当代西方政治思潮（之三） 主讲人：黄岭峻

1. 当代西方政治思潮（之三） 主讲人：黄岭峻 第三讲 自由主义（5）:诺齐克 Lecture 3, Liberalism（4）： Robert Nozick

2. 一、诺齐克的生平 • Robert Nozick (November 16, 1938 – January 23, 2002) was an American philosopher and professor at Harvard University.

3. 1,1938年出生于纽约布鲁克林区，其父亲为来自俄国的犹太裔企业家，诺齐克后来与美国诗人斯奇莱肯伯格结婚。1,1938年出生于纽约布鲁克林区，其父亲为来自俄国的犹太裔企业家，诺齐克后来与美国诗人斯奇莱肯伯格结婚。 • Nozick was born in Brooklyn, the son of a Jewish entrepreneur from Russia, and married the American poet Gjertrud Schnackenberg.

4. 2，先后在哥伦比亚大学（本科）、普林斯顿大学（博士）与牛津大学（访问学者）学习。2，先后在哥伦比亚大学（本科）、普林斯顿大学（博士）与牛津大学（访问学者）学习。 • He was educated at Columbia (A.B. 1959, summa cum laude), where he studied with Sidney Morgenbesser, at Princeton (Ph.D. 1963), and Oxford as a Fulbright Scholar.

5. 3，1974年，出版《无政府、国家与乌托邦》一书，以作为对罗尔斯《正义论》的回应。3，1974年，出版《无政府、国家与乌托邦》一书，以作为对罗尔斯《正义论》的回应。 • His best known work, Anarchy, State, and Utopia (1974), was a libertarian answer to John Rawls's A Theory of Justice (1971).

6. 《无政府、国家与乌托邦》，P204 • 原初状态的人们要么直接同意一种结果分配，要么同意一个原则。如果他们同意一个原则，那他们的同意仅仅是根据对结果分配的考虑。他们同意的基本原则，他们能一致倾向于达成协议的原则，一定是目的的原则。

7. 4，2002年死于癌症，葬于麻省的剑桥。 • Nozick died in 2002 after a prolonged struggle with cancer. His remains are interred at Mount Auburn Cemetery in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

8. 二、诺齐克的若干思想要点 • Nozick seeks to draw the line between permissible and forbidden government activities, not by appealing to their effects but rather by assessing their compatibility with individual human rights. • 诺齐克试图在可允许的政府活动与被禁止的政府活动之间划一条界线。

9. Given that individuals have certain rights in their very character as rational beings, which intrusion into their private space can be justified without doing violence to their natural liberty? 由于个人作为理性的存在，在其特性中就拥有某些权利，对于某种侵入其私人空间的活动，如何因其没有暴力剥夺其天然自由而证明为正当？ 1，最小国家 The minimal state（1）

10. Governments should provide public safety—and little else. Even the imposition of taxes is illegitimate. In Nozick’s stark phrase, it is the equivalent of “forced labor”. 政府只应该提供公共安全——而不是其他什么。即使课税也是非法的。按诺齐克的话说，就是它等同于“强迫劳动”。 1，最小国家 The minimal state（2）

11. 《无政府、国家与乌托邦》，P1 • 个人拥有权利。有些事情是任何他人或团体都不能对他们做的，做了就要侵犯到他们的权利。这些权利如此有力和广泛，以致引出了国家及其官员能做些什么事情的问题。

12. By virtue of our reason and free will—i.e., our ability to shape our lives in accordance with some chosen conception of the good—we are all entitled to be treated as ends, not means. Treating people as a means to an end that is not of their own choosing constitutes an infringement of human individuality. 根据我们的理性和自由意志等的优点，我们形铸我们生活的能力是与某些关于善的有选择的概念一致的。——我们都有资格被当作目的，而非手段。将人们看作达到某种目的（不是他们自己选择的目的）的手段，构成了对其人格的侵犯。 2，个人的分离 The separateness of individuals（1）

13. No person’s liberty or welfare may be legitimately sacrificed in order to enhance those of another. Nozick: “There are only individual people, with their own individual lives.” 没有任何人的自由与福祉可以为了加强其他人的自由与福祉而被合法地牺牲。 诺齐克说:“只有拥有其自己的个人生活的个人化的人。” 2，个人的分离 The separateness of individuals（2）

14. Distributive criteria for apportioning wealth, such as equality or neediness or merit, are based on the indefensible assumption that property is a social resource or a collective asset. 分配财富的某些标准，如平等、需求或功绩，都是基于一种无辩护余地的假设——财产是一种社会资源或一种集体资产。 3，没有社会“派”供分配 There is no social pie to be cut up and distributed.（1）

15. The property, if it is rightfully acquired through labor, exchange, or inheritance, is an entitlement against which organized society has no claims. 财产，只要是通过劳动、交换或继承等方式正当获得的，就是一种任何组织型社会都无权剥夺的权利。 3，没有社会“派”供分配 There is no social pie to be cut up and distributed.（2）

16. He advocates not amoral selfishness, but a world in which moral decisions are the free decisions of moral agents using their entitlements according to their own lights. 诺齐克支持的不是超道德的自私，而是这样一种状况：即道德决定是道德代表人利用其权利根据其见识做出的自由决定。 4，非强迫的利他 Altruism, not coercion（1）

17. What he objects to is not benevolence, but the coercive imposition of alien moral objectives onto individuals. Pursuing these objectives by depriving individuals of their property rights only adds economic injury to moral insult. 强迫性利他的目的不是慈善，而是将某种道德目标强加给某个个人。通过剥夺个人的财产权来追求这些目标，只会给道德侮辱再增加经济损害。 4，非强迫的利他 Altruism, not coercion（2）

18. Welfare liberals and social democrats fail to understand that humanitarian impulse cannot be realized through coercive measures that reduce some individuals to the means that advance the welfare of others. 福利自由主义与社会民主主义者错误认为人道主义冲动只能通过牺牲一些个人进而增加他人福利的强制性办法才能实现。 5，善行，不是权利 Benevolence, not right（1）

19. They confuse benevolence with rights, voluntary moral acts with proprietary entitlements. 他们混淆了善行与权利，也混淆了自愿的道德行为与财产所有权。 5，善行，不是权利 Benevolence, not right（2）

20. 6，举例证明再分配的问题 Redistribution’s problem （例1） • 例1,My spouse, this person contends, is far less desirable than those of others. Society therefore should redistribute spouses to insure that we each have our fair share of the social pie.

21. 例1：新娘的再分配 • 如果我认为自己的新娘跟其他相比远为逊色，那么我是否能够要求社会根据重新分配社会“派”的原则来再分一个合适的新娘给我呢？

22. 6，举例证明再分配的问题 Redistribution’s problem （例2） • 例2,Or consider the case of an exam in which one student argues that, to be fair, we really ought to redistribute our grade so that all of us receive a mediocre but passing grade. Does the student with the grade of 40 have the right to demand of student who received a 90 that they divide the 50 points between them so that they both pass with a 65?

23. 例2，分数的再分配 • 如果A在考试中只考了40分，B却考了90分，A能否要求B拿出50分与其重新分配，从而每人都可达到及格分数？

24. 6，举例证明再分配的问题 Redistribution’s problem （例3） • 例3,Ten sailors who, surviving a shipwreck, find themselves marooned on ten different islands. Each of them, according to temperament and talent, utilizes the time differently. Some build and plant industriously, others loll in the sun and subsist on berries. Imagine now that after years they discover each other’s presence and meet to talk over their situation. What would we make of a claim, advanced by one of the lolling berry-pickers, that they really ought to redistribute their wealth because it is unjust that some should have so much while others have so little?

25. 例3，荒岛水手的再分配 • 某年某月某日，一艘海船失事沉没，10位水手分配逃到10个相互孤立的岛上避难，因天赋与后天努力的不同，有人勤劳致富，有人游手好闲，若干年后再次相遇，游手好闲者有无权力向勤劳致富者索取财富？

26. Its confusion of benevolence with rights; Its cavalier（傲慢的） disregard for property; Its stubborn tendency to view wealth as a common social resource. （1）混淆了权利与善行； （2）无视个人财产； （3）将财富视为社会的共同资源。 7，集体主义的三个缺陷 Collectivism’s flaws

27. The problem with end-state theories is that they are always rectifying what free and autonomous people decide. They regularly deflect the invisible hand’s movements, replacing the natural order with an artificially imposed one. 目的型国家理论的问题在于：他们总是纠正自由而自治的人们做出的决定。他们总是定期扭曲看不见的手的运动，以人为秩序代替自然秩序。 8，拒绝目的型国家理论 Rejecting end-state theories（1）

28. Hence, political systems wedded to end-state preferences are necessarily unstable and coercive. Unstable, because they must constantly readjust natural tendencies in the direction of the desired end state. Coercive, because in so doing they unavoidably disqualify voluntary acts between free people. 因此，植根于目的型国家理论的政治制度必然是不稳定与压制性的。不稳定，是因为他们总是根据所谓国家目的调整自然趋势；压制性，是因为他们这样做的结果不可避免地损害自由民众之间的自愿行动。 8，拒绝目的型国家理论 Rejecting end-state theories（1）

29. Each human being is entitle to be treated as an end rather than as a means. Human separateness may not be diminished by levelling, averaging, or amalgamating different human ends into a composite public welfare. （1）每一个人应被看作目的，而非手段。人类的分离不能通过拉平或混合不同目的而将其压入一个合成的公共福利。 三，对诺齐克思想的总结 Summarizing the central points of Nozick’s argument(1)

30. Government may not infringe our basic human entitlements without our consent. While individual benevolence is praiseworthy, property rights may not be compromised in order to further collective social ends such as aiding the poor or providing health care or fostering education. （2）政府不经我们的同意不得侵犯我们的基本权利。虽然个人善行值得称道，但不能因为进一步的集体性社会目标（如救济穷人、健康保险或反哺教育等）而危害我们的财产权。 对诺齐克思想的总结 Summarizing the central points of Nozick’s argument(2)

31. There is no social pie to distribute. Property comes with owners; it is not a collective asset. They are entitlements that do not require social justification because they precede and are independent of organized society. （3）没有可供分配的社会“派”。财产总是与所有者相伴而生，它不是一个集体性概念。财产权不需要社会辩护，因为它优先于并独立于有组织的社会。 对诺齐克思想的总结 Summarizing the central points of Nozick’s argument(3)

32. The only legitimate function of the state is to provide protection and make sure that the rules of the game are being honored. This minimal state has no autonomous objectives of its own. （4）国家的唯一合法功能就是提供保护，并且确认游戏规则正得到尊重。这种最小意义国家没有它自己的目标。 对诺齐克思想的总结 Summarizing the central points of Nozick’s argument(4)

33. End-state theories of justice thwart the voluntary interactions of autonomous individuals by determining in advance what their outcome must be. End-state theories are ,therefore, inexorably destabilizing and coercive. 目的型国家理论通过事先决定人们的结果阻碍了自治的个人之自愿的相互作用。因此，目的型国家理论不可避免地是不稳定且压制的。 Summarizing the central points of Nozick’s argument(5)

34. 四、对诺齐克思想的评价 • 诺齐克既不接受社会契约论的假想前提，也不承认功利主义等一切模式化的分配正义原则，而只采取最基本的立场即个人自由权利。在方法论上，他试图说明只要坚持个人自由，一切形式的模式化或目的的分配正义原则都会被击垮。 • 这种以历史形成的个为持有权利和个为自由为根本出发点的正义理论，是自亚当·斯密以来放任自由主义的直接继承和发展。

35. 思考题： 1，诺齐克是怎样一个人？ 2，诺齐克的思想主要有哪些内容？ 阅读书目： 诺齐克：《无政府、国家与乌托邦》，北京：中国社会科学出版社1991年版。 ［英］托马斯·莫尔：《乌托邦》，北京：商务印书馆1959年版。 复习及预习：