Name: Justice：What's The Right Thing To Do ep-01
Uploaded: 2013-07-13T15:57:47.000Z
Duration: 54 min 56 s

基礎被動語態

Funding for this program is provided by...

--==聖城家園SCG字幕組bbs.cnscg.com==-- 僅供翻譯交流使用, 禁止用於商業用途

--==聖城家園SCG字幕組bbs.cnscg.com==-- 協調: 飛天宇 MAXの依依 時間軸：暗之忆 翻譯: 天天@天宇 Ivy CH被射之雕 天天@天真 校對: 呆狗

Suppose you're the driver of a trolley car,

and your trolley car is hurtling down the track

at 60 miles an hour. And at the end of the track

you notice five workers working on the track.

你的這輛車飛速的行駛在一條軌道上

that if you crash into these five workers,

時速每小時60英里 而在軌道的盡頭

And so you feel helpless until you notice

a side track and at the end of that track,

there is one worker working on the track.

Your steering wheel works, so you can turn the trolley car,

Here's our first question: what's the right thing to do?

有一條側軌 而在這條側軌的盡頭

方向盤還有用 所以如果你願意的話

How many wouldn't? How many would go straight ahead?

Keep your hands up those of you who would go straight ahead.

這就是我們的第一個問題 怎麼做才是正確的?

Let's begin with those in the majority who would turn to go

onto the side track. Why would you do it?

What would be your reason? Who's willing to volunteer a reason?

Because it can't be right to kill five people

when you can only kill one person instead.

It wouldn't be right to kill five if you could kill

那些要拐到側軌上的人 你們為什麼那麼做?

one person instead. That's a good reason.

Does everybody agree with that reason? Go ahead.

因為當你明明可以只殺掉一個人的時候

Well I was thinking it's the same reason on 9/11 with regard

你卻選擇了殺掉五個人 這顯然不是最佳選項

to the people who flew the plane into the Pennsylvania field

as heroes because they chose to kill the people on the plane

and not kill more people in big buildings.

So the principle there was the same on 9/11.

It's a tragic circumstance but better to kill one

那些使飛機墜毀在賓州地域的人們被當做英雄

就是因為他們選擇去犧牲飛機上的人

而不是那些高樓大廈裡更多的人

Let's hear now from those in the minority,

所以這個選擇的出發點和9.11是一樣的

這種情景是很悲慘 但是犧牲一個更好

Well, I think that's the same type of mentality

that justifies genocide and totalitarianism.

You would, to avoid the horrors of genocide,

我認為這和論證種族滅絕和極權主義

you would crash into the five and kill them?

所以在這個故事中 你會怎麼做?

你會直接衝向這五個人殺死他們?

and see whether those of you in the majority

"better that one should die so that five should live."

好的 還有誰? 剛才的答案很勇敢

This time you're not the driver of the trolley car,

you're an onlooker. You're standing on a bridge

at the end of the track are five workers,

is about to careen into the five and kill them.

And now, you're not the driver, you really feel helpless

leaning over the bridge is a very fat man.

He would fall over the bridge onto the track right in the way

電車就要衝向這五個人 撞死他們了

現在 你不是司機 你感到很無助

Now, how many would push the fat man over the bridge?

有個胖子正向橋欄杆外探出身體

Most people wouldn't. Here's the obvious question.

What became of the principle "better to save five lives

What became of the principle that almost everyone endorsed

in the first case? I need to hear from someone

大多數人不會推 這裡出現一個很明顯的矛盾

How do you explain the difference between the two? Yes.

"即便有一人要死 總比五個人都死要好"

The second one, I guess, involves an active choice

of pushing a person down which I guess that person himself

為什麼幾乎所有人在第一個案例中都同意這個原則?

would otherwise not have been involved in the situation at all.

And so to choose on his behalf, I guess, to involve him

in something that he otherwise would have escaped is,

你怎麼解釋這兩個案例的不同之處? 請說

I guess, more than what you have in the first case

where the three parties, the driver and the two sets of workers,

這個主動行為 我認為那個人自己

字幕列表影片播放

Justice：What's The Right Thing To Do ep-01

wrong

people

car

die