Name: 公正 該如何做是好 第四集 我的地盤我做主 滿合法年齡的成年人 (公正 该如何做是好 第四集 我的地盘我做主 满合法年龄的成年人)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T04:40:52.000Z
Duration: 54 min 59 s

--==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

On the face of it, Locke is a powerful ally of the libertarian.

--==聖城家園SCG字幕組bbs.cnscg.com==-- 協調: 飛天宇 MAXの依依 時間軸：MAXの依依 翻譯:  冷兔子 長路獨行 XQ 校對:  扎扎LU

First, he believes, as libertarians today maintain,

that there are certain fundamental individual rights that are so important

that no government, even a representative government,

even a democratically elected government, can override them.

Not only that, he believes that those fundamental rights include

乍看起來 Locke是自由意志論的忠實擁護者

a natural right to life, liberty, and property,

首先 他相信 正如當今的自由論者所堅持的

and furthermore he argues that the right to property

is not just the creation of government or of law.

The right to property is a natural right in the sense

還是民主選舉政府 都不能凌駕於這些權利之上

不僅如此 他認為這些基本權利還包括

It is a right that attaches to individuals as human beings,

生命權 自由權以及財產權 三大自然權利

even before government comes on the scene,

enact laws to define rights and to enforce them.

Locke says in order to think about what it means to have a natural right,

它是附屬於人類個體的權利 它的出現

before government, before law, and that's what Locke means

He says the state of nature is a state of liberty.

制定法律來定義並執行權利之前

Locke說 為了弄明白擁有自然權利意味著什麼

我們需要想像一下在政府 法律出現之前

It's not the case that some people are born to be kings

We are free and equal in the state of nature and yet,

他認為自然狀態就是一種自由狀態

he makes the point that there is a difference between

a state of liberty and a state of license.

And the reason is that even in the state of nature,

It's not the kind of law that legislatures enact.

在自然狀態中 我們是自由平等的

It's a law of nature. And this law of nature constrains

even though we are in the state of nature.

The only constraint given by the law of nature

這種法律不是立法者制定的那種法律

is that the rights we have, the natural rights we have

而是自然法則 它對我們的行為進行約束

Under the law of nature, I'm not free to take somebody else's

life or liberty or property, nor am I free to take

Even though I am free, I'm not free to violate the law of nature.

I'm not free to take my own life or to sell my self into slavery

or to give to somebody else arbitrary absolute power over me.

在自然法則之下 我不能隨意剝奪他人的

So where does this constraint, you may think it's a fairly

生命 自由或者財產 我也不能隨意

minimal constraint, but where does it come from?

即使我是自由的 我也不能違反自然規律

and he gives two answers. Here is the first answer.

我不能隨意結束自己的生命 或把自己賣給他人做奴隸

"For men, being all the workmanship of one omnipotent,

或給他人任意的絕對權利來操控我

"they are His property, whose workmanship they are,

made to last during His, not one another's, pleasure."

So one answer to the question is why can't I give up

my natural rights to life, liberty, and property is well,

"人類 由一位全能而又無比明智的智者

創造出來的" 這位智者就是上帝

After all, you are the creature of God. God has a bigger property right in us,

是他創造出來延續個人快樂 而非讓人類彼此取悅的"

Now, you might say that's an unsatisfying,

因為嚴格說來 這些權利不是你的

What did Locke have to say to them? Well, here is where Locke appeals

畢竟 你是上帝的創造物 上帝對我們擁有更大的財產權

to the idea of reason and this is the idea,

that if we properly reflect on what it means to be free,

你們可能會覺得這個答案不能令人滿意

we will be led to the conclusion that freedom can't just be a matter

I think this is what Locke means when he says, "The state of nature

那麼Locke如何對這些人解釋呢? Locke是這樣闡述

has a law of nature to govern it which obliges everyone: and reason,

which is that law, teaches mankind who will but consult it

如果我們仔細思考一下自由意味著什麼

that all being equal and independent, no one ought to harm another

in his life, health, liberty, or possessions."

This leads to a puzzling paradoxical feature of Locke's

我想Locke的以下這段話也足以表明態度 "自然狀態

用自然法則來約束每個人: 理性

It's the idea that our natural rights are unalienable.

What does "unalienable" mean? It's not for us to alienate them

所有人都是平等獨立的 沒有人能傷害或破壞

or to give them up, to give them away, to trade them away, to sell them.

Consider an airline ticket. Airline tickets are nontransferable.

Or tickets to the Patriots or to the Red Sox.

那就是我們的自然權利是不可剝奪的

I own them in the limited sense that I can use them for myself,

"不可剝奪"是什麼意思? 就是說 我們不能讓與

but I can't trade them away. So in one sense, an unalienable right,

a nontransferable right makes something I own less fully mine.

But in another sense of unalienable rights,

又或者是愛國者或紅襪隊的比賽門票

especially where we're thinking about life, liberty, and property,

or a right to be unalienable makes it more deeply,

狹義上 我擁有他們 我可以使用他們

more profoundly mine, and that's Locke's sense

但我卻不能轉讓買賣他們 所以某種意義上 不可剝奪權

不可轉讓權使我並不能完全擁有一樣東西

We see it in the American Declaration of Independence.

Thomas Jefferson drew on this idea of Locke.

尤其當我們考慮到生命 自由和財產時

Unalienable rights to life, liberty, and as Jefferson amended Locke,

一項不可剝奪的權利意味著這項權利完全地

to the pursuit of happiness. Unalienable rights.

that even I can't trade them away or give them up.

在美國獨立宣言中也可以看到這一點

So these are the rights we have in the state of nature

Thomas Jefferson引用了Locke的這一觀點

不可剝奪的生命權 自由權 Jefferson修正了Locke的觀點

In the case of life and liberty, I can't take my own life.

加上了追求幸福的權利 不可剝奪的權利

I can't sell myself into slavery any more than I can take

somebody else's life or take someone else

這些就是在政府出現之前 自然狀態中

But how does that work in the case of property?

字幕列表影片播放

公正該如何做是好第四集我的地盤我做主滿合法年齡的成年人 (公正该如何做是好第四集我的地盘我做主满合法年龄的成年人)

majority

arbitrary

acquire

native

公正 該如何做是好 第四集 我的地盤我做主 滿合法年齡的成年人 (公正 该如何做是好 第四集 我的地盘我做主 满合法年龄的成年人)

majority

arbitrary

acquire

native

公正該如何做是好第四集我的地盤我做主滿合法年齡的成年人 (公正该如何做是好第四集我的地盘我做主满合法年龄的成年人)