28:24Now we turn to the hardest philosopher we're going to read in this course. Today we turn to Immanuel Kant who offers a different account of why we have a categorical duty to respect the dignity of persons and not to use people as means merely even for good ends.
我们将要讲的是本课程最难理解的哲学家。今天开始讲伊曼努尔·康德，他提出了不同的解释，针对为何我们有尊重个人尊严的绝对义务，以及为何即使是出于良善目的也不能只把人当手段利用。
Kant excelled at the University of Konigsberg at the age of 16. At age of 31, he got his first job as an unsalaried lecturer paid on commission based on number of students showed up at his lectures.
康德16岁便考入了哥尼斯堡大学。31岁时，他得到了第一份工作，编外讲师，工资是根据上他课的学生人数来定的。
This is a sensible system that Harvard would do well to consider. Luckily for Kant, he was a popular lecturer and also an industrious one and so he eked out a meager living.
这个系统非常明智，哈佛也应考虑一下。康德很幸运，他大受欢迎，当然也很勤奋，勉强维持住了拮据的生活。
It wasn't until he was 57 that he published his first major work. But, it was worth the wait, the book was the "Critique of Pure Reason", perhaps the most important work in all of modern philosophy.
直到57岁他才出版了第一本重要著作。但等待是值得的，这本书就是《纯粹理性批判》，这或许是现代哲学里最重要的一本著作。
And a few years later, Kant wrote "the Groundwork for Metaphysics of Morals" which we read in this course. I want to acknowledge even before we start that Kant is a difficult thinker but it's important to try to figure out what he's saying.
几年后，康德编著了《道德形而上学的基础》，这也是本课程的必读书。开始上课之前我必须先承认康德是位很难理解的思想家，但理解他的思想非常重要。
Because what—what this book is about is, well, it's about what the supreme principle of morality is, number one, and it also—it gives us an account, one of the most powerful accounts we have, of what freedom really is. So, let me start today.
因为他书中所讲的首先是道德的最高原则究竟是什么，并向我们解释了，这也是我们所知最有力的解释，自由到底是什么。好了，今天的课程开始。
Kant rejects utilitarianism. He thinks that the individual person, all human beings, have a certain dignity that commands our respect.
康德反对功利主义。他认为，每个个体，所有人类都拥有一定尊严，人们必须尊重。
The reason the individual is sacred or the bearer of rights, according to Kant, doesn't stem from the idea that we own ourselves but instead from the idea that we are all rational beings. We're all rational beings, which simply means that we are beings who are capable of reason.
个体神圣不可侵犯或是拥有权利的原因在康德看来，并不是源于“我们是自己主人”这一理念，而是源于“我们都是理性存在”这一观点。我们都是理性存在，意思是我们是拥有理性能力的存在。
We are also autonomous beings, which is to say that we are beings capable of acting and choosing freely. Now, this capacity for reason and freedom isn't the only capacity we have.
我们也是自主存在的个体，也就是说，我们能够依据自己的意愿自由行动和进行选择。这种理性和自由并非我们拥有的唯一能力。
We also have the capacity for pain and pleasure, for suffering and satisfaction. Kant admits the utilitarians were half right.
我们也有感受烦恼与快乐的能力，感受痛苦与满足的能力。康德承认功利主义者们的观点是部分正确的。
Of course, we seek to avoid pain and we like pleasure, Kant doesn't deny this. What he does deny is Bentham's claim that pain and pleasure are our sovereign masters.
我们当然会力图趋乐避苦，康德并不否认这一点。边沁 (功利主义代表人物) 他否认的是边沁的这种观点，认为痛苦和快乐是人类至高无上的主宰。
He thinks that's wrong. Kant thinks that it's our rational capacity that makes us distinctive, that makes us special, that sets us apart from and above mere animal existence.
他认为这点是错误的。康德认为，是我们的理性能力使我们与众不同，让我们变得特殊，使得我们区别于动物并且超越它们。
It makes us something more than just physical creatures with appetites. Now, we often think of freedom as simply consisting in doing what we want or in the absence of obstacles to getting what we want, that's one way of thinking about freedom.
让我们不再是只拥有欲望的生物。我们通常认为 自由就是按照自己意愿行事，或是没有障碍地得到我们想得到的，这是我们对自由的一种看法。
But this isn't Kant's idea of freedom. Kant has a more stringent demanding notion of what it means to be free.
但康德对自由却另有看法。康德对何谓自由有更加严苛的定义。
And though it's stringent and demanding, if you think it through, it's actually pretty persuasive. Kant reasons as follows: when we, like animals, seek after pleasure or the satisfaction of our desires or the avoidance of pain, when we do that we aren't really acting freely.
虽然很严格也很苛刻，但仔细想就会发现它颇具说服力。康德的推理如下：当我们像动物一样寻求快乐，或满足欲望，或逃避痛苦的时候，我们做这些时并不是真正地在自由行动。
Why not? We're really acting as the slaves of those appetites and impulses.
为什么不是呢？我们实际上是那些欲望和冲动的奴隶。
I didn't choose this particular hunger or that particular appetite and so when I act to satisfy it, I'm just acting according to natural necessity. And for Kant, freedom is the opposite of necessity.
我并没有刻意地去选择某个欲望，所以当我去满足它时，仅仅是出于本能需要。而对于康德而言，自由则是需要的对立面。
There was an advertising slogan for the soft drink Sprite a few years ago. The slogan was, "Obey your thirst." There—there's a Kantian insight buried in that Sprite advertising slogan.
几年前，雪碧饮料有个广告语。广告语是这么说的，“服从你的渴望”。该雪碧广告语中暗含着一个康德学派的观点。
That in a way is Kant's point. When you go for Sprite or Pepsi, you're really—you might think that you're choosing freely, sprite versus Pepsi, but you're actually obeying something, a thirst or maybe a desire manufactured or massaged by advertising.
某种程度上说就是康德的观点。当你想来瓶雪碧或百事可乐时，你其实是……你可能会认为你是在自由选择雪碧或百事，但你实际上是在服从着某种东西，口渴，或可能是受广告影响而产生的欲望。
You're obeying a prompting that you yourself haven't chosen or created. And here it is worth noticing Kant's specially demanding idea of freedom.
你是在服从着一种并非自己选择或产生的启示。这里值得注意的是，康德对自由尤其严格的定义。
What way of acting, how can my will be determined if not by the promptings of nature or my hunger or my appetite or my desires? Kant's answer?
何谓自由行为，什么又堪称自由决定？如果并不是被本性、欲望、渴求或愿望所驱使的话。康德的回答是什么？
To act freely is to act autonomously. And to act autonomously is to act according to a law that I give myself, not according to the physical laws of nature or the laws of cause and effect which include my desire to eat or to drink or to choose this food in a restaurant over that.
自由行动也就是自主行动。自主行动则是根据自己制定的法则去行动，而不是根据自然法则或因果规律去行动，这些当然包括了我吃喝的欲望，或在餐厅里选择这种而非那种食物的欲望。
Now, what is the opposite. . . What is the opposite of autonomy for Kant? He invents a special term to describe the opposite of autonomy. Heteronomy is the opposite of autonomy.
那么，对康德来说，与自主行动相对的是什么？他自创了一个特殊的术语描述自律的对立面。他律是自律的对立面。
When I act heteronomously, I'm acting according to an inclination or a desire that I haven't chosen for myself. So, freedom as autonomy is an especially stringent idea that Kant insists on.
当我依据他律法则行动时，我所依据的意愿或欲望并非是我自己选择的。所以，自律意义上的自由是康德始终坚持的一个非常严格的概念。
Now, why is autonomy the opposite of acting heteronomously or according to the dictates of nature? Kant's point is that nature is governed by laws, laws of cause and effect for example.
那为什么自律和他律是相反的，或者说自律是受本性所支配的？康德的观点是，本能受控于法则，例如因果关系法则。
Suppose you drop a billiard ball, it falls to the ground; we wouldn't say the billiard ball is acting freely. Why not?
假设你扔了个弹子球，它掉到地上，我们不会说弹子球是在自由行动。为什么不是呢？
It's acting according to the law of nature, according to the laws of cause and effect, the law of gravity. And just as he has an unusually demanding and stringent conception of freedom, freedom as autonomy.
因为它在按照自然法则行动，按照因果关系法则，按照万有引力行动。正如他给自由下了一个非常严格的定义，自律意义上的自由。
He also has a demanding conception of morality. To act freely is not to choose the best means to a given end; it's to choose the end itself for its own sake.
他也给道德下了一个严格的定义。自由行动并非为了既定目的选择最佳手段。而是去选择目的本身。
And that's something that human beings can do and that billiard balls can't. In so far as we act on inclination or pursue pleasure, we act as means to the realization of ends given outside us.
这是人类可以做到而弹子球不能的事情。所以当我们因爱好或追求快乐去行动，我们只是实现一定外来目的手段。
We are instruments rather than authors of the purposes we pursue. That's the heteronymous determination of the will.
我们是工具，而非我们所追求目标的创造者。这是他律界定的意志。
On the other hand, in so far as we act autonomously, according to a law we give ourselves, we do something for its own sake as an end in itself. When we act autonomously, we cease to be instruments to purposes given outside us, we become, or we can come to think of ourselves as ends in ourselves.
另一方面，当我们按照自己制定的法则自主行动时，我们是出于目的本身来做某件事情。当我们自主行动时，我们不再是外来目的实现手段，我们是或可以认为自己就是目的本身。
This capacity to act freely, Kant tells us, is what gives human life its special dignity. Respecting human dignity means regarding persons not just as means but also as ends in themselves.
康德认为，就是这种自由行动的能力赋予了人类特殊的尊严。尊重人类尊严意味着不只把人当手段看待，还应当目的本身看待。
And this is why it's wrong to use people for the sake of other peoples' well-being or happiness. This is the real reason, Kant says, that utilitarianism goes wrong.
这就是为什么即便是为了他人健康与幸福而去利用他人仍然有失妥当。康德说，这是功利主义之所以错误的真正原因。
This is the reason it's important to respect the dignity of persons and to uphold their rights. So, even if there are cases, remember John Stuart Mill "Well, in the long run, if we uphold justice and respect the dignity of persons, we will maximize human happiness."
这就是尊重个体尊严和维护个体权利之所以重要的原因。所以即使在有些例子中，记得穆勒曾说过，“长远来看，如果我们秉持公正，并且尊重个人尊严，我们将会使人类幸福最大化。”
What would Kant's answer be to that? What would his answer be?
康德又会怎样回应这句话呢？他会怎样回应？
Even if that were true, even if the calculus worked out that way, even if you shouldn't throw the Christian's to the lions because in the long run fear will spread, the overall utility will decline, the utilitarian would be upholding justice and right and respect for persons for the wrong reason, for a purely a contingent reason, for an instrumental reason.
It would still be using people, even where the calculus works out for the best in the long run, it would still be using people as means rather than respecting them as ends in themselves.
即使这种说法正确，这种的演算可行，即使不应当让基督徒与狮子搏斗，因为长远来看，恐惧会扩散，整体功利会下降，功利主义者秉持公正和权利并尊重他人的最终原因，还是错误的，是出于一个纯偶然的原因，一种工具理性。这还是在利用人，即使这种解释长远来看还是有益处的，也依然是把他人当做手段来利用，而不是出于目的本身去尊重他们。
So, that's Kant's idea of freedom as autonomy. And you can begin to see how it's connected to his idea of morality.
这就是康德对自律意义上自由的看法。大家现在可以看看它是如何与康德的道德概念联系在一起的。
But we still have to answer one more question, what gives an act its moral worth in the first place? If it can't be directed that utility or satisfying wants and desires, what gives an action its moral worth?
但我们还是必须回答另一个问题，是什么最先赋予行为以道德价值？如果不是功利或有待满足的愿望与欲望，那是什么赋予行为以道德价值？
This leads us from Kant's demanding idea of freedom to his demanding idea of morality. What does Kant say?
这个问题把我们从康德严格的自由概念带到了他严格的道德概念上来。康德是怎么说的呢？
What makes an action morally worthy consists not in the consequences or in the results that flow from it, what makes an action morally worthy has to do with the motive, with the quality of the will, with the intention for which the act is done. What matters is the motive and the motive must be of a certain kind.
让行为具有道德价值并不与行为所产生的结果或者后果有关，而是与产生行为的动机有关，与意志的好坏有关，与行为的意图有关。重要的是动机，且必须是一种特定的动机。
So, the moral worth of an action depends on the motive for which it's done. And the important thing is that the person do the right thing for the right reason.
所以，行为的道德价值取决于其动机。重要的是，个人是出于正确的原因去做正确的事情。
"A good will isn't good because of what it affects or accomplishes," Kant writes, "It's good in itself. Even if by its utmost effort, the good will accomplishes nothing, it would still shine like a jewel for its own sake as something which has its full value in itself."
“良善意志并不因其影响或成就才是好的，”康德写到，“而是因为它本身是好的。即便竭尽全力，好的意愿没用任何成果但它本身却依然会像珠宝那样闪光，就如同实现了完全价值的东西一样。”
And so, for any action to be morally good, it's not enough that it should conform to the moral law, it must also be done for the sake of the moral law. The idea is that the motive confers the moral worth on an action and the only kind of motive that can confer moral worth on an action is the motive of duty.
所以，对于任何在道德上良好的行为，光是服从道德法则是不够的，还必须要为了道德法则去行动才可以。康德认为，正是动机赋予行为以道德价值，而唯一一种能赋予行为以道德价值的动机就是职责动机。
Well, what's the opposite of doing something out of a sense of duty because it's right? Well for Kant, the opposite would be all of those motives having to do with our inclinations.
那么由于感到正确，而出于职责感去做某件事情的相反面又是什么呢？对康德而言，反面就是所有那些与我们的爱好有关的动机。
And inclinations refer to all of our desires, all of our contingently given wants, preferences, impulses, and the like. Only actions done for the sake of the moral law, for the sake of duty, only these actions have moral worth.
爱好是指我们所有的欲望，所有偶然的特定需求、偏好、冲动等等。只有出于道德法则目的，出于职责的行为，只有这些行为才具有道德价值。
Now, I want to see what you think about this idea but first let's consider a few examples. Kant begins with an example of a shopkeeper.
我想要知道大家是怎么理解这个概念的，但首先让我们来思考一些例子。康德举过一个店主的例子。
He wants to bring out the intuition and make plausible the idea that what confers moral worth on an action is that it be done because it's right. He says suppose there's a shopkeeper and an inexperienced customer comes in.
他想要引出这一直觉，并证明他的观点，行为之所以有道德价值，是因为行为本身正确。他假设有个店主，然后一位外行顾客进到他到店里。
The shopkeeper knows that he could give the customer the wrong change, could shortchange the customer and get away with it; at least that customer wouldn't know. But the shopkeeper nonetheless says, "Well, if I shortchange this customer, word may get out, my reputation would be damaged, and I would lose business, so I won't shortchange this customer."
店主知道他可以给那名顾客找错零钱，给他少找些钱，并且可以逃过处罚；至少那顾客不会知道。但是店主依然会琢磨，“如果我给这个顾客少找了钱，也许会有传言，我的名誉会受到损害，这样我也就没生意做了，所以我不会给这名顾客少找钱。”
The shopkeeper does nothing wrong, he gives the correct change, but does his action have moral worth? Kant says no.
店主没有做任何错事，他找了正确的钱，但他的行为具有道德价值吗？康德认为没有。
It doesn't have moral worth, because the shopkeeper only did the right thing for the wrong reason, out of self-interest. That's a pretty straightforward case.
它没有道德价值，因为店主是做了正确的事，但是出于错的原因，是出于自身利益。这是个非常直截了当的例子。
Then he takes another case, the case of suicide. He says we have a duty to preserve ourselves.
然后他又举了另一个例子，自杀的例子。他认为我们有保护自己的职责。
Now, for most people who love life, we have multiple reasons for not taking our own lives.
So, the only way we can really tell, the only way we can isolate the operative motive for someone who doesn't take his or her life is to think, to imagine someone who's miserable and who despite having an absolutely miserable life nonetheless recognizes the duty to preserve one's self and so does not commit suicide.
对于大多数热爱生活的人来说，我们有很多不去自杀的理由。那么，我们可以辨认出，并找到那些不会自杀的人关键动机的唯一方法就是去想象某个不幸的人，想象那个尽管人生非常不幸，却认识到了人有保护自己的职责，所以才不会去自杀。
That's—the force of the example is to bring out the motive that matters. And the motive that matters for morality is doing the right thing for the sake of duty.
这个例子的作用就是为了引出，动机才是关键所在。而对道德来说，重要的动机则是出于职责原因做出了正确的事情。
Let me just give you a couple of other examples. The Better Business Bureau, what's their—their slogan? The slogan of the Better Business Bureau: "Honesty is the best policy. It's also the most profitable."
我们再来看几个例子。商业促进局，他们的口号是什么？商业促进局的口号是：“诚信是最好的策略，也是最赢利的策略。”
This is the Better Business Bureau's full page ad in the New York Times. "Honesty, it's as important as any other asset because a business that deals in truth, openness, and fair value cannot help but do well.
这是商业促进局在纽约时报上登的整版广告。“诚信和其他资产一样重要，因为讲求诚实公正 公平价格的公司一定会成功。
Come join us and profit from it." What would Kant say about the moral worth of the honest dealings of members of the Better Business Bureau? What would he say?
快加入我们，并从中获利。”康德会怎么看待商业促进局会员们诚信交易的道德价值观呢？他会怎么看？
That here's a perfect example that if this is the reason that these companies deal honestly with their customers, their action lacks moral worth. This is Kant's point.
这是个非常好的例子，如果是出于这个原因这些公司才与其顾客进行诚实交易，他们的行为就缺乏道德价值。这就是康德的看法。
A couple of years ago, at the University of Maryland, there was a problem with cheating and so they initiated an honor system. And they created a program with local merchants that if you signed the honor pledge, a pledge not to cheat, you would get discounts of 10% to 25% at local shops.
几年前，在马里兰大学存在学生作弊的问题，所以他们创建了一个信誉系统。他们与当地商人一同创建了一个项目，那就是，如果你签署了信誉保证一份不作弊的保证书，你会在当地商店享受10%到25%的折扣。
Well what would you think of someone motivated to uphold an honor code with the hope of discounts? It's the same as Kant's shopkeeper.
你们会怎么看待那些被折扣吸引才去遵守行为准则的人呢？这和康德所举店主的例子是一样的。
The point is, what matters is the quality of the will, the character of the motive and the relative motive to morality can only be the motive of duty, not the motive of inclination.
And when I act out of duty, when I resist as my motive for acting inclinations or self-interest, even sympathy and altruism, only then am I acting freely, only then am I acting autonomously, only then is my will not determined or governed by external considerations, that's the link between Kant's idea of freedom and of morality.
Now, I want to pause here to see if all of this is clear or if you have some questions or puzzles.
重要的是意愿好坏，是动机特征，而与道德有关的动机只能是职责动机，而不是爱好动机。当我出于职责行动时，当我拒绝出于个人爱好或自身利益，甚至同情和利他主义时，只有那时，我的行为才是真正自由的；只有那时，我的行为才是自主的；只有那时，我的意志才不是被外部因素所决定或控制。这就是康德认为的自由和道德之间的联系。现在我想在这里停一下，看看大家是否都明白了或有什么问题或困惑。
They can be questions of clarification or they can be challenges, if you want to challenge this idea that only the motive of duty confers moral worth on the action. What do you think?
可以是想要弄清某个问题，或挑战某个观点，倘若你想要挑战只有职责动机赋予行为道德价值这一观点。大家怎么认为？
Yes. Yeah, I actually have two questions of clarification.
你来。我有两个问题想得到阐释。
- The first is, there seems to be an aspect of this that makes it sort of self-defeating in that once you're conscious of what morality is you can sort of alter your motive to achieve that end of morality. And. . . - Give me—give me an example of what you have in mind. The shopkeeper example.
- 首先，这里好像是有些自相矛盾的地方，因为一旦你认识到了什么是道德，你可以刻意改变动机以实现道德的目的。然后……- 来举一个例子。那个店主的例子。
- If he decides that he wants to give the person the money to do the right thing and he—and he decides that it's his motive to do so because he wants to be moral then isn't that sort of defeating trying to. . . Isn't that sort of defeating the purity of his action if—if morality is determined by his motive? His motive is then to act morally.
- I see. So, you're imagining a case not of the purely selfish calculating shopkeeper but of one who says, well, he may consider shortchanging the customer, but then he says, "Not, well, my reputation might suffer if word gets out."
- 如果他认为要做正确的事，给顾客找对钱，而且认为是他的动机在驱使他这么做，因为他想做个有道德的人。那不就与……如果道德是被他的动机决定的话，那不就与他行为的纯粹性相矛盾了吗？那么他的动机就是有道德的行为。- 我懂了。所以你在想象一种情况，这里不是一个非常自私的店主，而是这样一个人，他可能会考虑少找顾客零钱，但是他说，“并不是因为如果传言出去的话，我的信誉可能会到损害。”
But instead he says, "Actually, I would like to be the kind of honest person who gives the right change to customers simply because it's the right thing to do." Or simply, "Because I want to be moral."
而是，“实际上，我想要做一个诚实的，不给顾客找错钱的店主，只是因为这是正确的做法。”或只是“因为我想要做个有道德的人。”
"Because I want to be moral, i want to be a good person, and so I'm going to conform all of my actions to what morality requires." It's a subtle point, it's a good question.
“因为我想做个有道德的人，做个好人，所以我所有的行为都会遵循道德要求去做。”这一点很微妙，问得非常好。
Kant does acknowledge, you're pressing Kant on an important point here. Kant does say there has to be some incentive to obey the moral law, it can't be a self-interested incentive that would defeat it by definition.
康德也确实承认，你指出了康德在这里的一个重要观点。康德确实说过，一定有遵守道德法则的动机，它肯定不会是与定义相矛盾的利己动机。
So, he speaks of a different kind of incentive from that inclination, he speaks of reverence for the moral law. So, if that shopkeeper says, "I want to develop a reverence for the moral law and so I'm going to do the right thing."
所以他谈到了爱好不同种类的动机，他谈到了对道德法则的尊重。所以，如果那个店主说，“我想要尊重道德法则，所以我要做正确的事情。”
Then I think he's there. He's there as far as Kant's concerned.
那么我想他做到了。在康德看来，他是有道德的。
Because he's formed his motive, his will is conforming to the moral law once he sees the importance of it. So, it would count, it would count.
因为他形成了他的动机，意志遵守了道德法则，只要他明白了道德法则的重要性。所以，这个也算，这个也算。
All right, then, secondly, very quickly, what stops morality from becoming completely objective in this point? - Oh, I'm sorry. Completely subjective. - What stops morality from becoming subjective?
- Yeah, like how can. . . If there's—if morally—if morality is completely determined by your morals, then how can you apply this or how can it be enforced? - All right, that's also a great question. What's your name? - My name is Amady.
好吧，快速谈一下第二个问题，那么是什么让道德无法完全客观化？- 抱歉。是主观化。- 是什么让道德无法主观化？- 是的，就像……如果道德完全被你的道德规范所决定，那么你如何能够应用它，或它是如何实施的呢？- 好的，这也是非常好的问题。你叫什么？- 我叫阿玛蒂。
- Amady? - Yes. All right, if acting morally means acting according to a moral law out of duty and if it's also to act freely in the sense of autonomously, it must mean that I'm acting according to a law that I give myself, that's what it means to act autonomously.
- 阿玛蒂？- 是的。如果行为道德意味着出于职责的道德法则行动，如果行为道德也意味着自主意义上的自由行动，那这肯定意味着我在根据自己所定的法则行动，这才是自主行动的意思。
Amady is right about that. But that does raise a really interesting question.
阿玛蒂在这方面的理解是正确的。但这却引出了另一个非常有趣的问题。
If acting autonomously means acting according to a law I give myself, that's how I escape the chain of cause and effect and the laws of nature. What's the guarantee that the law I give myself when I'm acting out of duty is the same as the law that Amady is giving himself and that each of you gives yourselves?
如果自主行为意味着按照自己制定的法则行动，那么我便脱离了因果关系和自然法则的束缚。是什么保证了当我出于职责的目的行动时，我为自己制定的法则与阿玛蒂为他制定的，以及大家每个人为自己制定的法则一样呢？
Well, here's the question. How many moral laws, from Kant's point of view, are there in this room?
问题就在这里。康德看来，这个讲堂里究竟有多少道德法则呢？
Are there a thousand or is there one? He thinks there's one, which in a way does go back to this question: all right, what is the moral law? What does it tell us?
有数千个吗？还是只有一个？他认为只有一个，这在某种程度上又回到了这个问题：什么是道德法则？它告诉了我们什么？
So, what guarantees. . . It sounds like to act autonomously is to act according to one's conscience, according to a law one gives oneself. But what guarantees that we—if we all exercise our reason, we will come up with one and the same moral law?
听上去好像自主行动是根据个人良心，个体给自己制定的法则行动的。但什么保证，我们如果我们实践的都是各自不同的理性，那我们会得出一个统一的道德法则吗？
That's what Amady wants to know. Here's Kant's answer: the reason that leads us to the law we give ourselves as autonomous beings is a reason.
这就是阿玛蒂想要知道的。康德的回答是：将我们引向作为自主存在而为自己制定的法则的，是一种理性。
It's a kind of practical reason that we share as human beings. It's not idiosyncratic.
是我们作为人类共有的一种实践理性。实践理性并不是个人化的东西。
The reason we need to respect the dignity of persons is that we're all rational beings, we all have the capacity for reason and it's the exercise of that capacity for reason which exists undifferentiated in all of us that makes us worthy of dignity, all of us.
And since it's the same capacity for reason, unqualified by particular autobiographies and life circumstance, it's the same universal capacity for reason that delivers the moral law.
我们之所以需要尊重他人尊严，是因为我们都是理性存在，我们都具有理性思考的能力，而正是通过存在于我们所有人中的这种无差别的理性思考能力的运用，才使得我们所有人都值得尊重。也因为这种理性思考的能力都是相同的，不受特定的生活经历以及生活环境所限定，这是同一种能够生成道德法则的普遍理性。
It turns out that to act autonomously is to act according to a law we give ourselves exercising our reason, but it's the reason we share with everyone as rational beings, not the particular reasons we have given our upbringings, our particular values, our particular interests.
It's pure practical reason, in Kant's terms, which legislates a priori regardless of any particular contingent or empirical ends.
它表明，自主行动就是我们理性思考后，按照自己制定的法则行动。但这是我们作为理性存在与他人共享的理性，这并不是我们能够传授给后代的特殊理性，特定的价值观或者特定的兴趣。用康德的话说，是先天存在的纯粹实践理性，不基于任何偶然或先验的目的。
Well, what moral law would that kind of reason deliver? What is its content?
这种理性又会生成怎样的道德法则呢？它的内容是什么？
To answer that question, you have to read the groundwork and we'll continue with that question next time.
要回答这个问题，必须先读一读《道德形而上学的基础》，我们下节课再来讨论这个问题。
excel学习库
excel表格_excel函数公式大全_execl从入门到精通
充满智慧、幽默的哈佛大学公开课- 第11讲 服从你的动机2024-05-08 20:12:23
28:24Now we turn to the hardest philosopher we're going to read in this course. Today we turn to Immanuel Kant who offers a different account of why we have a categorical duty to respect the dignity of persons and not to use people as means merely even for good ends.
我们将要讲的是本课程最难理解的哲学家。今天开始讲伊曼努尔·康德，他提出了不同的解释，针对为何我们有尊重个人尊严的绝对义务，以及为何即使是出于良善目的也不能只把人当手段利用。
Kant excelled at the University of Konigsberg at the age of 16. At age of 31, he got his first job as an unsalaried lecturer paid on commission based on number of students showed up at his lectures.
康德16岁便考入了哥尼斯堡大学。31岁时，他得到了第一份工作，编外讲师，工资是根据上他课的学生人数来定的。
This is a sensible system that Harvard would do well to consider. Luckily for Kant, he was a popular lecturer and also an industrious one and so he eked out a meager living.
这个系统非常明智，哈佛也应考虑一下。康德很幸运，他大受欢迎，当然也很勤奋，勉强维持住了拮据的生活。
It wasn't until he was 57 that he published his first major work. But, it was worth the wait, the book was the "Critique of Pure Reason", perhaps the most important work in all of modern philosophy.
直到57岁他才出版了第一本重要著作。但等待是值得的，这本书就是《纯粹理性批判》，这或许是现代哲学里最重要的一本著作。
And a few years later, Kant wrote "the Groundwork for Metaphysics of Morals" which we read in this course. I want to acknowledge even before we start that Kant is a difficult thinker but it's important to try to figure out what he's saying.
几年后，康德编著了《道德形而上学的基础》，这也是本课程的必读书。开始上课之前我必须先承认康德是位很难理解的思想家，但理解他的思想非常重要。
Because what—what this book is about is, well, it's about what the supreme principle of morality is, number one, and it also—it gives us an account, one of the most powerful accounts we have, of what freedom really is. So, let me start today.
因为他书中所讲的首先是道德的最高原则究竟是什么，并向我们解释了，这也是我们所知最有力的解释，自由到底是什么。好了，今天的课程开始。
Kant rejects utilitarianism. He thinks that the individual person, all human beings, have a certain dignity that commands our respect.
康德反对功利主义。他认为，每个个体，所有人类都拥有一定尊严，人们必须尊重。
The reason the individual is sacred or the bearer of rights, according to Kant, doesn't stem from the idea that we own ourselves but instead from the idea that we are all rational beings. We're all rational beings, which simply means that we are beings who are capable of reason.
个体神圣不可侵犯或是拥有权利的原因在康德看来，并不是源于“我们是自己主人”这一理念，而是源于“我们都是理性存在”这一观点。我们都是理性存在，意思是我们是拥有理性能力的存在。
We are also autonomous beings, which is to say that we are beings capable of acting and choosing freely. Now, this capacity for reason and freedom isn't the only capacity we have.
我们也是自主存在的个体，也就是说，我们能够依据自己的意愿自由行动和进行选择。这种理性和自由并非我们拥有的唯一能力。
We also have the capacity for pain and pleasure, for suffering and satisfaction. Kant admits the utilitarians were half right.
我们也有感受烦恼与快乐的能力，感受痛苦与满足的能力。康德承认功利主义者们的观点是部分正确的。
Of course, we seek to avoid pain and we like pleasure, Kant doesn't deny this. What he does deny is Bentham's claim that pain and pleasure are our sovereign masters.
我们当然会力图趋乐避苦，康德并不否认这一点。边沁 (功利主义代表人物) 他否认的是边沁的这种观点，认为痛苦和快乐是人类至高无上的主宰。
He thinks that's wrong. Kant thinks that it's our rational capacity that makes us distinctive, that makes us special, that sets us apart from and above mere animal existence.
他认为这点是错误的。康德认为，是我们的理性能力使我们与众不同，让我们变得特殊，使得我们区别于动物并且超越它们。
It makes us something more than just physical creatures with appetites. Now, we often think of freedom as simply consisting in doing what we want or in the absence of obstacles to getting what we want, that's one way of thinking about freedom.
让我们不再是只拥有欲望的生物。我们通常认为 自由就是按照自己意愿行事，或是没有障碍地得到我们想得到的，这是我们对自由的一种看法。
But this isn't Kant's idea of freedom. Kant has a more stringent demanding notion of what it means to be free.
但康德对自由却另有看法。康德对何谓自由有更加严苛的定义。
And though it's stringent and demanding, if you think it through, it's actually pretty persuasive. Kant reasons as follows: when we, like animals, seek after pleasure or the satisfaction of our desires or the avoidance of pain, when we do that we aren't really acting freely.
虽然很严格也很苛刻，但仔细想就会发现它颇具说服力。康德的推理如下：当我们像动物一样寻求快乐，或满足欲望，或逃避痛苦的时候，我们做这些时并不是真正地在自由行动。
Why not? We're really acting as the slaves of those appetites and impulses.
为什么不是呢？我们实际上是那些欲望和冲动的奴隶。
I didn't choose this particular hunger or that particular appetite and so when I act to satisfy it, I'm just acting according to natural necessity. And for Kant, freedom is the opposite of necessity.
我并没有刻意地去选择某个欲望，所以当我去满足它时，仅仅是出于本能需要。而对于康德而言，自由则是需要的对立面。
There was an advertising slogan for the soft drink Sprite a few years ago. The slogan was, "Obey your thirst." There—there's a Kantian insight buried in that Sprite advertising slogan.
几年前，雪碧饮料有个广告语。广告语是这么说的，“服从你的渴望”。该雪碧广告语中暗含着一个康德学派的观点。
That in a way is Kant's point. When you go for Sprite or Pepsi, you're really—you might think that you're choosing freely, sprite versus Pepsi, but you're actually obeying something, a thirst or maybe a desire manufactured or massaged by advertising.
某种程度上说就是康德的观点。当你想来瓶雪碧或百事可乐时，你其实是……你可能会认为你是在自由选择雪碧或百事，但你实际上是在服从着某种东西，口渴，或可能是受广告影响而产生的欲望。
You're obeying a prompting that you yourself haven't chosen or created. And here it is worth noticing Kant's specially demanding idea of freedom.
你是在服从着一种并非自己选择或产生的启示。这里值得注意的是，康德对自由尤其严格的定义。
What way of acting, how can my will be determined if not by the promptings of nature or my hunger or my appetite or my desires? Kant's answer?
何谓自由行为，什么又堪称自由决定？如果并不是被本性、欲望、渴求或愿望所驱使的话。康德的回答是什么？
To act freely is to act autonomously. And to act autonomously is to act according to a law that I give myself, not according to the physical laws of nature or the laws of cause and effect which include my desire to eat or to drink or to choose this food in a restaurant over that.
自由行动也就是自主行动。自主行动则是根据自己制定的法则去行动，而不是根据自然法则或因果规律去行动，这些当然包括了我吃喝的欲望，或在餐厅里选择这种而非那种食物的欲望。
Now, what is the opposite. . . What is the opposite of autonomy for Kant? He invents a special term to describe the opposite of autonomy. Heteronomy is the opposite of autonomy.
那么，对康德来说，与自主行动相对的是什么？他自创了一个特殊的术语描述自律的对立面。他律是自律的对立面。
When I act heteronomously, I'm acting according to an inclination or a desire that I haven't chosen for myself. So, freedom as autonomy is an especially stringent idea that Kant insists on.
当我依据他律法则行动时，我所依据的意愿或欲望并非是我自己选择的。所以，自律意义上的自由是康德始终坚持的一个非常严格的概念。
Now, why is autonomy the opposite of acting heteronomously or according to the dictates of nature? Kant's point is that nature is governed by laws, laws of cause and effect for example.
那为什么自律和他律是相反的，或者说自律是受本性所支配的？康德的观点是，本能受控于法则，例如因果关系法则。
Suppose you drop a billiard ball, it falls to the ground; we wouldn't say the billiard ball is acting freely. Why not?
假设你扔了个弹子球，它掉到地上，我们不会说弹子球是在自由行动。为什么不是呢？
It's acting according to the law of nature, according to the laws of cause and effect, the law of gravity. And just as he has an unusually demanding and stringent conception of freedom, freedom as autonomy.
因为它在按照自然法则行动，按照因果关系法则，按照万有引力行动。正如他给自由下了一个非常严格的定义，自律意义上的自由。
He also has a demanding conception of morality. To act freely is not to choose the best means to a given end; it's to choose the end itself for its own sake.
他也给道德下了一个严格的定义。自由行动并非为了既定目的选择最佳手段。而是去选择目的本身。
And that's something that human beings can do and that billiard balls can't. In so far as we act on inclination or pursue pleasure, we act as means to the realization of ends given outside us.
这是人类可以做到而弹子球不能的事情。所以当我们因爱好或追求快乐去行动，我们只是实现一定外来目的手段。
We are instruments rather than authors of the purposes we pursue. That's the heteronymous determination of the will.
我们是工具，而非我们所追求目标的创造者。这是他律界定的意志。
On the other hand, in so far as we act autonomously, according to a law we give ourselves, we do something for its own sake as an end in itself. When we act autonomously, we cease to be instruments to purposes given outside us, we become, or we can come to think of ourselves as ends in ourselves.
另一方面，当我们按照自己制定的法则自主行动时，我们是出于目的本身来做某件事情。当我们自主行动时，我们不再是外来目的实现手段，我们是或可以认为自己就是目的本身。
This capacity to act freely, Kant tells us, is what gives human life its special dignity. Respecting human dignity means regarding persons not just as means but also as ends in themselves.
康德认为，就是这种自由行动的能力赋予了人类特殊的尊严。尊重人类尊严意味着不只把人当手段看待，还应当目的本身看待。
And this is why it's wrong to use people for the sake of other peoples' well-being or happiness. This is the real reason, Kant says, that utilitarianism goes wrong.
这就是为什么即便是为了他人健康与幸福而去利用他人仍然有失妥当。康德说，这是功利主义之所以错误的真正原因。
This is the reason it's important to respect the dignity of persons and to uphold their rights. So, even if there are cases, remember John Stuart Mill "Well, in the long run, if we uphold justice and respect the dignity of persons, we will maximize human happiness."
这就是尊重个体尊严和维护个体权利之所以重要的原因。所以即使在有些例子中，记得穆勒曾说过，“长远来看，如果我们秉持公正，并且尊重个人尊严，我们将会使人类幸福最大化。”
What would Kant's answer be to that? What would his answer be?
康德又会怎样回应这句话呢？他会怎样回应？
Even if that were true, even if the calculus worked out that way, even if you shouldn't throw the Christian's to the lions because in the long run fear will spread, the overall utility will decline, the utilitarian would be upholding justice and right and respect for persons for the wrong reason, for a purely a contingent reason, for an instrumental reason.
It would still be using people, even where the calculus works out for the best in the long run, it would still be using people as means rather than respecting them as ends in themselves.
即使这种说法正确，这种的演算可行，即使不应当让基督徒与狮子搏斗，因为长远来看，恐惧会扩散，整体功利会下降，功利主义者秉持公正和权利并尊重他人的最终原因，还是错误的，是出于一个纯偶然的原因，一种工具理性。这还是在利用人，即使这种解释长远来看还是有益处的，也依然是把他人当做手段来利用，而不是出于目的本身去尊重他们。
So, that's Kant's idea of freedom as autonomy. And you can begin to see how it's connected to his idea of morality.
这就是康德对自律意义上自由的看法。大家现在可以看看它是如何与康德的道德概念联系在一起的。
But we still have to answer one more question, what gives an act its moral worth in the first place? If it can't be directed that utility or satisfying wants and desires, what gives an action its moral worth?
但我们还是必须回答另一个问题，是什么最先赋予行为以道德价值？如果不是功利或有待满足的愿望与欲望，那是什么赋予行为以道德价值？
This leads us from Kant's demanding idea of freedom to his demanding idea of morality. What does Kant say?
这个问题把我们从康德严格的自由概念带到了他严格的道德概念上来。康德是怎么说的呢？
What makes an action morally worthy consists not in the consequences or in the results that flow from it, what makes an action morally worthy has to do with the motive, with the quality of the will, with the intention for which the act is done. What matters is the motive and the motive must be of a certain kind.
让行为具有道德价值并不与行为所产生的结果或者后果有关，而是与产生行为的动机有关，与意志的好坏有关，与行为的意图有关。重要的是动机，且必须是一种特定的动机。
So, the moral worth of an action depends on the motive for which it's done. And the important thing is that the person do the right thing for the right reason.
所以，行为的道德价值取决于其动机。重要的是，个人是出于正确的原因去做正确的事情。
"A good will isn't good because of what it affects or accomplishes," Kant writes, "It's good in itself. Even if by its utmost effort, the good will accomplishes nothing, it would still shine like a jewel for its own sake as something which has its full value in itself."
“良善意志并不因其影响或成就才是好的，”康德写到，“而是因为它本身是好的。即便竭尽全力，好的意愿没用任何成果但它本身却依然会像珠宝那样闪光，就如同实现了完全价值的东西一样。”
And so, for any action to be morally good, it's not enough that it should conform to the moral law, it must also be done for the sake of the moral law. The idea is that the motive confers the moral worth on an action and the only kind of motive that can confer moral worth on an action is the motive of duty.
所以，对于任何在道德上良好的行为，光是服从道德法则是不够的，还必须要为了道德法则去行动才可以。康德认为，正是动机赋予行为以道德价值，而唯一一种能赋予行为以道德价值的动机就是职责动机。
Well, what's the opposite of doing something out of a sense of duty because it's right? Well for Kant, the opposite would be all of those motives having to do with our inclinations.
那么由于感到正确，而出于职责感去做某件事情的相反面又是什么呢？对康德而言，反面就是所有那些与我们的爱好有关的动机。
And inclinations refer to all of our desires, all of our contingently given wants, preferences, impulses, and the like. Only actions done for the sake of the moral law, for the sake of duty, only these actions have moral worth.
爱好是指我们所有的欲望，所有偶然的特定需求、偏好、冲动等等。只有出于道德法则目的，出于职责的行为，只有这些行为才具有道德价值。
Now, I want to see what you think about this idea but first let's consider a few examples. Kant begins with an example of a shopkeeper.
我想要知道大家是怎么理解这个概念的，但首先让我们来思考一些例子。康德举过一个店主的例子。
He wants to bring out the intuition and make plausible the idea that what confers moral worth on an action is that it be done because it's right. He says suppose there's a shopkeeper and an inexperienced customer comes in.
他想要引出这一直觉，并证明他的观点，行为之所以有道德价值，是因为行为本身正确。他假设有个店主，然后一位外行顾客进到他到店里。
The shopkeeper knows that he could give the customer the wrong change, could shortchange the customer and get away with it; at least that customer wouldn't know. But the shopkeeper nonetheless says, "Well, if I shortchange this customer, word may get out, my reputation would be damaged, and I would lose business, so I won't shortchange this customer."
店主知道他可以给那名顾客找错零钱，给他少找些钱，并且可以逃过处罚；至少那顾客不会知道。但是店主依然会琢磨，“如果我给这个顾客少找了钱，也许会有传言，我的名誉会受到损害，这样我也就没生意做了，所以我不会给这名顾客少找钱。”
The shopkeeper does nothing wrong, he gives the correct change, but does his action have moral worth? Kant says no.
店主没有做任何错事，他找了正确的钱，但他的行为具有道德价值吗？康德认为没有。
It doesn't have moral worth, because the shopkeeper only did the right thing for the wrong reason, out of self-interest. That's a pretty straightforward case.
它没有道德价值，因为店主是做了正确的事，但是出于错的原因，是出于自身利益。这是个非常直截了当的例子。
Then he takes another case, the case of suicide. He says we have a duty to preserve ourselves.
然后他又举了另一个例子，自杀的例子。他认为我们有保护自己的职责。
Now, for most people who love life, we have multiple reasons for not taking our own lives.
So, the only way we can really tell, the only way we can isolate the operative motive for someone who doesn't take his or her life is to think, to imagine someone who's miserable and who despite having an absolutely miserable life nonetheless recognizes the duty to preserve one's self and so does not commit suicide.
对于大多数热爱生活的人来说，我们有很多不去自杀的理由。那么，我们可以辨认出，并找到那些不会自杀的人关键动机的唯一方法就是去想象某个不幸的人，想象那个尽管人生非常不幸，却认识到了人有保护自己的职责，所以才不会去自杀。
That's—the force of the example is to bring out the motive that matters. And the motive that matters for morality is doing the right thing for the sake of duty.
这个例子的作用就是为了引出，动机才是关键所在。而对道德来说，重要的动机则是出于职责原因做出了正确的事情。
Let me just give you a couple of other examples. The Better Business Bureau, what's their—their slogan? The slogan of the Better Business Bureau: "Honesty is the best policy. It's also the most profitable."
我们再来看几个例子。商业促进局，他们的口号是什么？商业促进局的口号是：“诚信是最好的策略，也是最赢利的策略。”
This is the Better Business Bureau's full page ad in the New York Times. "Honesty, it's as important as any other asset because a business that deals in truth, openness, and fair value cannot help but do well.
这是商业促进局在纽约时报上登的整版广告。“诚信和其他资产一样重要，因为讲求诚实公正 公平价格的公司一定会成功。
Come join us and profit from it." What would Kant say about the moral worth of the honest dealings of members of the Better Business Bureau? What would he say?
快加入我们，并从中获利。”康德会怎么看待商业促进局会员们诚信交易的道德价值观呢？他会怎么看？
That here's a perfect example that if this is the reason that these companies deal honestly with their customers, their action lacks moral worth. This is Kant's point.
这是个非常好的例子，如果是出于这个原因这些公司才与其顾客进行诚实交易，他们的行为就缺乏道德价值。这就是康德的看法。
A couple of years ago, at the University of Maryland, there was a problem with cheating and so they initiated an honor system. And they created a program with local merchants that if you signed the honor pledge, a pledge not to cheat, you would get discounts of 10% to 25% at local shops.
几年前，在马里兰大学存在学生作弊的问题，所以他们创建了一个信誉系统。他们与当地商人一同创建了一个项目，那就是，如果你签署了信誉保证一份不作弊的保证书，你会在当地商店享受10%到25%的折扣。
Well what would you think of someone motivated to uphold an honor code with the hope of discounts? It's the same as Kant's shopkeeper.
你们会怎么看待那些被折扣吸引才去遵守行为准则的人呢？这和康德所举店主的例子是一样的。
The point is, what matters is the quality of the will, the character of the motive and the relative motive to morality can only be the motive of duty, not the motive of inclination.
And when I act out of duty, when I resist as my motive for acting inclinations or self-interest, even sympathy and altruism, only then am I acting freely, only then am I acting autonomously, only then is my will not determined or governed by external considerations, that's the link between Kant's idea of freedom and of morality.
Now, I want to pause here to see if all of this is clear or if you have some questions or puzzles.
重要的是意愿好坏，是动机特征，而与道德有关的动机只能是职责动机，而不是爱好动机。当我出于职责行动时，当我拒绝出于个人爱好或自身利益，甚至同情和利他主义时，只有那时，我的行为才是真正自由的；只有那时，我的行为才是自主的；只有那时，我的意志才不是被外部因素所决定或控制。这就是康德认为的自由和道德之间的联系。现在我想在这里停一下，看看大家是否都明白了或有什么问题或困惑。
They can be questions of clarification or they can be challenges, if you want to challenge this idea that only the motive of duty confers moral worth on the action. What do you think?
可以是想要弄清某个问题，或挑战某个观点，倘若你想要挑战只有职责动机赋予行为道德价值这一观点。大家怎么认为？
Yes. Yeah, I actually have two questions of clarification.
你来。我有两个问题想得到阐释。
- The first is, there seems to be an aspect of this that makes it sort of self-defeating in that once you're conscious of what morality is you can sort of alter your motive to achieve that end of morality. And. . . - Give me—give me an example of what you have in mind. The shopkeeper example.
- 首先，这里好像是有些自相矛盾的地方，因为一旦你认识到了什么是道德，你可以刻意改变动机以实现道德的目的。然后……- 来举一个例子。那个店主的例子。
- If he decides that he wants to give the person the money to do the right thing and he—and he decides that it's his motive to do so because he wants to be moral then isn't that sort of defeating trying to. . . Isn't that sort of defeating the purity of his action if—if morality is determined by his motive? His motive is then to act morally.
- I see. So, you're imagining a case not of the purely selfish calculating shopkeeper but of one who says, well, he may consider shortchanging the customer, but then he says, "Not, well, my reputation might suffer if word gets out."
- 如果他认为要做正确的事，给顾客找对钱，而且认为是他的动机在驱使他这么做，因为他想做个有道德的人。那不就与……如果道德是被他的动机决定的话，那不就与他行为的纯粹性相矛盾了吗？那么他的动机就是有道德的行为。- 我懂了。所以你在想象一种情况，这里不是一个非常自私的店主，而是这样一个人，他可能会考虑少找顾客零钱，但是他说，“并不是因为如果传言出去的话，我的信誉可能会到损害。”
But instead he says, "Actually, I would like to be the kind of honest person who gives the right change to customers simply because it's the right thing to do." Or simply, "Because I want to be moral."
而是，“实际上，我想要做一个诚实的，不给顾客找错钱的店主，只是因为这是正确的做法。”或只是“因为我想要做个有道德的人。”
"Because I want to be moral, i want to be a good person, and so I'm going to conform all of my actions to what morality requires." It's a subtle point, it's a good question.
“因为我想做个有道德的人，做个好人，所以我所有的行为都会遵循道德要求去做。”这一点很微妙，问得非常好。
Kant does acknowledge, you're pressing Kant on an important point here. Kant does say there has to be some incentive to obey the moral law, it can't be a self-interested incentive that would defeat it by definition.
康德也确实承认，你指出了康德在这里的一个重要观点。康德确实说过，一定有遵守道德法则的动机，它肯定不会是与定义相矛盾的利己动机。
So, he speaks of a different kind of incentive from that inclination, he speaks of reverence for the moral law. So, if that shopkeeper says, "I want to develop a reverence for the moral law and so I'm going to do the right thing."
所以他谈到了爱好不同种类的动机，他谈到了对道德法则的尊重。所以，如果那个店主说，“我想要尊重道德法则，所以我要做正确的事情。”
Then I think he's there. He's there as far as Kant's concerned.
那么我想他做到了。在康德看来，他是有道德的。
Because he's formed his motive, his will is conforming to the moral law once he sees the importance of it. So, it would count, it would count.
因为他形成了他的动机，意志遵守了道德法则，只要他明白了道德法则的重要性。所以，这个也算，这个也算。
All right, then, secondly, very quickly, what stops morality from becoming completely objective in this point? - Oh, I'm sorry. Completely subjective. - What stops morality from becoming subjective?
- Yeah, like how can. . . If there's—if morally—if morality is completely determined by your morals, then how can you apply this or how can it be enforced? - All right, that's also a great question. What's your name? - My name is Amady.
好吧，快速谈一下第二个问题，那么是什么让道德无法完全客观化？- 抱歉。是主观化。- 是什么让道德无法主观化？- 是的，就像……如果道德完全被你的道德规范所决定，那么你如何能够应用它，或它是如何实施的呢？- 好的，这也是非常好的问题。你叫什么？- 我叫阿玛蒂。
- Amady? - Yes. All right, if acting morally means acting according to a moral law out of duty and if it's also to act freely in the sense of autonomously, it must mean that I'm acting according to a law that I give myself, that's what it means to act autonomously.
- 阿玛蒂？- 是的。如果行为道德意味着出于职责的道德法则行动，如果行为道德也意味着自主意义上的自由行动，那这肯定意味着我在根据自己所定的法则行动，这才是自主行动的意思。
Amady is right about that. But that does raise a really interesting question.
阿玛蒂在这方面的理解是正确的。但这却引出了另一个非常有趣的问题。
If acting autonomously means acting according to a law I give myself, that's how I escape the chain of cause and effect and the laws of nature. What's the guarantee that the law I give myself when I'm acting out of duty is the same as the law that Amady is giving himself and that each of you gives yourselves?
如果自主行为意味着按照自己制定的法则行动，那么我便脱离了因果关系和自然法则的束缚。是什么保证了当我出于职责的目的行动时，我为自己制定的法则与阿玛蒂为他制定的，以及大家每个人为自己制定的法则一样呢？
Well, here's the question. How many moral laws, from Kant's point of view, are there in this room?
问题就在这里。康德看来，这个讲堂里究竟有多少道德法则呢？
Are there a thousand or is there one? He thinks there's one, which in a way does go back to this question: all right, what is the moral law? What does it tell us?
有数千个吗？还是只有一个？他认为只有一个，这在某种程度上又回到了这个问题：什么是道德法则？它告诉了我们什么？
So, what guarantees. . . It sounds like to act autonomously is to act according to one's conscience, according to a law one gives oneself. But what guarantees that we—if we all exercise our reason, we will come up with one and the same moral law?
听上去好像自主行动是根据个人良心，个体给自己制定的法则行动的。但什么保证，我们如果我们实践的都是各自不同的理性，那我们会得出一个统一的道德法则吗？
That's what Amady wants to know. Here's Kant's answer: the reason that leads us to the law we give ourselves as autonomous beings is a reason.
这就是阿玛蒂想要知道的。康德的回答是：将我们引向作为自主存在而为自己制定的法则的，是一种理性。
It's a kind of practical reason that we share as human beings. It's not idiosyncratic.
是我们作为人类共有的一种实践理性。实践理性并不是个人化的东西。
The reason we need to respect the dignity of persons is that we're all rational beings, we all have the capacity for reason and it's the exercise of that capacity for reason which exists undifferentiated in all of us that makes us worthy of dignity, all of us.
And since it's the same capacity for reason, unqualified by particular autobiographies and life circumstance, it's the same universal capacity for reason that delivers the moral law.
我们之所以需要尊重他人尊严，是因为我们都是理性存在，我们都具有理性思考的能力，而正是通过存在于我们所有人中的这种无差别的理性思考能力的运用，才使得我们所有人都值得尊重。也因为这种理性思考的能力都是相同的，不受特定的生活经历以及生活环境所限定，这是同一种能够生成道德法则的普遍理性。
It turns out that to act autonomously is to act according to a law we give ourselves exercising our reason, but it's the reason we share with everyone as rational beings, not the particular reasons we have given our upbringings, our particular values, our particular interests.
It's pure practical reason, in Kant's terms, which legislates a priori regardless of any particular contingent or empirical ends.
它表明，自主行动就是我们理性思考后，按照自己制定的法则行动。但这是我们作为理性存在与他人共享的理性，这并不是我们能够传授给后代的特殊理性，特定的价值观或者特定的兴趣。用康德的话说，是先天存在的纯粹实践理性，不基于任何偶然或先验的目的。
Well, what moral law would that kind of reason deliver? What is its content?
这种理性又会生成怎样的道德法则呢？它的内容是什么？
To answer that question, you have to read the groundwork and we'll continue with that question next time.
要回答这个问题，必须先读一读《道德形而上学的基础》，我们下节课再来讨论这个问题。
◎欢迎参与讨论，请在这里发表您的看法、交流您的观点。
- 控制面板
- 网站分类
- 搜索
- 最新留言
-
- 文章归档
- 友情链接
Powered By Z-BlogPHP 1.7.3
ICP证:湘ICP备2021010693号-4