Can you outsmart the college admissions fallacy? - Elizabeth Cox

翻译人员: Siyu Lian 校对人员: Yuwei Wu

“It’s the 4th century BCE,

“公元前 4 世纪，

and Aristotle has just written a critique of arguments

亚里士多德刚刚写了一篇文章

that take the truth of their conclusion for granted.”

批判那些预先将结论 认定为真的论点。”

“It’s still the 4th century BCE,

“仍然是公元前 4 世纪，

and Aristotle has just advanced a new theory:

亚里士多德提出了一个新理论：

that because Earth is the center of the universe,

由于地球是宇宙的中心，

humanity is alone in the universe.”

人类在宇宙中是孤独的。”

He should listen to himself.

他应该听听自己以前说了什么。

“It’s 1990, and the Federal District Court of Virginia

“ 1900 年， 弗吉尼亚州联邦地区法院

is about to hear a prospective student’s case against a university.

有一场学生诉讼大学的听证会。

She has filed a complaint about Virginia Military Institute’s

她投诉弗吉尼亚军事学院

admissions policy that excludes women.”

排除女性的招生政策。”

“VMI is a publicly-funded university that aims to produce ‘citizen soldiers’

弗吉尼亚军事学院是所公立大学， 它志在教育出“民众士兵”，

through a unique and rigorous method:

通过采用独特和严格的教育方法。

all students are subjected to an identical regimen

所有学生都会受到相同的训练，

of extreme physical and mental stress and deprivation of privacy.”

他们将会受到极度的身心压力， 还有剥夺隐私。”

Well, I'm certainly not sorry to be excluded.

我一点也不难过我被排除在外。

“VMI is the only single-sex public university in the state of Virginia;

“弗吉尼亚军事学院是弗吉尼亚州 唯一的单一性别公立大学，

there is no equivalent institution for women.

女性没有类似的针对性大学。

Because VMI is a government institution,

由于弗吉尼亚军事学院是 一所政府机构，根据法律，

by law, it cannot practice gender-based exclusion

在没有令人信服的有力理由下，

without ‘exceedingly persuasive justification.’

弗吉尼亚军事学院 不能排除学生基于性别。

It must prove that its single-sex admissions policy

它必须证明单性别的招生政策

is a necessary step to serving important governmental objectives.”

是实现政府重要目标的必须条件。

“The state of Virginia argues that VMI’s educational methods

弗吉尼亚州辩解说如果 弗吉尼亚军事学院录取女性，

would be compromised by admitting women.

它的教学方式会深受影响。

The state claims single-sex education is an ‘important governmental objective’

弗吉尼亚州声称单性别教育是 “重要政府目标”,

and that the exclusion of women from VMI is essential to that objective.”

弗吉尼亚军事学院排除女性 对该目标至关重要。

Hmm, considering how much they prize rigor,

考虑到他们是多么重视严谨，

their argument is certainly lacking it.

他们的说法一点都没有体现出来。

I’ll have to set them straight.

我必须把他们纠正过来。

Come now, Your Honor.

现在，法官大人，

Surely you can’t let that argument stand.

你不能让这种说法站住脚。

The state of Virginia is essentially saying that single-sex education

弗吉尼亚州基本上在说 单性别教育政策应该被允许

should be allowed because it serves the imperative of single-sex education.

因为它是为了满足 单性别教育的需求。

You might as well say that witch hunts should be encouraged

你还不如说我们应该鼓励猎杀女巫

because they fulfill the need for witch hunts.

因为这完成了猎杀女巫的要求。

These are examples of circular reasoning,

这些都是循环论证的例子，

sometimes called “begging the question,”

也称“乞题”，

where the reason given for a conclusion assumes the conclusion is true,

这是指为某一结论提供的理由 假定该结论是正确的，

rather than explaining why it’s true.

而不是解释为什么它是正确的。

Take the conclusion that witch hunts should be encouraged.

以鼓励猎杀女巫这个结论为例子，

The evidence given is that there is a need for witch hunts.

它提供的证据是 有猎杀女巫的需求。

But both the claim and the so-called evidence for the claim

但不论是主张还是主张的所谓证据

leave the same question unanswered:

都没有回答一个问题:

why are witch hunts necessary?

为什么需要猎杀女巫？

There actually isn't an argument made here at all.

实际上这里根本就没有一个论点。

Circular reasoning may sound straightforward, and in a way it is.

循环论证可能听起来直截了当， 而且在某种方面上是这样的。

Even a human can easily spot the circular logic in an argument like

每个人都可以轻易辨别循环论证，

“the baby was born because her mother gave birth to her.”

比如“一个婴儿出生了 因为她妈妈生了她”。

Where you run into trouble is when you assume

你遇到问题是由于你认定

that an opinion or current state of affairs,

某个观点或事物的现状是事实，

because it’s so familiar or long-lasting,

因为它太熟悉或者长久了，

is a fact, when really it’s an assumption.

但这其实只是假设。

Like the generations of astronomers and mathematicians

就像几代的天文学家和数学家，

who contorted themselves to explain anomalies in the planets’ orbits,

他们歪曲事实来解释 行星轨道的反常现象，

rather than questioning the premise that the planets orbited the Earth.

而不质疑行星绕地球公转的假设。

You modern humans may understand that the planets actually orbit the sun,

你们现代人可能相信 行星绕太阳公转，

but you're still susceptible to assumptions of your own.

但你们还是不能避免假设。

So you may hear “men and women should be treated differently

你可能听过“男人和女人 应该被区别对待，

because the law treats them differently”

因为法律区别对待他们。”

and think, well, yes, that makes sense.

然后想，的确，这是合理的。

The law has always treated them differently.

法律一直区别对待男人和女人。

But that’s merely a statement of fact;

不过这仅仅陈述了一个事实。

it’s not a reasoned argument for why it should to be the case.

这不是一个合理解释 为什么是这样的论点。

And just because something is true doesn’t make it proof of what is right.

只是因为某事是真实的 不代表这是正确的。

Not convinced? Well, I’m sure you, as a judge,

你不相信？没关系， 你作为一个法官

won’t mind hearing a bit more evidence.

一定不会在意再多听一些证据。

“It’s 1996, and the case has gone all the way to the Supreme Court

“ 在 1996 年，

of the United States.

此法案已提交至美国最高法院。”

The court has ruled 7 to 1 that VMI must begin to admit women.

法院以 7 比 1 作出裁决：

弗吉尼亚军事学院 必须开始录取女性。

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg delivers the ruling,

鲁斯·贝德·金斯伯格 法官作出裁决，

calling out the state of Virginia for its circular reasoning.”

指认弗吉尼亚州的循环论证。

If I may, I'd like to bring my companion here up to speed on your logic.

如果可以，我想让我的同伴 了解一下你的逻辑。

And while I’m at it, I’ll borrow that.

这个借我一下。

Now, let’s see.

现在我们来看看，

She points out that Virginia’s justification for excluding women from VMI

她指出弗吉尼亚州对 弗吉尼亚军事学院排除女性的辩解

gave the means as an end—

其实是把做法当作目的。

that is, it argued that women should be excluded

它辩解女性应该被排除

because the school’s mission was single-sex education,

因为学校的宗旨是单性别教育，

when in fact the school’s stated mission was to produce citizen soldiers

事实是学校的宗旨是教育出

prepared to take on leadership roles in American society—

在美国社会中担任 领导角色的民众士兵——

an aim, Justice Ginsburg asserts, that is surely broad enough to include women.

金斯伯格法官表示这个目标 肯定是包括女性的。

Alone in my universe at last.

终于我可以一个人享受安静了。