Damon Horowitz: Philosophy in prison

譯者: Ana Choi 審譯者: Allison Shu

Meet Tony. He's my student.

這位是東尼。他是我的學生。

He's about my age,

他大概是我的年齡，

and he's in San Quentin State Prison.

他在聖昆廷的州立監獄。

When Tony was 16 years old,

當東尼16歲時，

one day, one moment,

有一天，一個時刻，

"It was mom's gun.

「 這是媽媽的槍。

Just flash it, scare the guy. He's a punk.

只要亮一亮相，嚇嚇那傢伙。他是個小流氓。

He took some money; we'll take his money. That'll teach him.

他之前取了一些錢, 我們要拿回他的，教訓他。

Then last minute, I'm thinking, 'Can't do this. This is wrong.'

然後在最後一分鐘，我在想， 『不能這樣做，這是不對的。』

My buddy says, 'C'mon, let's do this.'

我的朋友說：『來吧，讓我們去幹。』

I say, 'Let's do this.'"

我說，『讓我們就這樣幹。』

And those three words, Tony's going to remember,

這句話，東尼會記得，

because the next thing he knows, he hears the pop.

因為接下來的事情，便是他聽到砰的一聲。

There's the punk on the ground, puddle of blood.

那個小流氓在地面上, 躺在一坑血水之中。

And that's felony murder --

接著是重罪謀殺--

25 to life, parole at 50 if you're lucky,

25年到終生，如果幸運，在50年後假釋,

and Tony's not feeling very lucky.

而東尼不感覺幸運。

So when we meet in my philosophy class in his prison

所以，當我們在獄中哲學課會面時，

and I say, "In this class, we will discuss the foundations of ethics,"

我說，「 在這課程中，我們將會討論道德的基礎，」

Tony interrupts me.

東尼打斷我,

"What are you going to teach me about right and wrong?

問 :「你要教我對與錯的什麼呢?

I know what is wrong. I have done wrong.

因為我知道什麼是錯的，我已經做錯了。

I am told every day,

我每一天，

by every face I see, every wall I face, that I am wrong.

每一個人的臉, 我對着的每一面牆, 都告訴我我錯了。

If I ever get out of here, there will always be a mark by my name.

如果我有機會離開這裡，我的名字將永遠有一個標誌。

I'm a convict; I am branded 'wrong.'

我是一個罪犯，我被烙印『 犯錯』。

What are you going to tell me about right and wrong?"

你要告訴我什麼是對與不對？ 」

So I say to Tony,

我對東尼說，

"Sorry, but it's worse than you think.

「 很抱歉，但它比你想像還更糟糕。

You think you know right and wrong?

你認為你知道對與錯?

Then can you tell me what wrong is?

那你能告訴我什麼是錯嗎?

No, don't just give me an example.

不, 不要只是給我一個例子。

I want to know about wrongness itself, the idea of wrong.

我想知道錯的本身, 錯的基礎理念。

What is that idea?

那概念究竟是什麼?

What makes something wrong?

什麼因素令東西成為錯呢?

How do we know that it's wrong? Maybe you and I disagree.

我們怎樣知道錯呢? 當你和我意見分歧。

Maybe one of us is wrong about the wrong.

也許我們其中之一是錯上加錯。

Maybe it's you, maybe it's me -- but we're not here to trade opinions;

也許是你, 也許是我--但我們在這裡不是為了要交換意見;

everyone's got an opinion.

每個人都有自己的意見。

We are here for knowledge.

我們在這裡是為了知識。

Our enemy is thoughtlessness. This is philosophy."

我們的敵人是輕率。這就是哲學。」

And something changes for Tony.

東尼像有所領悟。

"Could be I'm wrong. I'm tired of being wrong.

「可能是我錯了。我厭倦自己的錯誤。

I want to know what is wrong.

我想知道什麼是錯的。

I want to know what I know."

我想知道我知道甚麼。 」

What Tony sees in that moment is the project of philosophy,

東尼在那一刻看到的是哲學的項目，

the project that begins in wonder --

該項目開始於奇妙的驚異--

what Kant called "admiration and awe

是康德(德國古典哲學創始人) 稱為 「 對頭上的

at the starry sky above and the moral law within."

星空和之內的道德律欽佩和敬畏 」。

What can creatures like us know of such things?

我們這樣的生物可以理解像這的樣事情嗎？

It is the project that always takes us back to the condition of existence --

是這項目總是把我們帶回到了存在的條件 --

what Heidegger called "the always already there."

是海德格(德國哲學家)稱為「 已然存在」。

It is the project of questioning what we believe and why we believe it --

這學問是要質疑我們相信什麼和為什麼相信--

what Socrates called "the examined life."

蘇格拉底稱為「檢驗的人生」。

Socrates, a man wise enough to know that he knows nothing.

蘇格拉底, 一個有足夠智慧是以覺悟我們什麼都不知道的人。

Socrates died in prison,

蘇格拉底死在獄中，

his philosophy intact.

保留他完整的哲學。

So Tony starts doing his homework.

因此，東尼開始做他的作業。

He learns his whys and wherefores, his causes and correlations,

他探悉了理由和原因，來頭和關連，

his logic, his fallacies.

他的邏輯，他的謬論。

Turns out, Tony's got the philosophy muscle.

原來, 東尼具有不少哲學頭腦。

His body is in prison, but his mind is free.

他的肉身是在監獄裡，但他的精神是自由的。

Tony learns about the ontologically promiscuous,

東尼了解了本體論的混雜，

the epistemologically anxious,

知識論的焦慮，

the ethically dubious, the metaphysically ridiculous.

道德上的可疑，和形而上學的荒謬。

That's Plato, Descartes, Nietzsche

也就是柏拉圖，笛卡爾，尼采

and Bill Clinton.

和比爾柯林頓。

So when he gives me his final paper,

所以當他給我他最後的論文，

in which he argues that the categorical imperative

其中他認為康德的無上命令

is perhaps too uncompromising

或許對我們日常生活的衝突

to deal with the conflict that affects our everyday

顯得太不近情理時

and challenges me to tell him

他挑戰我要告訴他

whether therefore we are condemned to moral failure,

是否我們因此被譙讓到道德上失敗,

I say, "I don't know.

我說,「 我不知道，

Let us think about that."

讓我們去想想這個。」

Because in that moment, there's no mark by Tony's name;

因為在那一刻, 東尼的名字沒有囚犯的標記,

it's just the two of us standing there.

只是我們兩個人站在那裡。

It is not professor and convict,

這不是教授和囚徒，

it is just two minds ready to do philosophy.

而是兩個頭腦準備思考哲學。

And I say to Tony,

所以我對東尼說:

"Let's do this."

「 讓我們去幹。」

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

(掌聲)