So, all right. Good. Are there any other defenders who say it's just categorically wrong, with or without consent?

很好，有没其他人要辩护的,谁认为就是绝对错的，不管有没征得同意？

耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

Are there people who think who want to take up Kathleen's consent idea and who think that that would make it morally justified?

有没人赞同凯思琳这个“征得同意“的观点,有谁认为，派克同意，道德上就是正当的？

耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

And if we add consent, then more people are willing to consider the sacrifice morally justified.

如果有征得同意，更多的人就愿意认为,这在道德上是正当的。

耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

But that raises a third philosophical question: What is the moral work that consent does?

但这样又引发了第三个哲学问题：,征得同意有何道德作用？

耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

And question number three, the basic idea of consent. Kathleen got us on to this.

至于问题三，就是征得同意的观点，凯思琳提到的。

耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

Why does an act of consent make such a moral difference, that an act that would be wrong taking a life without consent, is morally permissible with consent?

为什么征得了同意，就能在道德上如此不同呢，没有征得同意就杀人，在道德上是不允许的，征得同意就是允许的吗？

耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

I'm wondering if Dudley and Steven had asked for Richard Parker's consent in you know, dying, if that would exonerate them from an act of murder and if so, is that still morally justifiable?

我想知道达德利和斯蒂芬斯,是否征得过派克的同意，取他的性命，是否那样就能赦免他们的谋杀罪名,是否这样，道德上就是正当的？

耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

That's interesting. All right. Consent.

非常有趣，好的，征得同意。

耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

Then there are some who say the real problem here is the lack of consent, whether the lack of consent to a lottery, to a fair procedure or, Kathleen's idea, lack of consent at the moment of death.

还有人认为,真正的问题在于，没有征得同意，不管是没有征得同意抽签，用公平程序进行,或者是凯思琳所说，没有征得派克的同意杀他。

耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选

I want to hear now, finally, from those of you who think even with consent, even with a lottery, even with a final murmur of consent by Parker, at the very last moment, it would still be wrong.

我现在想听听，是否有人认为,即便是征得了同意，即便是有了抽签，即便派克最终还是答应了，杀死派克依然还是错误的。

耶鲁公开课 - 公正课程节选