Section outline

  • General

    Collapse all Expand all

  • 谁得到什么?

    Social Philosophy
    ::社会哲学

     

    The principle question for social philosophy is: Who gets what?
    ::社会哲学的原则问题是:谁能得到什么?

    Principles of Justice: The Veil of Ignorance
    ::司法原则原则:无知的天天

    This matter is known as Distributive Justice . Just how are the goods and services within any society to be distributed? In any society no matter how small (an island society) or how large (the People’s Republic of China) there will arise the question of how goods and services are to be distributed. Whether people will be free to work and keep what they earn or whether all must contribute in some way to the welfare of others, particularly those not capable of working and caring for themselves. Below there are a number of principles which have been developed in response to this problem of deciding how social life is to be regulated and people are to be cared for.  Read these and note the differences.
    ::这个问题被称为分配正义。 社会内部的商品和服务是如何分配的? 在任何社会中,无论大小(岛屿社会)或大小(中华人民共和国),都会出现商品和服务如何分配的问题。人们是否可以自由地工作和保留他们挣来的钱,或是否都必须以某种方式为他人的福利作出贡献,特别是那些不能工作和照顾自己的人。下面有一些原则是针对这个决定如何管理社会生活和如何照顾人们的问题制定的。读读这些并注意差异。

    Read
    ::已读

    •   
    •  
    •  
    •   
    •    
    •  
    •    
    •  
    •   

    Strict Egalitarianism
    ::严格的平等主义

    One of the simplest principles of distributive justice is that of . The principle says that every person should have the same level of material goods and services. The principle is most commonly justified on the grounds that people are morally equal and that equality in material goods and services is the best way to give effect to this moral ideal.
    ::分配公正最简单的原则之一是......原则。原则指出,每个人都应当拥有同等水平的物质商品和服务。 最普遍的理由就是,人们在道德上是平等的,物质商品和服务平等是实现这一道德理想的最佳途径。

    The Difference Principle
    ::差异原则

    The most widely discussed T heory of D istributive Justice in the past four decades has been that proposed by J ohn R awls in a T heory of J ustice and Political Liberalism . Rawls proposes the following two principles of justice:
    ::过去四十年来讨论最广泛的分配公正理论是约翰·罗尔斯在《正义和政治自由主义理论》中提出的理论。

    1. Each person has an equal claim to a fully adequate scheme of equal basic rights and liberties, which scheme is compatible with the same scheme for all; and in this scheme the equal political liberties, and only those liberties, are to be guaranteed their fair value.
      ::每个人平等要求一个完全适当的平等基本权利和自由计划,这个计划符合所有人的同一计划;在这个计划中,平等的政治自由,只有这些自由,才能保证其公平价值。
    2. Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions:
      1. T hey are to be attached to positions and offices open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity; 
        ::在公平机会均等的条件下,他们应担任向所有人开放的职位和办公室;
      2. They are to be to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society
        ::社会上处境最不利的成员最能为他们谋最大利益

      ::社会和经济不平等必须满足两个条件:他们在公平机会平等的条件下,担任向所有人开放的职位和职务; 社会最不处于最不利地位的成员最受益。

    Equality of Opportunity and Luck Egalitarianism 
    ::机会和运气平等

    Dworkin proposed that people begin with equal resources but be allowed to end up with unequal economic benefits as a result of their own choices. What constitutes a just material distribution is to be determined by the result of a thought experiment designed to model fair distribution.  Suppose that everyone is given the same purchasing power and each uses that purchasing power to bid, in a fair auction, for resources best suited to their life plans. They are then permitted to use those resources as they see fit.  Although people may end up with different economic benefits, none of them is given less consideration than another in the sense that if they wanted somebody else's resource bundle they could have bid for it instead.
    ::Dworkin建议人们从平等资源开始,但允许他们最终因自己的选择而获得不平等的经济利益。 公正的物质分配是由设计用于模拟公平分配的思维实验的结果决定的。 假设每个人都拥有同样的购买力,并且每个人都使用这种购买力在公平拍卖中为最适合其生活计划的资源进行投标,然后允许他们酌情使用这些资源。 虽然人们最终可能获得不同的经济利益,但是没有人会比其他人得到同样的考虑,因为他们想要别人的资源包,他们可以为此投标。

    In D workin's proposal we see his attitudes to ‘ ambitions ’ and ‘ endowments ’ which have become a central feature of luck egalitarianism (though under a wide variety of alternative names and further subset-distinctions .  In terms of sensitivity to ‘ambitions’, Dworkin and many other luck egalitarians argue that provided people have an ‘equal’ starting point (in Dworkin's case, resources) they should live with the consequences of their choices. They argue, for instance, that people who choose to work hard to earn more income should not be required to subsidize those choosing more leisure and hence less income.
    ::在Dworkin的建议中,我们看到他对于`雄心壮志 ' 和`恩赐 ' 的态度,它们已经成为幸运平等主义的核心特征(尽管在各种各样的替代名称和进一步的分级区别下 ) 。 在对`雄心壮志 ' 的敏感度方面,Dworkin和许多其他幸运平等派认为,只要人们有一个`平等 ' 的起点(在Dworkin的案例中,资源 ) , 他们就应该与他们选择的后果生活在一起。 比如,他们争辩说,选择辛勤工作以赚取更多收入的人不应该被要求补贴那些选择更多闲暇因而收入较少的人。

    Welfare-Based Principles
    ::基于福利的原则

    Welfare-based principles are motivated by the idea that what is of primary moral importance is the level of welfare of people.  Advocates of welfare-based principles view the concerns of other theories— material equality , the level of primary goods of the least advantaged, resources, desert-claims , or liberty—as derivative concerns. They are only valuable in so far as they affect welfare, so that all distributive questions should be settled entirely by how the distribution affects welfare. However, there are many ways that welfare can be used in answering these distributive questions, so welfare-theorists need to specify what welfare function they believe should be maximized.  The welfare functions proposed vary according to what will count as welfare and the weighting system for that welfare. Economists defending some form of welfarism normally state the explicit functional form, while philosophers often avoid this formality, concentrating on developing their theories in answer to three  questions:
    ::福利原则的倡导者认为,其他理论——物质平等、最不优越的初级产品、资源、沙漠权利主张或自由——都是衍生性关切,这些只是影响福利的宝贵问题,因此所有分配问题都应完全通过分配如何影响福利来解决。然而,在回答这些分配问题时,有许多方法可以使用福利,因此福利理论家需要说明他们认为应最大限度地发挥何种福利功能。提议的福利功能因什么算作福利以及福利的权重制度而不同。捍卫某种形式狼藉主义的经济学家通常提出明确的功能形式,而哲学家则往往避免这种形式,集中研究他们理论,回答三个问题:

    1.  The question of what has intrinsic value , and
      ::哪些东西具有内在价值的问题,以及哪些东西具有内在价值的问题。
    2. The question of what actions or policies would maximize the intrinsic value.
      ::哪些行动或政策将最大限度地发挥内在价值的问题。
    3. Moreover, philosophers tend to restrict themselves to a small subset of the available welfare functions.
      ::此外,哲学家往往局限于现有的福利职能中的一小部分。

    Although there are a number of advocates of alternative welfare functions such as equality of well-being , most philosophical activity has concentrated on a variant known as Utilitarianism . This theory can be used to illustrate most of the main characteristics of welfare-based principles.
    ::虽然有一些倡导福利平等等替代福利功能的人,但大多数哲学活动都集中在称为“利用主义”的变体上,这一理论可以用来说明福利原则的大多数主要特征。

    Desert-Based Principles  
    ::基于沙漠的原则

    The different desert-based principles of distribution differ primarily according to what they identify as the basis for deserving. While A ristotle proposed virtue, or moral character, to be the best desert-basis for economic distribution, contemporary desert theorists have proposed desert-bases that are more practically implemented in complex modern societies. Most contemporary desert theorists have pursued John Locke's lead in this respect.  Locke argued people deserve to have those items produced by their toil and industry, the products, or the value thereof,  being a fitting reward for their effort.  Locke's underlying idea was to guarantee to individuals the fruits of their own labor and abstinence.  Most contemporary proposals for desert-bases fit into one of three broad categories:
    ::基于沙漠的不同分配原则主要根据它们所认定的值得分配的基础而有所不同。虽然亚里士多德提出了美德或道德品质,作为经济分配的最佳沙漠基础,但当代沙漠理论家提出了在复杂的现代社会中更实际实施的沙漠基地。大多数当代沙漠理论家在这方面都追求约翰·洛克的领导。洛克认为人们应该拥有由他们的工伤和工业生产的产品,产品或价值,作为他们努力的恰当奖励。洛克的基本思想是保证个人获得自己的劳动成果和禁欲。大多数当代关于沙漠基地的建议都属于三大类之一:

    1. Contribution : people should be rewarded for their work activity according to the value of their contribution to the social product. 
      ::贡献:人们的工作活动应当根据其对社会产品的贡献价值得到奖励。
    2. Effort: people should be rewarded according to the effort they expend in their work activity .
      ::努力:人们应该因其在工作活动中付出的努力而得到奖励。
    3. Compensation : people should be rewarded according to the costs they incur in their work activity.
      ::补偿:应根据工作活动引起的费用对人给予奖励。

    Libertarian Principles
    ::自由自由原则

    The market will be just, not as a means to some pattern, but insofar as the exchanges permitted in the market satisfy the conditions of just acquisition and exchange described by the principles.  For L ibertarians, just outcomes are those arrived at by the separate just actions of individuals; a particular distributive pattern is not required for justice.  Robert N ozick has advanced this version of Libertarianism and is its best known contemporary advocate. Nozick proposed a 3-part “entitlement theory”. If the world were wholly just, the following definition would exhaustively cover the subject of justice in holdings :
    ::市场将是公正的,不是实现某种模式的手段,而是市场允许的交易所满足原则所述公正获取和交换的条件。对于自由主义者来说,公正的结果是个人单独采取公正行动的结果;司法不需要一种特殊的分配模式。罗伯特·诺希克提出了自由主义的这一版本,也是其最著名的当代倡导者。诺希克提出了一个三部分的“应享权利理论 ” 如果世界完全公正,以下定义将详尽无遗地涵盖财产的司法问题:

    1. A person who acquires a holding in accordance with the P rinciple of Justice in acquisition is entitled to that holding.
      ::根据 " 取得财产的司法原则 " 取得财产的人有权获得这种财产。
    2. A person who acquires a holding in accordance with the P rinciple of Justice in transfer, from someone else entitled to the holding, is entitled to the holding.
      ::根据《司法原则》从有权取得该财产的其他人处获得财产的,有权取得该财产。
    3. No one is entitled to a holding except by (repeated) applications of ( 1 ) and ( 2 ).
      ::除了(1)和(2)的(重复的)申请之外,任何人都无权被扣押。

    The complete principle of D istributive Justice would say simply that a distribution is just if everyone is entitled to the holdings they possess under the distribution. 
    ::" 分配正义 " 的完整原则将简单地说,分配是公正的,只要每个人都有权获得分配下他们拥有的股份。

    Rawls and Nozick on Libertarian Principles of Justice
    ::关于司法自由原则的Rawls和Nuzick

    Consider some matter of importance to us today that relates to the question of the distribution of goods and services.  Apply any of the social theories you have read about and take a position on it. For example:
    ::考虑一下今天与商品和服务分配问题有关的一些对我们今天具有重要意义的问题。 应用你读过的任何社会理论,并对此采取立场。 例如:

    1. The distribution of the funds of the charities to the victims of the 9-11 disaster, how should the federal money be distributed?
      ::将慈善机构的资金分配给9-11灾难的受害者,如何分配联邦资金?
    2. What principle of distributive justice do you favor using to decide who gets what?
      ::分配公正原则是什么? 你更喜欢用什么原则来决定谁能得到什么?

    Read how the money was distributed.     
    ::看看钱是如何分配的

    Paying the 911 Victim-From the Fund Administrator
    ::从基金署长处支付911名受害人

    There are a variety of social situations that result from the application of these principles or from a combination of the principles.  The range of variations is quite broad and includes C ommunist S tates and D emocratic S tates.  It includes societies that have great concern for individual welfare and those that have great concern for the common welfare .  It includes those that have liberal as well as conservative orientations .  What does this mean?
    ::这些原则的适用或这些原则的结合造成了各种各样的社会状况,差异的范围相当广泛,包括共产主义国家和民主国家,包括非常关心个人福利的社会和非常关心共同福利的社会,包括既以自由为取向又以保守为取向的社会。

    We shall contrast two rather different approaches to the matter of distribution in the next section:  liberalism and conservatism.
    ::我们将在下一节对分配问题采取两种截然不同的办法:自由主义和保守主义。

    Vocabulary
    ::词汇表