哈佛大学公开课公正justice 01The Moral Side of MurderThe Case for Cannibalism 杀人的道德侧面同类.docx
- 文档编号:18018391
- 上传时间:2023-08-05
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:26
- 大小:28.52KB
哈佛大学公开课公正justice 01The Moral Side of MurderThe Case for Cannibalism 杀人的道德侧面同类.docx
《哈佛大学公开课公正justice 01The Moral Side of MurderThe Case for Cannibalism 杀人的道德侧面同类.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《哈佛大学公开课公正justice 01The Moral Side of MurderThe Case for Cannibalism 杀人的道德侧面同类.docx(26页珍藏版)》请在冰点文库上搜索。
哈佛大学公开课公正justice01TheMoralSideofMurderTheCaseforCannibalism杀人的道德侧面同类
Justice01TheMoralSideofMurder/TheCaseforCannibalism杀人的道德侧面/同类自残案
Thisisacourseaboutjusticeandwebeginwithastory.
Supposeyou'rethedriverofatrolleycar,andyourtrolleycarishurtlingdownthetrackat60milesanhour.
Andattheendofthetrackyounoticefiveworkersworkingonthetrack.
Youtrytostopbutyoucan't,yourbrakesdon'twork.
Youfeeldesperatebecauseyouknowthatifyoucrashintothesefiveworkers,theywillalldie.
Let'sassumeyouknowthatforsure.
Andsoyoufeelhelplessuntilyounoticethatthereis,offtotheright,asidetrackandattheendofthattrack,thereisoneworkerworkingonthetrack.
Yoursteeringwheelworks,soyoucanturnthetrolleycar,ifyouwantto,ontothesidetrackkillingtheonebutsparingthefive.
Here'sourfirstquestion:
what'stherightthingtodo?
Whatwouldyoudo?
Let'stakeapoll.
Howmanywouldturnthetrolleycarontothesidetrack?
Raiseyourhands.
Howmanywouldn't?
Howmanywouldgostraightahead?
Keepyourhandsupthoseofyouwhowouldgostraightahead.
Ahandfulofpeoplewould,thevastmajoritywouldturn.
Let'shearfirst,nowweneedtobegintoinvestigatethereasonswhyyouthinkit'stherightthingtodo.
Let'sbeginwiththoseinthemajoritywhowouldturntogoontothesidetrack.Whywouldyoudoit?
Whatwouldbeyourreason?
Who'swillingtovolunteerareason?
Goahead.Standup.
Becauseitcan'tberighttokillfivepeoplewhenyoucanonlykillonepersoninstead.
Itwouldn'tberighttokillfiveifyoucouldkillonepersoninstead.
That'sagoodreason.
That'sagoodreason.Whoelse?
Doeseverybodyagreewiththatreason?
Goahead.
WellIwasthinkingit'sthesamereasonon9/11withregardtothepeoplewhoflewtheplaneintothePennsylvaniafieldasheroesbecausetheychosetokillthepeopleontheplaneandnotkillmorepeopleinbigbuildings.
Sotheprincipletherewasthesameon9/11.
It'satragiccircumstancebutbettertokillonesothatfivecanlive,isthatthereasonmostofyouhad,thoseofyouwhowouldturn?
Yes?
Let'shearnowfromthoseintheminority,thosewhowouldn'tturn.Yes.
Well,Ithinkthat'sthesametypeofmentalitythatjustifiesgenocideandtotalitarianism.
Inordertosaveonetypeofrace,youwipeouttheother.
Sowhatwouldyoudointhiscase?
Youwould,toavoidthehorrorsofgenocide,youwouldcrashintothefiveandkillthem?
Presumably,yes.
Youwould?
-Yeah.
Okay.Whoelse?
That'sabraveanswer.
Thankyou.
Let'sconsideranothertrolleycarcaseandseewhetherthoseofyouinthemajoritywanttoadheretotheprinciple"betterthatoneshoulddiesothatfiveshouldlive."
Thistimeyou'renotthedriverofthetrolleycar,you'reanonlooker.You'restandingonabridgeoverlookingatrolleycartrack.
Anddownthetrackcomesatrolleycar,attheendofthetrackarefiveworkers,thebrakesdon'twork,thetrolleycarisabouttocareenintothefiveandkillthem.
Andnow,you'renotthedriver,youreallyfeelhelplessuntilyounoticestandingnexttoyou,leaningoverthebridgeisaveryfatman.
Andyoucouldgivehimashove.
Hewouldfalloverthebridgeontothetrackrightinthewayofthetrolleycar.Hewoulddiebuthewouldsparethefive.
Now,howmanywouldpushthefatmanoverthebridge?
Raiseyourhand.Howmanywouldn't?
Mostpeoplewouldn't.Here'stheobviousquestion.
Whatbecameoftheprinciple"bettertosavefivelivesevenifitmeanssacrificingone?
"
Whatbecameoftheprinciplethatalmosteveryoneendorsedinthefirstcase?
Ineedtohearfromsomeonewhowasinthemajorityinbothcases.
Howdoyouexplainthedifferencebetweenthetwo?
Yes.
Thesecondone,Iguess,involvesanactivechoiceofpushingapersondownwhichIguessthatpersonhimselfwouldotherwisenothavebeeninvolvedinthesituationatall.
Andsotochooseonhisbehalf,Iguess,toinvolvehiminsomethingthatheotherwisewouldhaveescapedis,Iguess,morethanwhatyouhaveinthefirstcasewherethethreeparties,thedriverandthetwosetsofworkers,arealready,Iguess,inthesituation.
Buttheguyworking,theoneonthetrackofftotheside,hedidn'tchoosetosacrificehislifeanymorethanthefatmandid,didhe?
That'strue,buthewasonthetracksand...
Thisguywasonthebridge.
Goahead,youcancomebackifyouwant.Allright.
It'sahardquestion.Youdidwell.Youdidverywell.
It'sahardquestion.
Whoelsecanfindawayofreconcilingthereactionofthemajorityinthesetwocases?
Yes.
Well,Iguessinthefirstcasewhereyouhavetheoneworkerandthefive,it'sachoicebetweenthosetwoandyouhavetomakeacertainchoiceandpeoplearegoingtodiebecauseofthetrolleycar,notnecessarilybecauseofyourdirectactions.
Thetrolleycarisarunawaythingandyou'remakingasplitsecondchoice.
Whereaspushingthefatmanoverisanactualactofmurderonyourpart.
Youhavecontroloverthatwhereasyoumaynothavecontroloverthetrolleycar.
SoIthinkit'saslightlydifferentsituation.
Allright,whohasareply?
That'sgood.Whohasaway?
Whowantstoreply?
Isthatawayoutofthis?
Idon'tthinkthat'saverygoodreasonbecauseyouchoosetoeitherwayyouhavetochoosewhodiesbecauseyoueitherchoosetoturnandkilltheperson,whichisanactofconsciousthoughttoturn,oryouchoosetopushthefatmanoverwhichisalsoanactive,consciousaction.
Soeitherway,you'remakingachoice.
Doyouwanttoreply?
I'mnotreallysurethatthat'sthecase.
Itjuststillseemskindofdifferent.
Theactofactuallypushingsomeoneoverontothetracksandkillinghim,youareactuallykillinghimyourself.
You'repushinghimwithyourownhands.
You'repushinghimandthat'sdifferentthansteeringsomethingthatisgoingtocausedeathintoanother.
Youknow,itdoesn'treallysoundrightsayingitnow.
No,no.It'sgood.It'sgood.
What'syourname?
Andrew.
Andrew.
Letmeaskyouthisquestion,Andrew.
Yes.
Supposestandingonthebridgenexttothefatman,Ididn'thavetopushhim,supposehewasstandingoveratrapdoorthatIcouldopenbyturningasteeringwheellikethat.
Wouldyouturn?
Forsomereason,thatstilljustseemsmorewrong.
Right?
Imean,maybeifyouaccidentallylikeleanedintothesteeringwheelorsomethinglikethat.
But...Orsaythatthecarishurtlingtowardsaswitchthatwilldropthetrap.
ThenIcouldagreewiththat.
That'sallright.Fairenough.
Itstillseemswronginawaythatitdoesn'tseemwronginthefirstcasetoturn,yousay.
Andinanotherway,Imean,inthefirstsituationyou'reinvolveddirectlywiththesituation.
Inthesecondone,you'reanonlookeraswell.
Allright.-Soyouhavethechoiceofbecominginvolvedornotbypushingthefatman.
Allright.Let'sforgetforthemomentaboutthiscase.
That'sgood.
Let'simagineadifferentcase.
Thistimeyou'readoctorinanemergencyroomandsixpatientscometoyou.
They'vebeeninaterribletrolleycarwreck.
Fiveofthemsustainmoderateinjuries,oneisseverelyinjured,youcouldspendalldaycaringfortheoneseverelyinjuredvictimbutinthattime,thefivewoulddie.
Oryoucouldlookafterthefive,restorethemtohealthbutduringthattime,theoneseverelyinjuredpersonwoulddie.
Howmanywouldsavethefive?
Nowasthedoctor,howmanywouldsavetheone?
Veryfewpeople,justahandfulofpeople.
Samereason,Iassume.
Onelifeversusfive?
Nowconsideranotherdoctorcase.
Thistime,you'reatransplantsurgeonandyouhavefivepatients,eachindesperateneedofanorgantransplantinordertosurvive.
Oneneedsaheart,onealung,oneakidney,onealiver,andthefifthapancreas.
Andyouhavenoorgandonors.
Youareabouttoseethemdie.
Andthenitoccurstoyouthatinthenextroomthere'sahealthyguywhocameinforacheck-up.
Andhe's--youlikethat--andhe'stakinganap,youcouldgoinveryquietly,yankoutthefiveorgans,thatpersonwoulddie,butyoucouldsavethefive.
Howmanywoulddoit?
Anyone?
Howmany?
Putyourhandsupifyouwoulddoit.
Anyoneinthebalcony?
Iwould.
Youwould?
Becareful,don'tleanovertoomuch.
Howmanywouldn't?
Allright.Whatdoyousay?
Speakupinthebalcony,youwhowouldyankouttheorgans.Why?
I'dactuallyliketoexploreaslightlyalternatepossibilityofjusttakingtheoneofthefivewhoneedsanorganwhodiesfirstandusingtheirfourhealthyorganstosavetheotherfour.
That'saprettygoodidea.
That'sagreatideaexceptforthefactthatyoujustwreckedthephilosophicalpoint.
Let'sstepbackfromthesestoriesandtheseargumentstonoticeacoupleofthingsaboutthewaytheargumentshavebeguntounfold.
Certainmoralprincipleshavealreadybeguntoemergefromthediscussionswe'vehad.
Andlet'sconsiderwhatthosemoralprincipleslooklike.
Thefirstmoralprinciplethatemergedinthediscussionsaidtherightthingtodo,themoralthingtododependsontheconsequencesthatwillresultfromyouraction.
Attheendoftheday,betterthatfiveshouldliveevenifonemustdie.
That'sanexampleofconsequentialistmoralreasoning.
Consequentialistmoralreasoninglocatesmoralityintheconsequencesofanact,inthestateoftheworldthatwillresultfromthethingyoudo.
Butthenwewentalittlefurther,weconsideredthoseothercasesandpeopleweren'tsosureaboutconsequentialistmoralreasoning.
Whenpeoplehesitatedtopushthefatmanoverthebridgeortoyankouttheorgansoftheinnocentpatient,peoplegesturedtowardreasonshavingtodowiththeintrinsicqualit
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- 哈佛大学公开课公正justice 01The Moral Side of Murder The Case for Cannibalism 杀人的道德侧面同类 哈佛大学 公开 公正 justice 01
链接地址:https://www.bingdoc.com/p-18018391.html