:04,070The argument for moral arbitrarianists.对于上述道义主观专断论有异议的?31200:20:04,870 --& 00:20:05,840Yes.是的[你]。31300:20:06,300 --& 00:20:10,900I think that in the egalitarian proposition我认为，在平均主义的这一命题中31400:20:11,139 --& 00:20:12,950the more talented people,对于那些更加有天赋的人，31500:20:13,280 --& 00:20:15,350I think it's very optimistic to think that they我觉得为他们很可能会31600:20:15,679 --& 00:20:20,520would still work really hard, even if they knew that依然会非常努力工作，甚至是他们一开始就知道31700:20:20,800 --& 00:20:23,020part of what they made would be given away.他们所努力的一部分会被取走。31800:20:23,210 --& 00:20:27,110So I think that the only way for the more talented people to所以我认为对于那些更有天赋的人31900:20:27,960 --& 00:20:29,480exercise their talents to the best of their ability让他们最大化地发挥他们天赋的唯一方法32000:20:29,710 --& 00:20:31,050is in the meritocracy.就是采取择优体系。32100:20:31,850 --& 00:20:33,470And in a meritocracy, what's your name?恩，在择优体系中，通名！32200:20:33,710 --& 00:20:34,390Kate.凯特。32300:20:34,669 --& 00:20:38,540Kate, does it bother you, and Mike, does it bother you,凯特，是否会抵触到你，以及麦克，是否会抵触到你，32400:20:38,720 --& 00:20:44,890that in a meritocratic system, that evenwith fair equality of opportunity,就是说才择优体系中，甚至是公正的机遇平等[的情况下]，32500:20:45,040 --& 00:20:50,240people get ahead, people get rewards that they don't deserve有人超前了，有人受奖赏了，而且还是他们不应得的，32600:20:50,659 --& 00:20:53,490simply because they happen to be naturally gifted.仅仅是因为他们碰巧有了自然天赋。32700:20:53,590 --& 00:20:54,510What about that?是这样么？32800:20:54,710 --& 00:20:57,120I think that it is arbitrary.我觉得这个是主观专断。32900:20:58,780 --& 00:20:59,880Obviously it's arbitrary.很明显，这是主观专断。33000:21:00,139 --& 00:21:03,750But I think that correcting for it would be detrimental.但我认为试图为之改变会是有害不利的。33100:21:04,040 --& 00:21:07,700Because it would reduce incentives, is that why?因为这会影响激励[体系]，是不是这样？33200:21:07,899 --& 00:21:09,500It would reduce incentives, yeah.对，这样会影响激励[体系],是的。33300:21:09,700 --& 00:21:11,870Mike, what do you say?麦克，你说呢？33400:21:12,110 --& 00:21:14,390We're all sitting in this room and we have undeserved我们这些坐在这间屋子里的人都有那么些我们不值得[拥有或遭受]的，33500:21:14,669 --& 00:21:16,660we have undeserved glory of some sort.我们或多或少都会有些我们自身不值得的荣耀。33600:21:16,889 --& 00:21:20,110So you should not be satisfied with the process of your life.所以你应当对你人生的进程满意。33700:21:20,280 --& 00:21:22,010Because you have not created any of this.因为这一切都不是你所创造的。33800:21:22,190 --& 00:21:24,780And I think, from a standpoint of,not just this room, us being upset,我觉得，从一个角度上来说，不单只这间屋内，我们都很受搅扰33900:21:25,120 --& 00:21:27,710but from a societal standpoint we should have some kind of但是从一个社会角度上来说，我们都应当多少34000:21:27,960 --& 00:21:30,260a gut reaction to that feeling.拥有对于上述感觉有胆量的反应。34100:21:30,500 --& 00:21:32,670The guy who runs the race, he doesn't...这个跑步选手，34200:21:32,879 --& 00:21:35,340He actually harms us as opposed to maybe makes me run that last他实际上是可能会伤害了我，因为如果我跑的话，他得34300:21:35,510 --& 00:21:36,640ten yards faster.让我快十码。34400:21:36,820 --& 00:21:39,150And that makes the guy behind me run ten yards faster那样也得让我后面的人跑得快十码。34500:21:39,379 --& 00:21:41,190and the guy behind him ten yards faster.让那个在他后面的人再快十码。34600:21:41,470 --& 00:21:42,680Alright, so Mike, let me ask you.好的，那么麦克，让我来问问看你。34700:21:42,850 --& 00:21:45,780You talked about effort before. Effort.你之前说过努力，努力。34800:21:46,480 --& 00:21:49,850Do you think when people work hard to get ahead, and succeed,你觉得当人们为了超越努力工作，并且取得了成功，34900:21:50,720 --& 00:21:54,930that they deserve the rewards that go with effort?这些人应得所有的这些靠努力而所取得的成就么？35000:21:55,129 --& 00:21:56,780Isn't that the idea behind your defense?这是否就是你的辩护背后的想法？35100:21:57,060 --& 00:21:58,630I mean, of course, bring Michael Jordan here,我意思是，的确，让迈克尔乔丹来这里，35200:21:58,740 --& 00:22:00,490I'm sure you can get him, and have him come我确定你可以搞定他，让他来[到这里]35300:22:00,770 --& 00:22:03,570and defend himself about he makes 31 million dollars.然后为他[年收入]赚0.31亿美元而辩护。35400:22:03,800 --& 00:22:04,950And I think what you're going to realize is然后，我觉得你之后会发觉35500:22:05,240 --& 00:22:07,650his life was a very, very tough one to get to the top.他的人生征途[念想当年]是历经坎坷才达到巅峰的。35600:22:07,850 --& 00:22:12,580And that we are basically being the majorityoppressing the minority in a different light.然后我们基本在另一层面上就是大众在压迫那些少数派。35700:22:12,760 --& 00:22:14,330It's very easy to pick on him. Very easy.很容易就能说到他。很容易[拿他举例子]。35800:22:14,570 --& 00:22:15,700Alright, effort.好的，努力。35900:22:18,300 --& 00:22:18,930You've got...你有。。。36000:22:20,470 --& 00:22:21,810I've got a few. I've got a few. But that's about it.我有一些。我有一些。但是这是关于那个的。36100:22:22,060 --& 00:22:26,370Effort, you know what Rawls's answer to that is?努力，你知道罗尔斯是如何回应这个[说法]的么?36200:22:28,100 --& 00:22:32,260Even the effort that some people expend,即使是一些人所花费的努力，36300:22:32,960 --& 00:22:35,160conscientious driving, the work ethic,认认真真勤勤恳恳努力，拥有工作精神，36400:22:36,270 --& 00:22:40,430even effort depends a lot on fortunate family circumstances.甚至是很大程度上基于富足家庭背景下的努力，36500:22:41,520 --& 00:22:43,950For which you, we, can claim no credit.对于你[来说],我们[来说]，都不能觉得是理所当然。36600:22:45,470 --& 00:22:51,590Let's do the test. Let's do a test here.让我们做个测试。让我们在这里做个测试。36700:22:52,889 --& 00:22:57,100Never mind economic class, those differences are very significant.不要去管经济差异，那些区别是很明显的。36800:22:57,360 --& 00:22:58,770Put those aside.[把那些先]放到一边。36900:22:59,629 --& 00:23:03,470Psychologists say that birth order makes a lot of difference心理学家说出生先后会产生很大的差异37000:23:03,700 --& 00:23:06,940in work ethic, striving, effort.会区分工作精神，奋斗，努力。37100:23:08,120 --& 00:23:10,450How many here, raise your hand,这里有多少，举起你的手，37200:23:10,620 --& 00:23:14,390those of you here, who are first in birth order.在这里的人，是头胎。37300:23:19,220 --& 00:23:21,080I am too by the way.顺便，我自己也是。37400:23:23,320 --& 00:23:25,620Mike, I noticed you raised your hand.麦克，我也注意到了你也举手了。37500:23:29,070 --& 00:23:33,380If the case for the meritocratic conception如果择优体系的概念37600:23:33,770 --& 00:23:35,940is that effort should be rewarded,是说应该奖励努力，37700:23:36,360 --& 00:23:40,540doesn't Rawls have a point that even effort那么罗尔斯是不是有道理，说即使是努力37800:23:40,720 --& 00:23:46,990striving, work ethic is largely shaped even by birth order?奋斗，工作精神也是很大程度上收到出生顺序的影响的？37900:23:47,639 --& 00:23:49,760Is it your doing?你对之做了什么了吗？38000:23:50,330 --& 00:23:53,340Mike, is it your doing that you were first in birth order?麦克，你是头胎出生是否是你的自身努力？[搞定你了吧]38100:23:55,110 --& 00:23:58,880Then why, Rawls says, of course not.所以，在这种情况下，罗尔斯说，当然不是。【狂敲手指，心理学上暗示在找方案与出路】38200:23:59,710 --& 00:24:03,710So why should income and wealth and opportunities in life那么为什么收入和财富和机遇，在人生中38300:24:06,159 --& 00:24:10,890be based on factors arbitrary from a moral point of view?从道义的观点上来看是需要基于主观专断的因素上【来衡量判断】的？38400:24:11,460 --& 00:24:13,320That's the challenge that he puts那就是他的挑战38500:24:15,570 --& 00:24:20,850to market societies, but also对于社会大众的挑战，不过同时38600:24:22,379 --& 00:24:25,080to those of us at places like this.也是对于我们这些在现有位置上的人的挑战。38700:24:25,260 --& 00:24:27,350A question to think about for next time.有个问题我们下节课会讨论下。38800:24:37,659 --& 00:24:39,730A justice of the United States Supreme Court,美国最高法院里的公正事件，38900:24:40,720 --& 00:24:42,660what do they make?他们能赚多少钱？39000:24:43,280 --& 00:24:46,110It's just under $200,000.只是低于20万美元。39100:24:47,409 --& 00:24:51,180But there's another judge who makesa lot more than Sandra Day O'Connor.但是有另一位法官，赚得比桑德拉·戴依·奥·康纳[法官]多的多。39200:24:53,260 --& 00:24:55,250Do you know who it is? - Judge Judy?你知道是谁么？ --- 朱蒂法官？39300:24:55,460 --& 00:24:58,000Judge Judy. How did you know that?朱蒂法官。你怎么知道的？39400:25:00,050 --& 00:25:01,860Judge Judy, you know how much she makes?朱蒂法官，你知道她赚多少钱么？39500:25:02,189 --& 00:25:04,810$25 million.0.25亿美元。39600:25:05,750 --& 00:25:09,280Now, is that just? Is it fair?那么这个公正么？公平么？39700:25:13,399 --& 00:25:18,240We ended last time with that remarkable poll, do you remember?我们上次结束的时候，进行了个非凡的调查，你还记得么？39800:25:20,270 --& 00:25:22,680The poll about birth order.关于出生顺序的调查。39900:25:26,179 --& 00:25:27,990What percentage of people多少人40000:25:29,520 --& 00:25:33,050in this room raised their hands,在这间房中有多少人举手了，
40100:25:33,699 --& 00:25:37,000was it, to say that they were the first born?那么，就是说他们都是头胎咯？40200:25:40,439 --& 00:25:42,25075, 80 percent?75%，80%？40300:25:45,580 --& 00:25:47,310And what was the significance of that?那么这点的重要性在哪里？40400:25:47,409 --& 00:25:50,030If you're thinking about thesetheories of distributive justice.如果你在考虑公正分配的理论[的话]。40500:25:51,850 --& 00:25:55,850Remember, we were discussing记住，我们在讨论40600:25:58,230 --& 00:26:00,690three different theories of distributive justice.三种不同的公正分配的理论。40700:26:01,389 --& 00:26:03,140Three different ways of answering the question,三种不同的回答问题的方式。40800:26:03,500 --& 00:26:06,530&How should income and wealth and opportunities如何对于收入，财富与机遇40900:26:07,320 --& 00:26:09,410and the good things in life, be distributed?&以及人生美好事物，进行分配？41000:26:10,060 --& 00:26:12,520And so far we've looked at the libertarian answer.至此，我们已经学习了自由主义的回答。41100:26:14,060 --& 00:26:16,100That says, the just system of distribution自由主义认为，公正的分配体系41200:26:17,169 --& 00:26:20,750is a system of free exchange, a free market economy.是一种自由交换的体系，自由的市场经济。41300:26:21,760 --& 00:26:25,970Against a background of formal equality.反对背景的一种完全平等。41400:26:26,199 --& 00:26:30,540Which simply means, that jobs and careers are open to anyone.简单来说，就是工作与职业应该对所有人开放。41500:26:33,199 --& 00:26:35,290Rawls says that this represents an improvement罗尔斯认为这体现了一种改进41600:26:35,659 --& 00:26:39,500over aristocratic and caste systems,是超越了贵族与社会等级制度体系，41700:26:40,000 --& 00:26:42,900because everyone can compete for every job.因为每个人都可以竞争所有的工作。41800:26:43,159 --& 00:26:44,860Careers open to talents.职业对有天赋的人敞开。41900:26:45,659 --& 00:26:47,600And beyond that, the just distribution is the one从中，公正分配42000:26:47,780 --& 00:26:49,950that results from free exchange.是从自由交易的结果产生的。42100:26:50,210 --& 00:26:52,980Voluntary transactions.自由自愿的转交。42200:26:53,970 --& 00:26:55,390No more, no less.不多不少[，正正好好]。42300:26:56,480 --& 00:27:02,490Then Rawls argues, if all you have is formal equality,然后罗尔斯称，如果你只有完全平等，42400:27:02,699 --& 00:27:04,510jobs open to everyone,工作对每个人都敞开，42500:27:06,929 --& 00:27:08,970the result is not going to be fair.结果是不会公平的。42600:27:10,510 --& 00:27:14,120It will be biased in favor of those who happen to be born[胜利的天平就会]偏向于那些碰巧出生42700:27:14,350 --& 00:27:16,520to affluent families,在富足家庭的人，42800:27:17,510 --& 00:27:20,880who happen to have the benefit of good educational opportunities.那些碰巧能有接受优良教育机会的人。42900:27:22,990 --& 00:27:24,430And that accident of birth而这种出生的偶然性43000:27:26,000 --& 00:27:30,370is not a just basis for distributing life chances.用于分配人生际遇是不公正的。43100:27:33,310 --& 00:27:39,320And so, many people who notice this unfairness,所以，很多人注意到了这种不公平，43200:27:39,949 --& 00:27:47,920Rawls argues, are lead to embrace asystem of fair equality of opportunity.罗尔斯称，[那些人]都转向拥护一种公平机遇的体系。43300:27:49,870 --& 00:27:52,700That leads to the meritocratic system.那就是择优体系。43400:27:54,470 --& 00:27:56,560Fair equality of opportunity.公正的机遇均等。43500:27:58,100 --& 00:28:00,270But Rawls says, even if you bring everyone但是罗尔斯称，即使你将人人都带到43600:28:00,510 --& 00:28:02,790to the same starting point in the race,同一个赛跑的起点，43700:28:03,590 --& 00:28:06,970what's going to happen? Who's going to win?会发生什么？谁会赢？43800:28:09,389 --& 00:28:10,780The fastest runners.跑的最快的。43900:28:11,790 --& 00:28:15,430So once you're troubled by basing distributive shares所以，一旦当你受困于分配的基础44000:28:15,600 --& 00:28:18,140on morally arbitrary contingencies,按照道义主观专断的意外性，44100:28:19,000 --& 00:28:22,610you should, if you reason it through,如果你周道地考虑分析，你应当44200:28:23,179 --& 00:28:27,910be carried all the way to what Rawlscalls, &the democratic conception&.完全按照罗尔斯所说的，“民主的概念”。44300:28:28,379 --& 00:28:32,170A more egalitarian conception of distributive justice一个更加平等的公正分配的概念44400:28:32,919 --& 00:28:36,400that he defines by the difference principle.他用差异原理所定义的。44500:28:37,020 --& 00:28:40,940Now, he doesn't say that the only way to remedy现在，他不认为唯一的补救途径44600:28:41,939 --& 00:28:46,310or to compensate for differences in natural talents and abilities或者去补偿自然天赋与能力[所带来的]差异44700:28:47,550 --& 00:28:50,950is to have a kind of, leveling equality.是采取一种拉平的公正。44800:28:51,179 --& 00:28:53,070A guaranteed equality of outcome.一种从结果出发的保证平等。44900:28:53,169 --& 00:28:54,740But he does say但是他的确有说45000:28:56,669 --& 00:28:59,500there's another way to deal with these contingencies.有另外一种发放来应对这种意外性。45100:29:00,770 --& 00:29:05,500People may gain, may benefit from their good fortune,人们可以收获，可以从他们的好运中获益，45200:29:05,730 --& 00:29:09,470but only on terms that work to the advantage of the least well off.但是只能是以为最底层人民谋福利为条件[才能算数]。45300:29:12,709 --& 00:29:15,850And so, we can test how this theory actually works然后这样，我们就能测试这个理论到底如何起作用45400:29:16,080 --& 00:29:19,560by thinking about some paid differentials that arise通过考虑一些收入上的差异45500:29:21,330 --& 00:29:22,900in our society.发生于我们社会中的。45600:29:23,840 --& 00:29:25,700What does the average school teacher make一个学校老师收入平均多少45700:29:26,760 --& 00:29:28,490in the United States, do you suppose?你猜猜看在美国？45800:29:29,379 --& 00:29:32,280Roughly. -$35,000.毛估估的。--- 3万5美元。45900:29:32,480 --& 00:29:34,970It's a little more, 40, $42,000.恩，多一点点，4万，4万2美元。46000:29:35,639 --& 00:29:37,340What about David Letterman?那么戴维·莱特曼[赚多少]呢?46100:29:37,580 --& 00:29:39,020How much do you think David Letterman makes?你觉得戴维·莱特曼赚多少钱？46200:29:40,419 --& 00:29:41,940More than a school teacher?比一个学校老师多么？46300:29:44,970 --& 00:29:49,230$31 million. David Letterman.0.31亿美元。戴维·莱特曼。46400:29:49,439 --& 00:29:51,140Is that fair?这是公正的么？46500:29:52,209 --& 00:29:55,240That David Letterman makes thatmuch more than a school teacher?戴维·莱特曼赚得比一个学校老师多这么多？46600:29:55,419 --& 00:29:57,280Well, Rawls's answer would be,好了，罗尔斯的回答可能会是，46700:29:58,340 --& 00:30:03,390it depends whether the basic structureof society is designed in such a way这取决于这个社会的基架是否形成了这么一种形式46800:30:05,030 --& 00:30:08,330that Letterman's $31 million is subject to taxation就是莱特曼的0.31亿美元是需要赋税的46900:30:08,510 --& 00:30:11,440so that some of those earnings are taken所以他的一些收入被征收掉47000:30:11,639 --& 00:30:15,800to work for the advantage of the least well off.来用于为最底层人民谋福利。47100:30:17,439 --& 00:30:19,690One other example of a paid differential.另一个关于收入差异的例子。47200:30:21,620 --& 00:30:23,740A justice of the United States Supreme Court.美国最高法院里的公正事件。47300:30:25,699 --& 00:30:26,850What do they make?他们赚多少？47400:30:29,689 --& 00:30:32,390It's just under $200,000.只有区区20万美元以下。47500:30:33,870 --& 00:30:38,420Here's Sandra Day O'Connor, for example. There she is.例如，桑德拉·戴依·奥·康纳。看，那就是她。47600:30:42,100 --& 00:30:44,430But there's another judge who makes a lot more但是有另外一位法官，赚得多很多47700:30:44,610 --& 00:30:45,870than Sandra Day O'Connor.比桑德拉·戴依·奥·康纳多的多。47800:30:48,470 --& 00:30:50,040Do you know who it is? - Judge Judy.你知道是谁么？ --- 朱蒂法官。47900:30:50,510 --& 00:30:52,680Judge Judy. How did you know that?朱蒂法官。你怎么知道的？48000:30:53,379 --& 00:30:55,420You watch?你看的？48100:30:56,540 --& 00:30:57,980You're right.你对了。48200:30:58,270 --& 00:31:00,030Judge Judy, you know how much she makes?朱蒂法官，你知道她赚多少吗？48300:31:01,740 --& 00:31:03,420There she is.那就是她。48400:31:04,429 --& 00:31:08,300$25 million.0.25亿美元。48500:31:11,409 --& 00:31:15,020Now, is that just? Is it fair?那么这样公正么？公平么？48600:31:15,350 --& 00:31:20,420Well, the answer is, it depends on whether回答是，这取决于是否48700:31:22,330 --& 00:31:24,190this is against a background system这个反对背景体系48800:31:25,199 --& 00:31:26,900in line with the difference principle.与差异原则相一致。48900:31:28,310 --& 00:31:30,070Where those who come out on top, in terms of其中最突出的，关于49000:31:30,270 --& 00:31:33,640income and wealth are taxed in a way收入与财富税的征收49100:31:33,899 --& 00:31:37,460that benefits the least well off members of society.是用于为社会底层民众谋福利的。49200:31:38,520 --& 00:31:40,480Now, we're going to come back现在，我们要回到49300:31:41,870 --& 00:31:45,530to these wage differentials, pay differentials,、工资差异，收入差异上来49400:31:46,570 --& 00:31:50,230between a real judge and a TV judge.一个是真实的法官，一个是电视法官。49500:31:51,250 --& 00:31:53,470The one Marcus watches all the time.这个马科斯一致看。【嘿嘿我们互相揭穿】49600:31:55,399 --& 00:31:59,090What I want to do now, is return to these theories我现在想做的，是回到这些理论中来49700:31:59,659 --& 00:32:05,990and to examine the objections to来检验49800:32:07,230 --& 00:32:10,760Rawls's more egalitarian theory.针对罗尔斯深层评价主义理论的反对观点。49900:32:11,459 --& 00:32:12,740The difference principle.差异原则。50000:32:13,810 --& 00:32:16,740There are at least three objections有至少三种反对观点
50100:32:18,800 --& 00:32:20,680to Rawls's difference principle.针对罗尔斯的差异原则50200:32:22,280 --& 00:32:25,890One of them came up last time in the discussion一个上次在讨论中50300:32:25,990 --& 00:32:27,560and a number of you raised this worry.以及同学们提出了这一担忧。50400:32:28,550 --& 00:32:30,590What about incentives?鼓励激励怎么办？50500:32:31,659 --& 00:32:37,280Isn't there the risk, if taxes reach70, 80, 90 percent marginal rate是否有风险说，如果税赋上升到70,80,90的临界百分比50600:32:39,230 --& 00:32:42,190that Michael Jordan won't play basketball?然后迈克尔乔丹就不[肯]打篮球了？50700:32:43,540 --& 00:32:48,220That David Letterman won't do late night comedy?然后戴维德·莱特曼就不[肯]做午夜戏剧[秀]了?50800:32:50,649 --& 00:32:57,470Or that CEOs will go into some other line of work?或者那些CEO们都情愿去做别的工作了?50900:32:58,120 --& 00:33:01,940Now, who among those who are defenders of Rawls现在，那些在座的罗尔斯的辩护者们51000:33:04,439 --& 00:33:06,950who has an answer to this objection about谁有对这个反对观点的回答51100:33:07,240 --& 00:33:09,280the need for incentives？[来回答如何处理]对于激励的需要？51200:33:10,810 --& 00:33:13,580Yes. Go ahead, stand up.是。说，起立。51300:33:15,260 --& 00:33:19,630Rawls's idea is that there should only be so much difference罗尔斯的想法是即使要有不同，那么也要是用于51400:33:20,060 --& 00:33:22,830that it helps the least well off the most.为社会底层民众谋福利。51500:33:23,010 --& 00:33:27,480So if there's too much equality, then the least well off所以如果过度平等，那么最底层民众51600:33:27,580 --& 00:33:29,520might not be able to watch late night TV,就不能看午夜剧场了，51700:33:29,810 --& 00:33:33,290or might not have a job because their CEO doesn't want to work.或者就没有工作了，因为CEO都不想工作了。51800:33:33,620 --& 00:33:36,680So you need to find the correct balance where所以必须找到很好的平衡51900:33:36,860 --& 00:33:41,230taxation still leaves enough incentive to least well off to benefit在为最底层民众福利的赋税与足够的刺激鼓励52000:33:41,399 --& 00:33:43,160from the talents.
- Good.那些有天赋的人。 ---
好。52100:33:43,260 --& 00:33:44,620And what's your name? - Tim.然后通名！ --- 蒂姆。52200:33:44,800 --& 00:33:47,440Tim. Alright, so Tim is saying, in effect,蒂姆。好的，那么蒂姆就是说，在效果上，52300:33:47,649 --& 00:33:50,240that Rawls is taking count of incentives.罗尔斯是考虑激励的。52400:33:51,020 --& 00:33:53,350And could allow for pay differentials and也可以允许收入差异52500:33:53,520 --& 00:33:56,820for some adjustment in the tax rate以及在税收率上的调整52600:33:57,050 --& 00:33:58,830to take account of incentives.来调节激励。52700:33:59,189 --& 00:34:00,500But, Tim points out,但是蒂姆指出，52800:34:03,060 --& 00:34:09,070the standpoint from which the questionof incentives needs to be considered关于激励的需求所需要考虑的问题点52900:34:09,410 --& 00:34:13,720is not the effect on the total size of the economic pie.不是从全盘经济上的效果，53000:34:14,529 --& 00:34:17,120But instead from the standpoint of the effect而是从一个效果上的，53100:34:17,270 --& 00:34:18,970of incentives, or disincentives,激励上的，或是不利于经济发展的因素上的，53200:34:20,250 --& 00:34:21,950on the well-being of those on the bottom.关于那些最底层民众生计的效果上来考虑。53300:34:22,180 --& 00:34:24,040Right?是不是？53400:34:24,270 --& 00:34:25,660Good. Thank you.好。谢谢。53500:34:25,890 --& 00:34:27,330I think that is what Rawls would say.我也觉得罗尔斯会这么说。53600:34:28,270 --& 00:34:32,270In fact, if you look in section 17,事实上，若你查阅第17部分，53700:34:33,810 --& 00:34:36,660where he describes the difference principle,那里有他[罗尔斯]对于差异原则的表述，53800:34:40,390 --& 00:34:43,140he allows for incentives.他也有考虑到激励体制。53900:34:44,150 --& 00:34:46,480&The naturally advantaged are not gain”自然[条件上所带来的]优势54000:34:47,440 --& 00:34:49,300merely because they are more gifted,不仅仅是得益于他们的天赋更好54100:34:49,819 --& 00:34:52,460but only to cover the costs of training and education而只是用于满足训练和教育的花销54200:34:52,640 --& 00:34:57,350and for using their endowments inways that help less fortunate as well.&以及发挥他们的天赋来帮助那些不太幸运的人。“54300:34:57,580 --& 00:35:00,720So you can have incentives. You can adjust the tax rate.所以你可以有激励机制。你可以调整税率。54400:35:01,339 --& 00:35:04,900If taking too much from David Letterman若过多地从戴维德·莱特曼的收入中[收缴赋税的话]，54500:35:05,650 --& 00:35:08,060or from Michael Jordan, or from Bill Gates,或者是迈克尔·乔丹，或者是比尔·盖茨的话，54600:35:09,750 --& 00:35:12,710winds up actually hurting those at the bottom.最终是会伤害到社会最底层人民的权益的。54700:35:13,089 --& 00:35:14,500That's the test.这就是测试[辨别的标准]。54800:35:18,000 --& 00:35:21,770So incentives, that's not a decisive objections against所以关于激励机制，其并非一个决定性的反对观点54900:35:21,950 --& 00:35:24,040Rawls's difference principle.针对罗尔斯的差异原则[理论的反对意见]。55000:35:24,930 --& 00:35:29,790But there are two weightier, more difficult objections.但有另外两个更有影响的，更难以[驳斥]的反对观点。55100:35:32,549 --& 00:35:34,020One of them其中之一55200:35:36,810 --& 00:35:41,960comes from defenders of a meritocratic conception.来自于择优体系概念的辩护者。55300:35:44,049 --& 00:35:46,980The argument that says, what about effort?论点称，那么努力怎么算？55400:35:47,600 --& 00:35:50,010What about people working hard那些努力工作的人55500:35:50,790 --& 00:35:53,200having a right to what they earn有权享有其所得所赚取的55600:35:53,580 --& 00:35:54,860because they've deserved it.因为他们值得拥有[其所赚取]。55700:35:55,120 --& 00:35:56,590They've worked hard for it.他们有为之而努力奋斗。55800:35:57,060 --& 00:36:01,060That's the objection from effort and moral desert.这就是从努力与道义缺失方面提出的反对观点。55900:36:02,230 --& 00:36:05,130Then there's another objection.然后，又有另外一个反对观点。56000:36:06,670 --& 00:36:10,100That comes from libertarians.这个反对观点是来自于自由主义者的。56100:36:11,450 --& 00:36:16,650And this objection has to do with reasserting the idea而这个反对观点来源于重申56200:36:17,589 --& 00:36:19,060of self-ownership.对自身拥有的思想。56300:36:22,130 --& 00:36:25,300Doesn't the difference principle, by treating是否差异原则，看待56400:36:25,839 --& 00:36:29,240our natural talents and endowments as common assets,我们的自然天赋与努力看作成公共财富，56500:36:31,020 --& 00:36:35,700doesn't that violate the idea that we own ourselves?这个理念是否违反了我们自己拥有自己的概念？56600:36:36,080 --& 00:36:38,850Now, let me deal first,现在，先让我来处理56700:36:39,560 --& 00:36:44,710with the objection that comes from the libertarian direction.来自于自由主义论的反对论点。56800:36:46,250 --& 00:36:49,960Milton Friedman writes, in his book, &Free to Choose,&弥尔顿·弗里德曼在他书中些到，“选择的自由，56900:36:50,790 --& 00:36:52,130&Life is not fair.生命本不是公正的。57000:36:53,299 --& 00:36:56,960And it's tempting to believe that government can rectify而其倾向于认为政府可以修正57100:36:57,609 --& 00:36:59,810what nature has spawned.&所发生的自然现象。57200:37:00,770 --& 00:37:02,320But his answer is,不过他的答案是，57300:37:05,130 --& 00:37:07,880&The only way to try to rectify that is to have唯一的用以修正的方法是57400:37:08,060 --& 00:37:11,540a leveling equality of outcome.&对于结果进行的拉平的公正。”57500:37:11,819 --& 00:37:13,600Everyone finishing the race at the same point.每个人在同一点结束赛跑。57600:37:15,870 --& 00:37:17,570And that would be a disaster.然后这样就会有灾难了。57700:37:20,279 --& 00:37:22,820This is an easy argument to answer.这是个很好应对的论点。57800:37:24,180 --& 00:37:26,220And Rawls addresses it.然后罗尔斯对之做出回应。57900:37:29,190 --& 00:37:32,250In one of the most powerful passages, I think,在我看来，[罗尔斯的回答]是最精彩强大的一章之一，58000:37:32,460 --& 00:37:33,690of the theory of justice.在公正的理论中[最出彩的一章之一]。[我也觉得人当常以此理论自省。]58100:37:33,890 --& 00:37:36,790It's in Section 17.在第17部分。58200:37:37,730 --& 00:37:40,760&The natural distribution&, and here he's talking about“自然的分配 ”，在这里他说道58300:37:41,000 --& 00:37:43,490the natural distribution talents and endowments.对于天赋与努力的自然分配。58400:37:43,790 --& 00:37:45,550&...is neither just nor unjust.“。。。[自然的偶然分配]是既公正又不公正的。58500:37:46,980 --& 00:37:50,750&Nor is it unjust that persons are borninto society at some particular position.“人在社会的某个阶层出生也并非是不公正的。58600:37:50,930 --& 00:37:52,500These are simply natural facts.这些都是很简单的自然现象的事实。58700:37:52,779 --& 00:37:55,810What is just and unjust is the way that institutions是否公正，只是社会58800:37:55,990 --& 00:37:57,800deal with these facts.&如何处理应对这些实际现象。”58900:38:00,040 --& 00:38:05,240That's his answer to libertarian laissez faire economists这是他对于自由放任主义经济学家们的回应59000:38:05,420 --& 00:38:09,080like Milton Friedman who say, &Life is unfair but get over it.&比如弥尔顿·弗雷德曼说的“人生是不公平的但去克服忘却吧。”[算了，退一步海阔天空。]59100:38:10,799 --& 00:38:13,260Get over it and let's see if we can, at least,退一步，克服一下，然后来看看我们是否可以，至少，59200:38:13,470 --& 00:38:15,900maximize the benefits that flow from it.最大化从中获取的益处。59300:38:18,299 --& 00:38:21,200But the more powerful libertarian objection to Rawls但是对罗尔斯理论更凶悍的自由主义方面的反对观点59400:38:21,310 --& 00:38:24,890is not libertarian from the libertarianeconomists like Milton Friedman.不是从像弥尔顿·弗莱德曼那样的自由主义经学家衍生出来的自由主义59500:38:26,839 --& 00:38:29,430It's from the argument about self-ownership.而是来源于自我拥有论的观点。59600:38:30,680 --& 00:38:32,770Developed as we saw, in Nozick.像我们所见到的诺齐克那样的发展。59700:38:36,460 --& 00:38:37,880And from that point of view,然后，那种观点中，59800:38:38,150 --& 00:38:40,190yes, it might be a good thing,的确，可能是个好事，59900:38:41,290 --& 00:38:43,880to create head start programs and public schools来创建起头项目于公共学校60000:38:44,109 --& 00:38:46,520so that everyone can go to a decent school以使每个人都可以去个像样得体的学校
60100:38:46,750 --& 00:38:49,320and start the race at the same starting line.然后在同一起跑线开始赛跑。60200:38:49,540 --& 00:38:50,750That might be good.这样也许的确蛮好。60300:38:52,100 --& 00:38:55,420But if you tax people to create public schools,但是若你从民众中征税来建设公共学校，60400:38:56,830 --& 00:38:59,710if you tax people against their will,如果你违背人民的意愿地征税，60500:39:01,120 --& 00:39:02,870you coerce them.你就是在强迫他们。60600:39:03,100 --& 00:39:04,860It's a form of theft.这就好像是种盗窃行为。60700:39:05,319 --& 00:39:08,300If you take some of Letterman's $31 million,如果你从莱特曼的0.31亿美元中抽掉一些，60800:39:09,190 --& 00:39:13,920tax it away to support public schools, against his will,违背他意志地征税，来援建公共学校，60900:39:15,589 --& 00:39:20,320the state is really doing no better than stealing from him.这个政府就是在确确实实地偷盗他。61000:39:20,600 --& 00:39:21,990It's coercion.这就是强迫。61100:39:23,029 --& 00:39:26,820And the reason is, we have to think of ourselves因为，我们必须认为我们自己是61200:39:26,930 --& 00:39:29,990as owning our talents and endowments.对自己的天赋与努力是独立拥有的。61300:39:30,450 --& 00:39:34,820Because otherwise we're back to justusing people and coercing people.因为不然的话，我们就是重回压榨强迫人民的道路。61400:39:35,890 --& 00:39:37,830That's the libertarian reply.这是自由主义论的反对论点。61500:39:39,390 --& 00:39:41,800What's Rawls's answer to that objection?那么罗尔斯是如何对这种反对论点进行回应的呢？61600:39:48,029 --& 00:39:52,190He doesn't address the idea of self-ownership directly.他并未直接应对自我拥有论的观点。61700:39:53,600 --& 00:39:56,760But the effect, the moral weight of his argument但是效果，他在道义上的突出的论点61800:39:56,859 --& 00:39:58,430for the difference principle is,基于差异原则的论点是，61900:40:00,210 --& 00:40:04,370maybe we don't own ourselves inthat thoroughgoing sense after all.也许我们从根本上就不对自身完全拥有。62000:40:06,240 --& 00:40:08,880Now, he says, this doesn't mean that the state这里，他说道，并不意味着终章BOSS【防河蟹】62100:40:09,350 --& 00:40:14,110is an owner in me, in the sense that it can simply也对人自身拥有，简单意指62200:40:14,500 --& 00:40:16,310commandeer my life.对个人人生的强占徵用。62300:40:17,520 --& 00:40:19,220Because remember, the first principle因为要记住，第一原则62400:40:19,930 --& 00:40:21,870we would agree to behind the veil of ignorance,我们在无知面纱的背后会同意62500:40:23,870 --& 00:40:26,430is the principle of equal basic liberties.基本自由平等的原则。62600:40:27,370 --& 00:40:29,130Freedom of speech, religious liberty,随便说说话，随便信个神，[防河蟹处理]62700:40:29,410 --& 00:40:31,660freedom of conscience and the like.随意想法等等。[防河蟹处理]62800:40:33,589 --& 00:40:35,810So the only respect所以唯一的重要方面62900:40:37,589 --& 00:40:41,560in which the idea of self-ownership must give way,在其中自我拥有观点必须让步63000:40:43,460 --& 00:40:46,100comes when we're thinking about whether来源于我们的思考，对于63100:40:47,279 --& 00:40:51,280I own myself in the sense that我们是否自我拥有的思考，63200:40:51,690 --& 00:40:53,550I have a privileged claim思考我是否有理所当然的权益63300:40:56,049 --& 00:40:59,660on the benefits that come from the exercise of my talents来从个人基于自身天赋努力所取得成果的权益63400:40:59,759 --& 00:41:01,720in a market economy.在市场经济中所赚取的权益。63500:41:01,830 --& 00:41:04,190And Rawls says, on reflection, we don't.而罗尔斯说，在深思熟虑后，我们会发现，其实我们并不。63600:41:05,359 --& 00:41:06,770We can defend rights.我们可以维权。63700:41:07,339 --& 00:41:09,070We can respect the individual