評論
打印
if not whether acts of torture can be morally excused after the fact.
如果不是那么酷刑是否在道德上可以得到原諒
And our first panelist pleased to introduce Claudia Card who's a professor of philosophy at the University of Wisconsin.
下面我很榮幸地介紹我們的第一位專家Claudia Card威斯康辛大學哲學教授
Thank you, I'm delighted to be here and learn all things that one learns from these wonderful papers.
謝謝我很高興來到這里從大家精彩的論文里我學到了很多
Well, the title of my piece is ticking bombs and interrogation.
那么我要宣讀的論文是定時炸彈和審問
Torturing to gain information on terrorism is an evil response to terrorism or so I argue.
在我看來使用酷刑手段獲得恐怖主義活動的信息是一種罪惡的做法
In my book, 'The Atrocity Paradigm' I analyzed evils as reasonably foreseeable intolerable harms produced by culpable wrongs.
在我的書《殘暴的范式:罪惡論》中我分析了罪惡是有罪的錯誤行為造成的相當的可預見的不能忍受的傷害
Reflection on responses to genocide terrorism
后來我對人們對于種族清洗的恐怖主義
and torture led me since to modify the wrong doing element of that analysis substituting inexcusable for culpable.
和酷刑進行反思也修改了自己之前的分析將有罪行為中的有罪一詞換成了不可原諒的
I now define evils as, reasonable foreseeable intolerable harms produced by inexcusable wrongs.
那么現在我對于罪惡的定義就是由不可原諒的錯誤行為造成的相當的可預見的不能忍受的傷害
Inexcusable here means not just wrongs but indefensible. Not even partly justifiable.
這里的不可原諒指的不僅是錯誤行為而且是無辯護余地的一點都不可以辯解
On a practice such as torture is inexcusable, the norms that define that practice are morally indefensible.
沒有辯護余地的像酷刑這樣的做法是不可原諒的定義這種做法的規范在道德上也是
It is a separate question whether participants or supporters who apply those norms
但是應用這些規范的酷刑的執行者或者支持者這么做是否
are at fault for doing so. Their culpability is partly a function of their alternatives at the time and
有錯就是另一個問題了他們的有罪性部分取決于當時情況下是否有其它選擇
the nature of their participation or support.
以及他們參與和支持酷刑的性質
