评论
打印
Let's take a final example that's prominent in contemporary political debate: same-sex marriage.
最后再举一个例子，一个当代政治的热点话题：同性婚姻
There are those who favor state recognition only of traditional marriage between one man and one woman,
有些人只支持传统婚姻，一男一女
and there are those who favor state recognition of same-sex marriage.
有些人同时支持同性婚姻
How many here favor the first policy:
在座有多少人属于前者？
the state should recognize traditional marriage only?
各州应该只允许传统式婚姻？
And how many favor the second, same-sex marriage?
有多少人支持后者，同性婚姻？
Now, put it this way:
这么说吧，
What ways of thinking about justice and morality underlie the arguments we have over marriage?
我们对于婚姻形式的争论体现了哪些关于公正伦理的价值观呢？
The opponents of same-sex marriage say that the purpose of marriage, fundamentally, is procreation,
反对同性婚姻的人说，婚姻的根本目的是传宗接代
and that's what's worthy of honoring and recognizing and encouraging.
传宗接代才是值得尊重、认可和鼓励的价值本质
And the defenders of same-sex marriage say no,
赞成同性婚姻的人说
procreation is not the only purpose of marriage;
繁衍后代并非婚姻的唯一目的
what about a lifelong, mutual, loving commitment?
大家都忘了长相厮守、白头偕老、相濡以沫了吗？
That's really what marriage is about.
那才是婚姻的真谛
So with flutes, with golf carts,
所以，无论是分配笛子，高尔夫球车
and even with a fiercely contested question like same-sex marriage, Aristotle has a point.
还是尖锐的同性婚姻话题，亚里士多德有一点说得很有道理
Very hard to argue about justice
如果不首先讨论社会组织的目的，
without first arguing about the purpose of social institutions
以及值得认可和称道的价值理念
and about what qualities are worthy of honor and recognition.
是很难讨论公平公正的
So let's step back from these cases and see how they shed light
现在让我们反思这些案例，看看能从中得到什么启发
on the way we might improve, elevate, the terms of political discourse in the United States, and for that matter, around the world.
来帮助我们提升改进美国乃至世界的政治辩论状况
There is a tendency to think
现在有这样一种倾向，
that if we engage too directly with moral questions in politics,
认为如果我们直面政治方面的道德问题
that's a recipe for disagreement,
就很容易产生观点上的分歧，
and for that matter, a recipe for intolerance and coercion.
从而导致偏狭与排异，并相互强加观点给对方
So better to shy away from, to ignore, the moral and the religious convictions that people bring to civic life.
所以最好是避开那些宗教及道义方面的大命题
It seems to me that our discussion reflects the opposite,
我觉得我们的讨论证明事实恰恰相反
that a better way to mutual respect
一个更好的互相尊重的方式是
is to engage directly with the moral convictions citizens bring to public life,
是直面日常生活中所涉及的伦理道德问题
rather than to require that people leave their deepest moral convictions outside politics before they enter.
而不是要求人们在讨论政治问题时回避他们最深层的道德信仰
That, it seems to me, is a way to begin to restore the art of democratic argument.
在我看来，这是复兴我们失落了的民主辩论艺术的一种方式
Thank you very much.
非常感谢大家
