Michael Sandel: The lost art of democratic debate

Prevoditelj: Djurdjica Ercegovac Recezent: Ivan Stamenković

One thing the world needs,

Jedna stvar koju svijet treba,

jedna stvar koju ova zemlja očajnički treba

one thing this country desperately needs

is a better way

je bolji način

of conducting our political debates.

vođenja političkih debata.

We need to rediscover

Trebali bismo ponovo otkriti

the lost art of democratic argument.

izgubljenu umjetnost demokratske rasprave.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

If you think about the arguments we have,

Ako razmislite o raspravama koje vodimo,

most of the time it's shouting matches

uglavnom su to natjecanja u nadvikavanju

on cable television,

na kabelskoj televiziji,

ideological food fights on the floor of Congress.

ideološke bitke hranom u Kongresu.

I have a suggestion.

Ja imam prijedlog.

Look at all the arguments we have these days

Pogledajte sve diskusije koje imamo ovih dana

over health care,

o zdravstvenoj skrbi,

over bonuses and bailouts on Wall Street,

o bonusima i sanacijama na Wall Streetu,

over the gap between rich and poor,

o jazu između bogatih i siromašnih,

over affirmative action and same-sex marriage.

o afirmativnoj akciji i istospolnim brakovima.

Lying just beneath the surface

Tik ispod površine

of those arguments,

ovih diskusija,

with passions raging on all sides,

s uzburkanim strastima na svim stranama,

are big questions

leže velika pitanja

of moral philosophy,

filozofije morala,

big questions of justice.

velika pitanja pravde.

But we too rarely

No, mi isuviše rijetko

articulate and defend

artikuliramo i branimo

and argue about

i diskutiramo o

those big moral questions in our politics.

tim velikim moralnim pitanjima u našoj politici.

So what I would like to do today

Pa ono što bih danas želio

is have something of a discussion.

jest imati neku vrstu diskusije.

First, let me take

Prvo, dopustite mi da uzmem

a famous philosopher

čuvenog filozofa

who wrote about those questions

koji je pisao o ovim pitanjima

of justice and morality,

pravde i morala,

give you a very short lecture

da vam održim vrlo kratku lekciju

on Aristotle of ancient Athens,

o Aristotelu iz drevne Atene,

Aristotle's theory of justice,

Aristotelovoj teoriji pravde,

and then have a discussion here

i zatim da ovdje provedemo diskusiju

to see whether Aristotle's ideas

kako bismo ustanovili da li Aristotelove ideje

actually inform

uistinu utječu

the way we think and argue

na način našeg razmišljanja i diskutiranja

about questions today.

o pitanjima današnjice.

So, are you ready for the lecture?

Dakle, jeste li spremni za lekciju?

According to Aristotle,

Prema Aristotelu,

justice means giving people what they deserve.

pravda znači ljudima dati ono što zaslužuju.

That's it; that's the lecture.

To je to; to je lekcija.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Vi biste sada mogli reći, pa to je dovoljno jasno.

Now, you may say, well, that's obvious enough.

The real questions begin

Prava pitanja počinju

when it comes to arguing about

kada dođe do rasprave o tome

who deserves what and why.

tko zaslužuje što i zašto.

Take the example of flutes.

Uzmite primjer flauta.

Suppose we're distributing flutes.

Pretpostavimo da dijelimo flaute.

Who should get the best ones?

Tko bi trebao dobiti najbolje?

Let's see what people --

Da vidimo što ljudi --

What would you say?

Što biste vi rekli?

Who should get the best flute?

Tko bi trebao dobiti najbolje flaute?

You can just call it out.

Možete samo doviknuti.

(Audience: Random.)

(Publika: Nasumice.)

Michael Sandel: Nasumice. Vi bi to proveli lutrijom.

Michael Sandel: At random. You would do it by lottery.

Or by the first person to rush into the hall to get them.

Ili prva osoba koja požuri u dvoranu da ih uzme.

Who else?

Još netko?

(Audience: The best flute players.)

(Publika: Najbolji svirači flauta.)

MS: The best flute players. (Audience: The worst flute players.)

MS: Najbolji svirači flauta. (Publika: Najgori svirači flauta.)

MS: The worst flute players.

MS: Najgori svirači flauta.

How many say the best flute players?

Koliko vas kaže najbolji svirači flauta?

Why?

Zašto?

Actually, that was Aristotle's answer too.

Zapravo, to je bio i Aristotelov odgovor.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

But here's a harder question.

No, evo težeg pitanja.

Why do you think,

Zašto mislite,

those of you who voted this way,

oni od vas koji su tako glasali,

that the best flutes should go to the best flute players?

da najbolje flaute trebaju dobiti najbolji svirači flauta?

Peter: The greatest benefit to all.

Peter: Najveća korist za sve.

MS: The greatest benefit to all.

MS: Najveća korist za sve.

We'll hear better music

Slušat ćemo bolju muziku,

if the best flutes should go to the best flute players.

ako najbolje flaute odu najboljim sviračima flauta.

That's Peter? (Audience: Peter.)

To je Peter? (Publika: Peter)

MS: All right.

MS: Dobro.

Well, it's a good reason.

To je dobar razlog.

We'll all be better off if good music is played

Svima će nam biti bolje ako se svira dobra muzika

rather than terrible music.

nego grozna muzika.

But Peter,

Ali Peter,

Aristotle doesn't agree with you that that's the reason.

Aristotel se ne slaže s vama da je to razlog.

That's all right.

To je u redu.

Aristotle had a different reason

Aristotel je imao drugi razlog

for saying the best flutes should go to the best flute players.

da kaže da najbolje flaute trebaju ići najboljim sviračima.

He said,

On je rekao,

that's what flutes are for --

flaute tome služe --

to be played well.

da se na njima dobro svira.

He says that to reason about

On kaže da kada prosuđujemo

just distribution of a thing,

o pravednoj raspodjeli neke stvari,

we have to reason about,

moramo prosuđivati,

and sometimes argue about,

i ponekad se prepirati,

the purpose of the thing,

o svrsi te stvari

ili društvene aktivnosti --

or the social activity --

u ovom slučaju, muzičke izvedbe.

in this case, musical performance.

And the point, the essential nature,

A poanta, suštinska priroda,

of musical performance

muzičke izvedbe

is to produce excellent music.

je da proizvede odličnu muziku.

It'll be a happy byproduct

To će biti sretan nusproizvod

that we'll all benefit.

od kojeg ćemo svi imati koristi.

But when we think about justice,

No, kada razmišljamo o pravdi,

Aristotle says,

kaže Aristotel,

what we really need to think about

ono o čemu zapravo moramo razmišljati

is the essential nature of the activity in question

jest suštinska priroda dane aktivnosti

and the qualities that are worth

i kvalitete vrijedne poštovanja

honoring and admiring and recognizing.

i divljenja i priznavanja.

One of the reasons

Jedan od razloga

that the best flute players should get the best flutes

zašto najbolje flaute trebaju ići najboljim sviračima flauta

is that musical performance

je taj što muzička izvedba

is not only to make the rest of us happy,

ne služi samo da nas ostale usreći

but to honor

već da oda počast

and recognize

i priznanje

the excellence

izvrsnosti

of the best musicians.

najboljih muzičara.

Now, flutes may seem ... the distribution of flutes

Međutim, flaute mogu izgledati ... raspodjela flauta

may seem a trivial case.

može izgledati kao trivijalan slučaj.

Let's take a contemporary example

Uzmimo moderan primjer

of the dispute about justice.

prepirke o pravdi.

It had to do with golf.

Radi se o golfu.

Casey Martin -- a few years ago,

Casey Martin -- prije nekoliko godina,

Casey Martin --

Casey Martin --

did any of you hear about him?

je li itko od vas čuo za njega?

He was a very good golfer,

On je bio jako dobar golfer,

but he had a disability.

ali invalid.

He had a bad leg, a circulatory problem,

Imao je problem sa jednom nogom i cirkulacijom

that made it very painful

što je mu uzrokovalo jaku bol

for him to walk the course.

pri hodanju po igralištu.

In fact, it carried risk of injury.

U stvari, postojao je i rizik od povrede.

He asked the PGA,

Tražio je od PGA,

the Professional Golfers' Association,

Udruženja profesionalnih igrača golfa,

for permission to use a golf cart

dozvolu za korištenje vozila za golf

in the PGA tournaments.

na PGA turnirima.

They said, "No.

Oni su rekli, "Ne.

Now that would give you an unfair advantage."

To bi vam dalo nepoštenu prednost."

He sued,

On ih je tužio

and his case went all the way

i njegov je slučaj dospio skroz

to the Supreme Court, believe it or not,

do Vrhovnog suda, vjerovali ili ne,

the case over the golf cart,

slučaj u vezi vozila za golf,

because the law says

zato jer zakon kaže

that the disabled

da osobe s invaliditetom

must be accommodated,

moraju biti zbrinute,

provided the accommodation does not

uz uvijet da ta skrb

change the essential nature

ne mijenja suštinsku prirodu

of the activity.

aktivnosti.

He says, "I'm a great golfer.

On kaže, "Ja sam odličan golfer.

I want to compete.

Želim se natjecati.

But I need a golf cart

Ali mi je potrebno vozilo za golf

to get from one hole to the next."

da bih došao od jedne rupe do druge."

Suppose you were

Pretpostavimo da ste vi

on the Supreme Court.

član Vrhovnog suda.

Suppose you were deciding

Pretpostavimo da odlučujete

the justice of this case.

o pravdi u ovom slučaju.

How many here would say

Koliko vas ovdje bi reklo

that Casey Martin does have a right to use a golf cart?

da Casey Martin ima pravo koristiti vozilo za golf?

And how many say, no, he doesn't?

A koliko vas kaže, ne, nema pravo?

All right, let's take a poll, show of hands.

U redu, hajde da prebrojimo glasove, podignute ruke.

How many would rule in favor of Casey Martin?

Koliko bi vas presudilo u korist Casey Martina?

And how many would not? How many would say he doesn't?

A koliko ne bi? Koliko bi vas reklo da nema pravo?

All right, we have a good division of opinion here.

U redu, ovdje imamo dobru podjelu mišljenja.

Someone who would not

Netko tko Casey Martinu

grant Casey Martin the right to a golf cart,

ne bi odobrio pravo na vozilo za golf,

what would be your reason?

koji bi bio vaš razlog?

Raise your hand, and we'll try to get you a microphone.

Dignite ruku i pokušat ćemo vam dodati mikrofon.

What would be your reason?

Koji bi bio vaš razlog?

(Audience: It'd be an unfair advantage.)

(Publika: To bi bila nepoštena prednost.)

MS: It would be an unfair advantage

MS: To bi bila nepoštena prednost,

if he gets to ride in a golf cart.

ako dobije vozilo za golf.

All right, those of you,

U redu, oni od vas,

I imagine most of you who would not give him the golf cart

pretpostavljam da većinu vas koji mu ne bi dali vozilo za golf

worry about an unfair advantage.

brine nepoštena prednost.

What about those of you who say

Što je s vama koji kažete

he should be given a golf cart?

da bi mu trebalo dati vozilo za golf?

How would you answer the objection?

Kako biste vi odgovorili na prigovor?

Yes, all right.

Da, u redu.

Audience: The cart's not part of the game.

Publika: Vozilo nije dio igre.

MS: What's your name? (Audience: Charlie.)

MS: Kako se vi zovete? (Publika: Charlie.)

MS: Charlie says --

MS: Charlie kaže --

Dodajte Charlie mikrofon za slučaj da netko želi odgovoriti.

We'll get Charlie a microphone in case someone wants to reply.

Tell us, Charlie,

Recite nam, Charlie,

why would you say he should be able to use a golf cart?

zašto bi vi rekli da bi mu moralo biti omogućeno da vozi vozilo za golf?

Charlie: The cart's not part of the game.

Charlie: Vozilo nije dio igre.

MS: But what about walking from hole to hole?

MS: A što je s hodanjem od rupe do rupe?

Charlie: It doesn't matter; it's not part of the game.

Charlie: To nije važno; to nije dio igre.

MS: Walking the course is not part of the game of golf?

MS: Hodanje po terenu nije dio igre golfa?

Charlie: Not in my book, it isn't.

Charlie: Ne, po mom mišljenju.

MS: All right. Stay there, Charlie.

MS: U redu. Ostanite tu, Charlie.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Who has an answer for Charlie?

Tko bi odgovorio Charlie?

All right, who has an answer for Charlie?

U redu, tko bi odgovorio Charlie?

What would you say?

Što biste vi rekli?

Audience: The endurance element is a very important part of the game,

Publika: Element izdržljivosti je vrlo važan dio igre,

walking all those holes.

hodanje do svih rupa.

MS: Walking all those holes?

MS: Hodanje do svih rupa?

That's part of the game of golf? (Audience: Absolutely.)

To je dio igre golfa? (Publika: Apsolutno.)

MS: What's your name? (Audience: Warren.)

MS: Kako se vi zovete? (Publika: Warren)

MS: Warren.

MS: Warren.

Charlie, what do you say to Warren?

Charlie, što vi kažete Warrenu?

Charley: I'll stick to my original thesis.

Charley: Ostala bih kod svoje prvobitne teze.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

MS: Warren, are you a golfer?

MS: Warren, jeste li vi golfer?

Warren: I am not a golfer.

Warren: Nisam golfer.

Charley: And I am. (MS: Okay.)

Charley: A ja jesam. (MS: U redu.)

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

You know,

Znate,

it's interesting.

to je zanimljivo.

In the case, in the lower court,

U ovom slučaju, na niži sud

they brought in golfing greats

su doveli velikane golfa

to testify on this very issue.

kako bi svjedočili upravo o ovom pitanju.

Is walking the course essential to the game?

Je li hodanje po terenu bitni dio igre?

And they brought in Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer.

Doveli su Jacka Niklausa i Arnolda Palmera.

And what do you suppose they all said?

I što mislite da su svi oni rekli?

Yes. They agreed with Warren.

Da. Složili su se s Warrenom.

They said, yes, walking the course

Rekli su, da hodanje po terenu

is strenuous physical exercise.

je naporna fizička vježba.

The fatigue factor is an important part of golf.

Faktor umora važan je dio golfa.

And so it would change

I zato bi to promijenilo

the fundamental nature of the game

fundamentalnu prirodu igre

to give him the golf cart.

kada bi se dalo vozilo za golf.

Now, notice,

Sada, uočite

something interesting --

nešto zanimljivo --

Well, I should tell you about the Supreme Court first.

No, prije bih vam trebao reći o Višem sudu.

The Supreme Court

Viši sud

decided.

je odlučio.

What do you suppose they said?

Što mislite da su rekli?

They said yes,

Rekli su, da

that Casey Martin must be provided a golf cart.

Casey Martinu treba osigurati vozilo za golf.

Seven to two, they ruled.

Omjer je bio sedam prema dva.

What was interesting about their ruling

Ono što je zanimljivo u njihovom suđenju

and about the discussion we've just had

i u diskusiji koju smo upravo imali

is that the discussion about

jest da je diskusija o

the right, the justice, of the matter

pravu, pravdi u ovoj stvari

depended on

ovisila o

figuring out what is

utvrđivanju što je

the essential nature of golf.

suštinska priroda golfa.

And the Supreme Court justices

I suci Vrhovnog suda

wrestled with that question.

borili su se s tim pitanjem.

And Justice Stevens, writing for the majority,

A sudac Stevens, pišući u ime većine,

said he had read all about the history of golf,

rekao je da je pročitao sve o povijesti golfa

and the essential point of the game

i da je suština igre u tome

is to get very small ball from one place

da se vrlo mala lopta dovede od jednog mjesta

into a hole

do rupe

in as few strokes as possible,

sa što je moguće manje udaraca,

and that walking was not essential, but incidental.

a hodanje nije bilo bitno, već uzgredno.

Now, there were two dissenters,

Dvoje ih se nije slagalo,

one of whom was Justice Scalia.

jedan od njih bio je sudac Scalia.

He wouldn't have granted the cart,

On ne bi dozvolio vozilo,

a imao je vrlo zanimljiv prigovor.

and he had a very interesting dissent.

It's interesting because

Zanimljiv je stoga

što je odbacio Aristotelovsku premisu

he rejected the Aristotelian premise

underlying the majority's opinion.

u podlozi mišljenja većine.

He said it's not possible

On je rekao da nije moguće

to determine the essential nature

odrediti suštinsku prirodu

of a game like golf.

igre poput golfa.

Here's how he put it.

Ovako je to sročio.

"To say that something is essential

"Reći da je nešto suštinsko

is ordinarily to say that it is necessary

je općenito isto kao reći da je nužno

to the achievement of a certain object.

za postizanje određenog cilja.

But since it is the very nature of a game

No budući da je sama priroda igre

to have no object except amusement,

da nema cilja osim zabave,

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

that is, what distinguishes games

to jest, ono što igre razlikuje

from productive activity,

od proizvodne djelatnosti,

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

it is quite impossible to say

potpuno je nemoguće reći

that any of a game's arbitrary rules

da je bilo koje od proizvoljnih pravila igre

is essential."

suštinsko."

So there you have Justice Scalia

Dakle ovdje imate suca Scaliu

taking on the Aristotelian premise

koji napada Aristotelovsku premisu

of the majority's opinion.

mišljenja većine.

Justice Scalia's opinion

Mišljenje suca Scalie

is questionable

upitno je

for two reasons.

iz dva razloga.

Prvo, niti jedan pravi ljubitelj sporta ne bi tako govorio.

First, no real sports fan would talk that way.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

If we had thought that the rules

Da smo mislili da su pravila

of the sports we care about

sporta koji nam je drag

are merely arbitrary,

tek proizvoljna,

rather than designed to call forth

a ne osmišljena da potaknu

the virtues and the excellences

vrline i izvrsnosti

that we think are worthy of admiring,

koje smatramo vrijednim divljenja,

we wouldn't care about the outcome of the game.

mi ne bismo marili o ishodu igre.

It's also objectionable

To je također upitno

on a second ground.

na drugoj osnovi.

On the face of it,

Na prvi pogled

it seemed to be -- this debate about the golf cart --

je izgledalo da je -- ova debata o vozilu za golf --

an argument about fairness,

rasprava o pravičnosti,

what's an unfair advantage.

što je to nepoštena prednost.

But if fairness were the only thing at stake,

No, kada bi jedino pravičnost bila u pitanju,

there would have been an easy and obvious solution.

tada bi to bilo lako i očigledno rješenje.

What would it be? (Audience: Let everyone use the cart.)

Koje bi to bilo? (Publika: Svima dozvoliti vozilo.)

Let everyone ride in a golf cart

Svima dozvoliti vožnju vozilom za golf

if they want to.

ako to žele.

Then the fairness objection goes away.

Tada prigovor pravičnosti nestaje.

But letting everyone ride in a cart

No, dozvoliti svima vožnju u vozilu

would have been, I suspect,

bilo bi, pretpostavljam,

more anathema

još veća anatema

to the golfing greats

za velikane golfa

and to the PGA,

i za PGA,

even than making an exception for Casey Martin.

čak od dozvoljavanja iznimke za Casey Martina.

Why?

Zašto?

Because what was at stake

Zato jer ono što je na kocki

in the dispute over the golf cart

u prepirci o vozilu za golf

was not only the essential nature of golf,

nije samo suštinska priroda golfa,

but, relatedly, the question:

već, s tim u vezi, pitanje:

What abilities

Koje sposobnosti

are worthy

su vrijedne

of honor and recognition

poštovanja i priznanja

as athletic talents?

kao atletski talenti?

Let me put the point

Dozvolite da pojasnim

as delicately as possible:

što je moguće delikatnije:

Golfers are a little sensitive

Golferi su malo osjetljivi

about the athletic status of their game.

na atletski status svoje igre.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

After all, there's no running or jumping,

Konačno, tu nema trčanja ni skakanja,

and the ball stands still.

a loptica stoji na miru.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

So if golfing is the kind of game

Zato, da je golf vrsta igre

that can be played while riding around in a golf cart,

koja se može igrati vozeći se naokolo vozilom za golf,

it would be hard to confer

bilo bi teško

on the golfing greats

velikanima golfa pridjeljivati

the status that we confer,

status koji im pridjeljujemo,

the honor and recognition

poštovanje i priznanje

that goes to truly great athletes.

koje pripada uistinu velikim atletičarima.

That illustrates

Ovo ilustrira

that with golf,

da je u vezi golfa,

as with flutes,

kao i flauta,

it's hard to decide the question

teško odgovoriti na pitanje

of what justice requires,

što zahtijeva pravda,

without grappling with the question,

bez hvatanja u koštac s pitanjem,

"What is the essential nature

"Koja je suštinska priroda

of the activity in question,

dane aktivnosti

and what qualities,

i koje su kvalitete,

what excellences

koje izvrsnosti,

connected with that activity,

povezane s tom aktivnosti,

are worthy of honor and recognition?"

vrijedne poštovanja i priznanja?"

Let's take a final example

Uzmimo posljednji primjer

that's prominent in contemporary political debate:

istaknut u suvremenoj političkoj debati:

same-sex marriage.

istospolni brak.

There are those who favor state recognition

Postoje oni koji zagovaraju priznavanje od strane države

only of traditional marriage

samo tradicionalnog braka

between one man and one woman,

između jednog muškarca i jedne žene,

and there are those who favor state recognition

a postoje oni koji zagovaraju priznavanje

of same-sex marriage.

istospolnog braka.

How many here

Koliko vas ovdje

favor the first policy:

zagovara prvo načelo:

the state should recognize traditional marriage only?

država bi trebala priznavati samo tradicionalni brak?

And how many favor the second, same-sex marriage?

A koliko vas zagovara drugo, istospolni brak?

Now, put it this way:

Recimo to ovako:

What ways of thinking

Koji načini razmišljanja

about justice and morality

o pravdi i moralnosti

underlie the arguments we have

leže u podlozi naših rasprava

over marriage?

o braku?

The opponents of same-sex marriage say

Protivnici istospolnog braka kažu

that the purpose of marriage,

da je svrha braka

fundamentally, is procreation,

u osnovi, rađanje,

and that's what's worthy of honoring

i to je ono što je vrijedno poštovanja

and recognizing and encouraging.

i priznavanja i poticanja.

And the defenders of same-sex marriage say no,

A branitelji istospolnog braka kažu ne,

procreation is not the only purpose of marriage;

rađanje nije jedina svrha braka;

what about a lifelong, mutual, loving commitment?

što je s cijeloživotnim, međusobnim, ljubavnim zavjetom?

That's really what marriage is about.

To je ustvari bit braka.

So with flutes, with golf carts,

Dakle sa flautama, sa vozilima za golf,

and even with a fiercely contested question

a čak i sa žestoko osporavanim pitanjem

like same-sex marriage,

poput istospolnog braka,

Aristotle has a point.

Aristotel je u pravu.

Very hard to argue about justice

Vrlo je teško raspravljati o pravdi

without first arguing

bez prethodnog raspravljanja

about the purpose of social institutions

o svrsi društvenih institucija

and about what qualities are worthy

i o kvalitetama vrijednim

of honor and recognition.

poštovanja i priznanja.

So let's step back from these cases

Odmaknimo se sada od tih slučajeva

and see how they shed light

i pogledajmo kako oni pojašnjavaju

on the way we might improve, elevate,

način na koji bismo mogli poboljšati,

the terms of political discourse

unaprijediti uvjete političke debate

in the United States,

u Sjedinjenim državama

and for that matter, around the world.

i s tim u vezi, diljem svijeta.

There is a tendency to think

Postoji tendencija da se smatra

that if we engage too directly

da ako se isuviše direktno bavimo

with moral questions in politics,

moralnim pitanjima u politici,

that's a recipe for disagreement,

to je recept za nesuglasice

and for that matter, a recipe for

i s tim u vezi, recept za

intolerance and coercion.

netoleranciju i prisilu.

So better to shy away from,

Zato je bolje izbjegavati,

to ignore,

ignorirati

the moral and the religious convictions

moralna i religijska uvjerenja

that people bring to civic life.

koje ljudi donose u politički život.

It seems to me that our discussion

Meni se čini da naša diskusija

reflects the opposite,

pokazuje suprotno,

that a better way

da je bolji način

to mutual respect

za međusobno poštovanje

is to engage directly

da se direktno bavimo

with the moral convictions

moralnim uvjerenjima

citizens bring to public life,

koje građani donose u javni život,

rather than to require

radije nego da zahtijevamo

that people leave their deepest moral convictions

da ljudi ostave svoja najdublja moralna uvjerenja

outside politics

izvan politike

before they enter.

prije no što u nju ulaze.

That, it seems to me, is a way

Meni se čini da je to način

to begin to restore

da se započne obnavljanje

the art of democratic argument.

umjetnosti demokratske rasprave.

Thank you very much.

Puno vam hvala.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

Thank you.

Hvala.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

Thank you.

Hvala.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

Thank you very much.

Puno vam hvala.

Thanks. Thank you.

Hvala. Hvala vam.

Chris.

Chris.

Thanks, Chris.

Hvala, Chris.

Chris Anderson: From flutes to golf courses

Chris Anderson: Od flauta do golf terena

to same-sex marriage --

do istospolnog braka --

that was a genius link.

to je bila genijalna veza.

Now look, you're a pioneer of open education.

Vidite, vi ste pionir otvorenog obrazovanja.

Serija vaših predavanja bila je prva koja je to radila kako treba.

Your lecture series was one of the first to do it big.

What's your vision for the next phase of this?

Koja je vaša vizija za sljedeću fazu ovoga?

MS: Well, I think that it is possible.

MS: Pa, mislim da je to moguće.

In the classroom, we have arguments

U predavaonici mi diskutiramo

on some of the most fiercely held

o nekim od najdubljih

moralnih uvjerenja koja studenti imaju

moral convictions that students have

about big public questions.

o značajnim javnim pitanjima.

And I think we can do that in public life more generally.

I ja mislim da to u javnom životu općenito možemo činiti češće.

And so my real dream would be

I zato bi moj pravi san bio

to take the public television series

da uzmemo javnu televizijsku seriju

that we've created of the course --

koju samo napravili od predavanja --

it's available now, online,

ona je sada dostupna online

free for everyone anywhere in the world --

besplatno za svakog bilo gdje na svijetu --

and to see whether we can partner with institutions,

i da se pokušamo povezati sa institucijama

at universities in China, in India,

na sveučilištima u Kini, Indiji,

in Africa, around the world,

u Africi, diljem svijeta,

to try to promote

da bismo pokušali promovirati

civic education

građansko obrazovanje

and also a richer kind

i također bogatiju vrstu

of democratic debate.

demokratske debate.

CA: So you picture, at some point,

CA: Dakle vi zamišljate da biste u nekom času

live, in real time,

uživo, u realnom vremenu

you could have this kind of conversation, inviting questions,

mogli imati ovu vrstu konverzacije, potičući pitanja,

but with people from China and India joining in?

ali da vam se pridruže i ljudi iz Kine i Indije?

MS: Right. We did a little bit of it here

MS: Točno. Mi smo to malo radili ovdje

with 1,500 people in Long Beach,

s 1.500 ljudi u Long Beachu,

and we do it in a classroom at Harvard

a radili smo u predavaonici na Harvardu

with about 1,000 students.

s oko 1.000 studenata.

Wouldn't it be interesting

Ne bi li bilo zanimljivo

to take this way

uzeti taj način

of thinking and arguing,

razmišljanja i raspravljanja,

engaging seriously with big moral questions,

ozbiljno se baveći velikim moralnim pitanjima,

exploring cultural differences

istražujući kulturalne razlike

and connect through a live video hookup,

i povezati uživo preko video priključka

students in Beijing and Mumbai

studente u Beijingu i Mumbaiu

and in Cambridge, Massachusetts

i u Cambridgeu u Massachusettsu

and create a global classroom.

i stvoriti globalnu predavaonicu.

That's what I would love to do.

To je ono što bih volio raditi.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)

CA: So, I would imagine

CA: Pa, pretpostavljam

that there are a lot of people who would love to join you in that endeavor.

da ima mnogo ljudi koji bi vam se rado pridružili u tom pothvatu.

Michael Sandel. Thank you so much. (MS: Thanks so much.)

Michael Sandel. Puno vam hvala. (MS: Puno hvala.)