道德观念的不恰当的影响
by factors arbitrary from a moral point of view.
比如 不管你是否曾经接受好的教育
Such as, whether you got a good education or not.
也不论你是否成长在一个经济上给予你支持
Whether you grew up in a family that support you
致力于培养你的职业道德
and developed in you a work ethic
并且为你提供各种机会的家庭
and gave you the opportunities.
这表明它已经演变成了一个
So that suggests moving to a system of fair
机会均等的制度
equality of opportunity.
这就是Mike刚才提倡的体制的本质
And that's really the system that Mike was advocating earlier on.
我们可以叫它基优制
What we might call a merit-based system.
一个绩效化的制度
A meritocratic system.
在公平的精英制中 社会建立各种机构
In a fair meritocracy the society sets up institutions
以确保在比赛开始前
to bring everyone to the same starting point
每个人的起点相同
before the race begins.
享受平等的受教育的权利
Equal educational opportunities.
比如说 早期智力开发项目
Head start programs, for example.
对于贫困社区学校的帮助
Support for schools in impoverished neighborhoods.
这样的话 每个人 不管家庭背景如何
So that everyone, regardless of their family background,
都拥有真正的公平的机会
has a genuinely fair opportunity.
即每个人都站在同一起跑线上
Everyone starts from the same starting line.
那么 Rawls是怎样看待精英制度的呢?
Well, what does Rawls think about the meritocratic system?
他认为 就连这种制度也未能有效地
Even that, he says, doesn't go far enough
弥补或者解决
in remedying, or addressing,
每个人得到的"自然彩数"(指运气)
the moral arbitrariness
以及道德的任意性
of the natural lottery.
因为 如果你让每个人都站在同一起跑线上
Because if you bring everyone to the same starting point
然后开始比赛 谁才会赢得胜利呢?
and begin the race, who's going to win the race?
谁会赢?
Who would win?
拿跑步者来说
To use the runners example.
跑得最快的人会赢
The fastest runners would win.
但是 他们之所以会赢
But is it their doing
是因为刚好有着运动员的天赋 所以跑得快吗?
that they happen to be blessed with athletic prowess to run fast?
所以Rawls说 "即使是精英制的原则
So Rawls says, "Even the principle of meritocracy,
让每个人都站在同一起跑线上
where you bring everyone to the same starting point,
可能会消除社会偶然因素 和社会教养带来的影响
may eliminate the influence of social contingencies and upbringing,
但是它还是允许财富和收入的分配
but it still permits the distribution of wealth and income to be determined
受能力与天赋的自然分布的支配"
by the natural distribution of abilities and talents."
所以他认为 在消除道德观念武断
And so he thinks that the principle of eliminating
在收入和财富的影响的这一原则
morally arbitrary influences in the distribution of income and wealth
需要超越
requires going beyond
Mike提倡的精英制度系统
what Mike favors, the meritocratic system.
那么 你怎样去超越呢?
Now, how do you go beyond?
即使你让每个人都站在同一起跑线上
Do you bring everyone to the same starting point
你还是因为一些人是跑步好手
and you're still bothered by the fact that
而另外一些人都不善于跑步而困扰
some are fast runners and some are not fast runners,
你能做什么呢?
what can you do?
一些持有更为平等观念的评论家们说
Well, some critics of a more egalitarian conception
你唯一能做的就是给运动健将们制造障碍
say the only thing you can do is handicap the fast runners.
让他们穿上铅鞋
Make them wear lead shoes.
但谁又想那么做呢?
But who wants to do that?
那只会彻底毁掉整个比赛
That would defeat the whole point of running the race.
但是Rawls认为 如果你想
But Rawls says, you don't have to have
超越精英制度的话 没有必要去追求一种
a kind of leveling equality, if you want to go
水平上的平等
beyond a meritocratic conception.
你只要允许 甚至鼓励
You permit, you even encourage,
那些也许有天赋的人 去实现他们的才能
those who may be gifted, to exercise their talents.
但是你要做的 就是改变条件
But what you do, is you change the terms
让其他的人也能够享受到有才能的人
on which people are entitled to the fruits of
实践成功过后的果实
the exercise of those talents.
那才是差异原则所要表达的真正含义
And that really is what the difference principle is.
你将建立起一项这样的原则
You establish a principle that says,
人们也许会从他们的好运中获利
people may benefit from their good fortune,
从他们在基因博彩中的胜出中获利
from their luck in the genetic lottery,
但条件是 必须将自己所得部分 用于帮助那些最贫困的人
but only on terms that work to the advantage of the least well off.
因此 举个例子
And so, for example,
迈克尔·乔丹可以赚3100万美元
Michael Jordan can make 31 million dollars but,
但那必须在一个特定的制度下 税收会将他的部分收入
only under a system that taxes away a chunk of that
拨来帮助那些与他刚好相反的 缺乏篮球技巧的人
to help those who lack the basketball skills that he's blessed with.
同样的 比尔·盖茨
Likewise, Bill Gates.
他可以继续赚大钱
He can make his billions.
但从道德角度而言 他不能认为自己理所当然
But he can't think that he somehow morally deserves
该拥有这么多钱
those billions.
"那些先天受到自然眷顾的人
"Those who have been favored by nature,
可以从他们的好运中获得利益 但那只建立在改善
may gain from their good fortune but only on terms that improve
那些失利者状况的基础上"
the situation of those who have lost out."
这就是差异原则
That's the difference principle.
一个来自于道德武断主义的论断
And it's an argument from moral arbitrarianists.
Rawls主张 如果你为了如何将共享分配建立在
Rawls claims, that if you're bothered by basing distributive shares
道德观念的专断性上而烦恼
on factors arbitrary from a moral point of view,
那么你并不只是为了自由市场 而否决了封建贵族
you don't just reject a feudal aristocracy for a free market.
你甚至不满足于让每个人都站在
You don't even rest content with a meritocratic system
同一起跑线上的精英制度
that brings everyone to the same starting point.
于是你建立起一项新的制度 在这个制度下 每个人
You set up a system, where everyone, including those at the bottom,
包括那些处在社会底层的人 都将从那些有幸拥有天赋才能
benefit from the exercise of the talents held by those
并将其实现的人那里获益
who happen to be lucky.
你们怎么看? 这令人信服吗?
What do you think? Is that persuasive?
谁觉得这个论题没有说服力?
Who finds that argument unpersuasive?
关于这个道德武断主义的论题
The argument for moral arbitrarianists.
请说
Yes.
我认为 在平等主义的主张下
I think that in the egalitarian proposition
那些更有才能的人
the more talented people,
即使清楚自己辛苦得来的部分财产
I think it's very optimistic to think that they
将会被再分配 还是会一如既往地努力工作
would still work really hard, even if they knew that
这一想法过于乐观
part of what they made would be given away.
所以我认为 更有才能的人们要想最大限度地
So I think that the only way for the more talented people to
实现他们的才能 唯一的方法就是
exercise their talents to the best of their ability
依靠精英制度
is in the meritocracy.
但是在精英制度下 你叫什么名字?
And in a meritocracy, what's your name?
我叫Kate
Kate.
Kate 那曾经困扰你吗 还有Mike 也曾经困扰过吗
Kate, does it bother you, and Mike, does it bother you,
在精英制度下 甚至在机会均等的条件下
that in a meritocratic system, that even with fair equality of opportunity,
有人遥遥领先 有人获得他不值得拥有的奖励
people get ahead, people get rewards that they don't deserve
仅仅只是因为他们有幸拥有某种天赋
simply because they happen to be naturally gifted.
那又作何解释呢?
What about that?
我认为这是武断的
I think that it is arbitrary.
很明显具有武断性
Obviously it's arbitrary.
但是我认为 轻易地改变它是十分不利的
But I think that correcting for it would be detrimental.
因为这会减少积极性 是这样吗?
Because it would reduce incentives, is that why?
会减少积极性 是的
It would reduce incentives, yeah.
Mike 你怎么看?
Mike, what do you say?
我们现在正坐在这间教室里 我们不配
We're all sitting in this room and we have undeserved,
我们在某种程度上 不配有这种荣誉
we have undeserved glory of some sort.
所以你不应该满足于个人的人生进程
So you should not be satisfied with the process of your life.
因为这一切都不是你创造的
Because you have not created any of this.
而且我认为 从一个角度看 不仅是这间教室 让我们感到失败
And I think, from a standpoint of, not just this room, us being upset,
从社会的角度看 我们更应该对那种失败的感觉
but from a societal standpoint we should have some kind of
做出某种本能的反应
a gut reaction to that feeling.
赢得比赛的那个人 他...
The guy who runs the race, he doesn't...
他实际上伤害了我们 因为跟他相比 可能我最后10码
He actually harms us as opposed to maybe makes me run that last
必须得加速
ten yards faster.
我身后的那个选手也得加速10码
And that makes the guy behind me run ten yards faster
他身后的选手同样要加速10码
and the guy behind him ten yards faster.
好吧 那么Mike 我来问你
Alright, so Mike, let me ask you.
你刚才谈到了努力 努力
You talked about effort before. Effort.
你认为当有些人因认真工作而遥遥领先 并获得成功
Do you think when people work hard to get ahead, and succeed,
那么他们就值得那些伴随努力而来的嘉奖吗?
that they deserve the rewards that go with effort?
那难道不是你自我辩护下的措辞吗?
Isn't that the idea behind your defense?
我是说 当然 把迈克尔·乔丹带到这儿
I mean, of course, bring Michael Jordan here,
我肯定你一定能做到 让他来这儿
I'm sure you can get him, and have him come
为他自己赚的3100万美元进行辩护
and defend himself about he makes 31 million dollars.
然后我想你就会了解
And I think what you're going to realize is
他付出了非常 非常艰苦的努力才到达人生的顶峰
his life was a very, very tough one to get to the top.
我们根本就是多数人以另一种角度在压迫少数人
And that we are basically being the majority oppressing the minority in a different light.
他很容易成为攻击的对象 非常容易
It's very easy to pick on him. Very easy.
