What about Mill's attempt to account for the especially weighty character of individual rights and justice in chapter five of Utilitarianism.
那么穆勒在《功利主义》,第五章中提到的,个人权利和公正重要性的解释,又是否成立呢。
Another illustration of the difficulty of translating all values, in this case, a certain idea of virtue, into utilitarian terms.
这个例子再次说明,很难把所有的价值,此处特指某种德行,转换为功利主义形式。
When we finished last time, we were looking at John Stuart Mill's attempt to reply to the critics of Bentham's Utilitarianism.
上节课结束时,我们讲到约翰·斯图尔特·穆勒试图回应,对边沁功利主义的批判。
So what we need to examine now is whether John Stuart Mill had a convincing reply to these objections to utilitarianism.
我们现在的任务是思考穆勒,是否令人信服地回应了对功利主义的质疑。
How many think that it does succeed of arguing within utilitarian terms for a distinction between higher and lower pleasures?
有多少人觉得它成功地,在功利主义范畴区分了高级和低级快乐?
The Benthamite utilitarian says everybody's preferences count and they count regardless of what people want, regardless of what makes different people happy.
边沁功利主义者认为每个人的偏好都有意义,不论人们所欲何为,不论其喜好各有不同。
Does it mean that we're back to utilitarianism and using people and aggregating preferences and pushing the fat man off the bridge?
那是否意味着我们又回到了功利主义的老路上,利用他人,还简单加总偏好,把那个胖子从桥上推下去?
It comes from personal experience that raises a question at least about whether all values can be translated without loss into utilitarian terms.
是亲身见闻所引起的疑问,是否所有的价值都可以完好无损地,转换为功利主义的形式。
But then, page eight, also in chapter two, he argues that it is possible for a utilitarian to distinguish higher from lower pleasures.
但在第八页,即第二章中,他提出功利主义者可以区分,高级和低级快乐。
So justice is higher, individual rights are privileged, but not for reasons that depart from utilitarian assumptions.
所以公正是更高级的,个体权利是种特权,但并不能出于功利主义假设之外的理由。
Now, those among you who are defenders of utilitarianism may think that this is an unfair test.
在座功利主义的支持者们,可能觉得这个研究不公。
She and Mill got married, they lived happily ever after, and it was under her influence that John Stuart Mill tried to humanize utilitarianism.
他们结了婚,从此过上了幸福的生活,正是在她的影响下,约翰·斯图尔特·穆勒试图把功利主义人性化。
How can a utilitarian distinguish qualitatively higher pleasures from lesser ones, base ones, unworthy ones? Yes?
功利主义者何以将性质上更高级的快乐,与较低级,基本无价值的区分开呢,请说?
Bentham's utilitarianism is sometimes summed up with the slogan "The greatest good for the greatest number."
边沁的功利主义有时被总结为一句口号,为最多的人谋求最大的幸福“
But times have changed and they were embarrassed to give the true grounds for their objection and so they translated their arguments into utilitarian terms.
但时代不同了,她们羞于讲出反对的真实理由,就转换为功利主义形式表达反对。
As for Jeremy Bentham, who launched utilitarianism as a doctrine in moral and legal philosophy, 85 Bentham died in 1832 at the age of 85.
杰里米·边沁,确立了功利主义,作为道德和法律哲学学说的地位,边沁死于1832年,享年。
And starting next time, we're going to read Bentham and John Stuart Mill, utilitarian philosophers.
下讲开始,我们将开始阅读边沁,约翰·斯图尔特·穆勒等功利主义哲学家的著作。
Last time, we began to consider some objections to Jeremy Bentham's version of utilitarianism.
上节课,我们开始思考一些,对杰里米·边沁功利主义的反对观点。
How many disagree with the utilitarian approach to law and to the common good?
有多少人不同意,功利主义在法律及公共利益方面的做法?
And if they can't, what are the consequences for the utilitarian theory of morality?
如果不能,那么功利主义道德理论意义何在?
So here are the objections to Bentham's utilitarianism and now, we turn to someone who tried to respond to those objections, a latter-day utilitarian, John Stuart Mill.
以上就是对边沁功利主义的异议,现在再来看看另一位,他试图回应这些异议,近代功利主义者约翰·斯图尔特·穆勒。
In his book Utilitarianism, Mill tries to show that critics to the contrary it is possible within the utilitarian framework to distinguish between higher and lower pleasures.
在穆勒的《功利主义》中,他试图证明,与批判者所言相反,在功利主义的框架下,是能区分高级和低级快乐的。
The first was the objection, the claim that utilitarianism, " by concerning itself with the greatest good for the greatest number, fails adequately to respect individual rights.
第一点异议,是说功利主义,只关注“为最多的人谋求最大的幸福,没有充分地尊重个人权利。
Can you give an example of the kind of thing you're worried about when you say you're worried about utilitarianism violating the concern or respect due the minority?
你能举个你所担心的类似例子吗,即你所说的担心,功利主义缺少对少数的关心和尊重?
Or do you think this completely destroys the whole utilitarian calculus?
还是你们认为它完全推翻了,功利主义的演算?
Last time, we began to consider Bentham's version of utilitarianism.
上节课,我们开始,思考边沁的功利主义。
So we really have here two different objections to utilitarianism.
因此我们确实对功利主义有两点异议。
Is this a counterexample to the utilitarian idea of calculating?
这算是功利主义计算思路的反例吗?
And if you were a utilitarian, what would you do?
如果你是个功利主义者,你会怎么办?
应用推荐