TED2010
Michael Sandel: The lost art of democratic debate
Michael Sandel: Arta uitata a dezbaterii democratice
Filmed:
Readability: 4.2
1,412,912 views
Democratia prospera prin dezbatere publica, spune Michael Sandel -- dar, in mod rusinos, ne-am pierdut acest exercitiu. El conduce o discutie placuta si revigoranta, in timp ce TEDsterii se contrazic pe tema unui caz recent al Curtii Supreme (Turneul PGA, Inc. v. Martin) al carui rezultat releva ingredientul esential al dreptatii.
Michael Sandel - Political philosopher
Michael Sandel teaches political philosophy at Harvard, exploring some of the most hotly contested moral and political issues of our time. Full bio
Michael Sandel teaches political philosophy at Harvard, exploring some of the most hotly contested moral and political issues of our time. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:17
One thing the world needs,
0
2000
2000
Un lucru de care lumea are nevoie,
00:19
one thing this country desperately needs
1
4000
2000
un lucru de care aceasta tara are mare nevoie
00:21
is a better way
2
6000
2000
este un mod mai bun
00:23
of conducting our political debates.
3
8000
2000
de desfasurare a dezbaterilor politice.
00:25
We need to rediscover
4
10000
2000
Trebuie sa redescoperim
00:27
the lost art of democratic argument.
5
12000
3000
arta uitata a dezbaterii democratice.
00:30
(Applause)
6
15000
6000
(Aplauze)
00:36
If you think about the arguments we have,
7
21000
3000
Daca ne gandim la dezbaterile pe care le sustinem,
00:39
most of the time it's shouting matches
8
24000
2000
majoritatea sunt certuri, in care cineva incearca sa tipe mai tare
00:41
on cable television,
9
26000
2000
la emisiunile de la televizor,
00:43
ideological food fights on the floor of Congress.
10
28000
3000
imbranceli ideologice in sala Congresului.
00:48
I have a suggestion.
11
33000
2000
Eu am o sugestie.
00:50
Look at all the arguments we have these days
12
35000
3000
Haideti sa ne uitam la dezbaterile care au loc in ziua de azi
00:53
over health care,
13
38000
2000
pe tema sistemului de sanatate,
00:55
over bonuses and bailouts on Wall Street,
14
40000
3000
pe tema primelor si ajutorului financiar acordat celor de pe Wall Street,
00:58
over the gap between rich and poor,
15
43000
3000
pe tema discrepantei dintre saraci si bogati,
01:01
over affirmative action and same-sex marriage.
16
46000
3000
pe temele actiunii afirmative si casatoriilor homosexuale.
01:04
Lying just beneath the surface
17
49000
2000
Imediat in spatele
01:06
of those arguments,
18
51000
3000
acestor controverse,
01:09
with passions raging on all sides,
19
54000
3000
care starnesc pasiuni de ambele parti,
01:12
are big questions
20
57000
3000
sunt intrebari esentiale
01:15
of moral philosophy,
21
60000
2000
de filosofie morala,
01:17
big questions of justice.
22
62000
2000
intrebari esentiale despre dreptate.
01:19
But we too rarely
23
64000
2000
Dar noi prea rar
01:21
articulate and defend
24
66000
3000
explicitam, aparam
01:24
and argue about
25
69000
2000
si dezbatem
01:26
those big moral questions in our politics.
26
71000
3000
aceste importante chestiuni morale in politica noastra.
01:29
So what I would like to do today
27
74000
3000
Astfel ca ceea ce mi-as dori astazi
01:32
is have something of a discussion.
28
77000
2000
este sa purtam un fel de discutie.
01:34
First, let me take
29
79000
2000
In primul rand, ma voi referi
01:36
a famous philosopher
30
81000
2000
la un filosof renumit
01:38
who wrote about those questions
31
83000
2000
care a scris despre problematica
01:40
of justice and morality,
32
85000
2000
dreptatii si a moralitatii,
01:42
give you a very short lecture
33
87000
2000
si voi tine o scurta prelegere
01:44
on Aristotle of ancient Athens,
34
89000
3000
despre Aristotel din Atena antica,
01:47
Aristotle's theory of justice,
35
92000
2000
despre teoria lui Aristotel despre dreptate,
01:49
and then have a discussion here
36
94000
3000
urmand sa purtam o discutie
01:52
to see whether Aristotle's ideas
37
97000
2000
pentru a vedea daca ideile lui Aristotel
01:54
actually inform
38
99000
2000
sunt relevante
01:56
the way we think and argue
39
101000
2000
pentru modul in care gandim si dezbatem
01:58
about questions today.
40
103000
3000
probleme in ziua de azi.
02:01
So, are you ready for the lecture?
41
106000
3000
Sunteti gata pentru prelegere?
02:05
According to Aristotle,
42
110000
2000
Conform lui Aristotel,
02:07
justice means giving people what they deserve.
43
112000
3000
dreptatea consta in a da oamenilor ceea ce merita.
02:13
That's it; that's the lecture.
44
118000
2000
Atat. Asta a fost prelegerea.
02:15
(Laughter)
45
120000
3000
(Rasete)
02:18
Now, you may say, well, that's obvious enough.
46
123000
2000
Ati putea spune ca e destul de evident.
02:20
The real questions begin
47
125000
2000
Adevaratele intrebari apar
02:22
when it comes to arguing about
48
127000
2000
cand incepe discutia
02:24
who deserves what and why.
49
129000
3000
despre ce merita fiecare si de ce.
02:28
Take the example of flutes.
50
133000
2000
Sa vedem exemplul flautelor.
02:30
Suppose we're distributing flutes.
51
135000
3000
Presupunem ca distribuim flaute.
02:33
Who should get the best ones?
52
138000
2000
Cine ar trebui sa le primeasca pe cele mai bune?
02:35
Let's see what people --
53
140000
2000
Sa vedem --
02:37
What would you say?
54
142000
2000
Ce ati spune dumneavoastra?
02:39
Who should get the best flute?
55
144000
2000
Cine ar trebui sa primeasca cel mai bun flaut?
02:41
You can just call it out.
56
146000
2000
Puteti sa spuneti tare.
02:43
(Audience: Random.)
57
148000
2000
(Public: La intamplare.)
02:45
Michael Sandel: At random. You would do it by lottery.
58
150000
2000
Michael Sandel: La intamplare. Ati face ca la loterie.
02:47
Or by the first person to rush into the hall to get them.
59
152000
3000
Sau in functie de prima persoana care se inghesuie ca sa il primeasca.
02:51
Who else?
60
156000
2000
Altcineva?
02:53
(Audience: The best flute players.)
61
158000
2000
(Public: Cei mai buni flautisti.)
02:55
MS: The best flute players. (Audience: The worst flute players.)
62
160000
2000
MS: Cei mai buni flautisti. (Public: Cei mai slabi flautisti.)
02:57
MS: The worst flute players.
63
162000
3000
MS: Cei mai slabi flautisti.
03:00
How many say the best flute players?
64
165000
2000
Cati spun cei mai buni flautisti?
03:04
Why?
65
169000
2000
De ce?
03:07
Actually, that was Aristotle's answer too.
66
172000
3000
De fapt, acesta a fost si raspunsul lui Aristotel.
03:10
(Laughter)
67
175000
2000
(Rasete)
03:12
But here's a harder question.
68
177000
2000
Dar iata o intrebare mai grea.
03:14
Why do you think,
69
179000
2000
De ce credeti,
03:16
those of you who voted this way,
70
181000
2000
cei care ati votat asa,
03:18
that the best flutes should go to the best flute players?
71
183000
3000
ca cele mai bune flaute ar trebui date celor mai buni flautisti?
03:21
Peter: The greatest benefit to all.
72
186000
2000
Peter: Cel mai mare beneficiu pentru toti.
03:23
MS: The greatest benefit to all.
73
188000
2000
MS: Cel mai mare beneficiu pentru toti.
03:25
We'll hear better music
74
190000
2000
Vom asculta muzica mai buna
03:27
if the best flutes should go to the best flute players.
75
192000
3000
daca cele mai bune flaute revin celor mai buni flautisti.
03:30
That's Peter? (Audience: Peter.)
76
195000
2000
A fost... Peter? (Public: Peter.)
03:32
MS: All right.
77
197000
2000
MS: Bine.
03:35
Well, it's a good reason.
78
200000
2000
E un motiv bun.
03:37
We'll all be better off if good music is played
79
202000
2000
Cu totii am fi mai castigati daca s-ar canta muzica buna
03:39
rather than terrible music.
80
204000
3000
si nu muzica proasta.
03:43
But Peter,
81
208000
2000
Dar Peter,
03:45
Aristotle doesn't agree with you that that's the reason.
82
210000
3000
Aristotel nu e de acord cu tine ca acesta este motivul.
03:48
That's all right.
83
213000
2000
E in regula.
03:50
Aristotle had a different reason
84
215000
2000
Aristotel a avut un alt motiv
03:52
for saying the best flutes should go to the best flute players.
85
217000
3000
sa spuna ca cele mai bune flaute ar trebui date celor mai buni flautisti.
03:55
He said,
86
220000
2000
El a spus
03:57
that's what flutes are for --
87
222000
2000
ca pentru asta e facut flautul --
03:59
to be played well.
88
224000
3000
sa se cante frumos la el.
04:02
He says that to reason about
89
227000
2000
El spune ca pentru a discuta
04:04
just distribution of a thing,
90
229000
3000
doar despre distribuirea a unui bun,
04:07
we have to reason about,
91
232000
3000
trebuie sa ne gandim,
04:10
and sometimes argue about,
92
235000
2000
si uneori chiar sa dezbatem,
04:12
the purpose of the thing,
93
237000
2000
scopului acelui lucru,
04:14
or the social activity --
94
239000
2000
sau al activitatii sociale,
04:16
in this case, musical performance.
95
241000
2000
care in acest caz este cantatul.
04:18
And the point, the essential nature,
96
243000
2000
Iar scopul, natura esentiala,
04:20
of musical performance
97
245000
2000
a cantatului
04:22
is to produce excellent music.
98
247000
2000
este de a produce muzica excelenta.
04:24
It'll be a happy byproduct
99
249000
2000
Va fi un plus fericit
04:26
that we'll all benefit.
100
251000
3000
de care vom beneficia cu totii.
04:30
But when we think about justice,
101
255000
3000
Dar cand ne gandim la dreptate,
04:33
Aristotle says,
102
258000
2000
spune Aristotel,
04:35
what we really need to think about
103
260000
2000
ceea ce trebuie de fapt sa ne preocupe
04:37
is the essential nature of the activity in question
104
262000
3000
este natura esentiala a activitatii respective
04:41
and the qualities that are worth
105
266000
3000
si calitatile care sunt demne
04:44
honoring and admiring and recognizing.
106
269000
3000
de respectat, de admirat si de recunoscut.
04:47
One of the reasons
107
272000
2000
Unul din motivele pentru care
04:49
that the best flute players should get the best flutes
108
274000
2000
cei mai buni flautisti ar trebui sa primeasca cele mai bune flaute
04:51
is that musical performance
109
276000
2000
este acela ca ceea ce canta
04:53
is not only to make the rest of us happy,
110
278000
2000
nu are doar scopul de a ne face fericiti pe noi ceilalti,
04:55
but to honor
111
280000
2000
ci sa respecte
04:57
and recognize
112
282000
2000
si sa afirme
04:59
the excellence
113
284000
2000
excelenta
05:01
of the best musicians.
114
286000
2000
celor mai buni muzicieni.
05:03
Now, flutes may seem ... the distribution of flutes
115
288000
3000
Acum, flautele pot parea ... distributia flautelor
05:06
may seem a trivial case.
116
291000
3000
poate parea un caz banal.
05:09
Let's take a contemporary example
117
294000
2000
Sa luam un exemplu actual
05:11
of the dispute about justice.
118
296000
3000
de disputa pe tema dreptatii.
05:14
It had to do with golf.
119
299000
2000
A avut legatura cu golful.
05:16
Casey Martin -- a few years ago,
120
301000
2000
Casey Martin -- acum cativa ani,
05:18
Casey Martin --
121
303000
2000
Casey Martin --
05:20
did any of you hear about him?
122
305000
2000
a auzit cineva de el?
05:22
He was a very good golfer,
123
307000
2000
Era un jucator foarte bun de golf,
05:24
but he had a disability.
124
309000
2000
dar avea o dizabilitate fizica,
05:26
He had a bad leg, a circulatory problem,
125
311000
3000
avea un picior afectat de o problema de circulatie,
05:29
that made it very painful
126
314000
2000
care ii provoca multa durere
05:31
for him to walk the course.
127
316000
3000
cand se plimba pe teren.
05:34
In fact, it carried risk of injury.
128
319000
3000
De fapt, exista chiar riscul sa se raneasca.
05:38
He asked the PGA,
129
323000
2000
El a cerut PGA,
05:40
the Professional Golfers' Association,
130
325000
2000
Asociatiei jucatorilor de Golf Profesionisti,
05:42
for permission to use a golf cart
131
327000
3000
permisiunea sa foloseasca o masina de golf
05:45
in the PGA tournaments.
132
330000
2000
in turneele PGA.
05:47
They said, "No.
133
332000
2000
Ei au spus "Nu.
05:49
Now that would give you an unfair advantage."
134
334000
2000
Asta ti-ar acorda un avantaj nedrept."
05:51
He sued,
135
336000
2000
El i-a dat in judecata,
05:53
and his case went all the way
136
338000
2000
iar cazul lui a ajuns
05:55
to the Supreme Court, believe it or not,
137
340000
2000
pana la Curtea Suprema, daca va vine sa credeti,
05:57
the case over the golf cart,
138
342000
3000
cazul pentru masina de golf.
06:00
because the law says
139
345000
2000
Pentru ca legea spune
06:02
that the disabled
140
347000
2000
ca persoanele cu dizabilitati
06:04
must be accommodated,
141
349000
3000
trebuie ajutate,
06:07
provided the accommodation does not
142
352000
3000
cu conditia ca ajutorul
06:10
change the essential nature
143
355000
3000
sa nu schimbe natura esentiala
06:13
of the activity.
144
358000
2000
a activitatii.
06:15
He says, "I'm a great golfer.
145
360000
2000
El a spus "Sunt un jucator de golf bun.
06:17
I want to compete.
146
362000
2000
Vreau sa concurez.
06:19
But I need a golf cart
147
364000
2000
Dar am nevoie de o masina
06:21
to get from one hole to the next."
148
366000
2000
sa ajung de la o gaura la alta."
06:23
Suppose you were
149
368000
2000
Presupunem ca erati
06:25
on the Supreme Court.
150
370000
2000
la Curtea Suprema.
06:27
Suppose you were deciding
151
372000
2000
Presupunem ca trebuia sa decideti
06:29
the justice of this case.
152
374000
3000
asupra dreptatii in acest caz.
06:32
How many here would say
153
377000
2000
Cati i-ar acorda
06:34
that Casey Martin does have a right to use a golf cart?
154
379000
3000
lui Casey Martin dreptul de a folosi masina de golf?
06:37
And how many say, no, he doesn't?
155
382000
3000
Si cati ar spune ca nu are acest drept?
06:41
All right, let's take a poll, show of hands.
156
386000
2000
Bine, sa facem un sondaj, un vot deschis.
06:43
How many would rule in favor of Casey Martin?
157
388000
2000
Cati ar vota in favoarea lui Casey Martin?
06:47
And how many would not? How many would say he doesn't?
158
392000
3000
Si cati nu? Cati ar spune ca nu are dreptul?
06:50
All right, we have a good division of opinion here.
159
395000
3000
Bine, avem o divergenta clara de opinii aici.
06:54
Someone who would not
160
399000
2000
Pentru cineva care
06:56
grant Casey Martin the right to a golf cart,
161
401000
2000
nu i-ar da lui Casey Martin dreptul la o masina de golf,
06:58
what would be your reason?
162
403000
2000
care ar fi motivul?
07:00
Raise your hand, and we'll try to get you a microphone.
163
405000
2000
Ridicati mana si vom incerca sa va aducem un microfon.
07:02
What would be your reason?
164
407000
2000
Care ar fi motivul dumneavoastra?
07:05
(Audience: It'd be an unfair advantage.)
165
410000
2000
(Public: Ar fi un avantaj nedrept.)
07:07
MS: It would be an unfair advantage
166
412000
3000
MS: Ar fi un avantaj nedrept
07:10
if he gets to ride in a golf cart.
167
415000
2000
daca ar putea sa se plimbe cu masina.
07:12
All right, those of you,
168
417000
2000
Asadar, aceia dintre dumneavoastra,
07:14
I imagine most of you who would not give him the golf cart
169
419000
3000
majoritatea, imi imaginez, a celor care nu i-ar acorda masina de golf
07:17
worry about an unfair advantage.
170
422000
2000
se tem de acordarea unui avantaj nedrept.
07:19
What about those of you who say
171
424000
2000
Dar cei care spun
07:21
he should be given a golf cart?
172
426000
2000
ca ar trebui sa i se acorde o masina de golf?
07:23
How would you answer the objection?
173
428000
2000
Cum ati raspunde obiectiei?
07:25
Yes, all right.
174
430000
2000
Da, bine.
07:27
Audience: The cart's not part of the game.
175
432000
3000
Public: Masina nu face parte din joc.
07:30
MS: What's your name? (Audience: Charlie.)
176
435000
3000
MS: Cum te numesti? (Public: Charlie.)
07:33
MS: Charlie says --
177
438000
3000
MS: Charlie spune --
07:36
We'll get Charlie a microphone in case someone wants to reply.
178
441000
2000
Ii aducem lui Charlie un microfon in cazul in care vrea sa-i raspunda cineva.
07:38
Tell us, Charlie,
179
443000
2000
Spune-ne, Charlie,
07:40
why would you say he should be able to use a golf cart?
180
445000
3000
de ce ai spune ca ar trebui sa poata folosi masina de golf?
07:43
Charlie: The cart's not part of the game.
181
448000
3000
Charlie: Masina nu face parte din joc.
07:47
MS: But what about walking from hole to hole?
182
452000
3000
MS: Dar cum ramane cu mersul de la o gaura la alta?
07:50
Charlie: It doesn't matter; it's not part of the game.
183
455000
3000
Charlie: Nu conteaza, nu face parte din joc.
07:53
MS: Walking the course is not part of the game of golf?
184
458000
3000
MS: Mersul pe teren nu face parte din jocul de golf?
07:57
Charlie: Not in my book, it isn't.
185
462000
2000
Charlie: In opinia mea, nu.
07:59
MS: All right. Stay there, Charlie.
186
464000
2000
MS: Bine, stai acolo, Charlie.
08:01
(Laughter)
187
466000
2000
(Rasete)
08:03
Who has an answer for Charlie?
188
468000
3000
Cine are un raspuns pentru Charlie?
08:06
All right, who has an answer for Charlie?
189
471000
2000
Bine, cine are un raspuns pentru Charlie?
08:08
What would you say?
190
473000
2000
Ce ati spune dumneavoastra?
08:10
Audience: The endurance element is a very important part of the game,
191
475000
3000
Public: Elementul rezistentei este o parte foarte importanta a jocului,
08:13
walking all those holes.
192
478000
2000
mersul pana la toate acele gauri.
08:15
MS: Walking all those holes?
193
480000
2000
MS: Parcurgerea distantei dintre gauri?
08:17
That's part of the game of golf? (Audience: Absolutely.)
194
482000
3000
Asta face parte din jocul de golf? (Public: Absolut.)
08:20
MS: What's your name? (Audience: Warren.)
195
485000
2000
MS: Cum te numesti? (Public: Warren.)
08:22
MS: Warren.
196
487000
2000
MS: Warren.
08:25
Charlie, what do you say to Warren?
197
490000
2000
Charlie, ce ii raspunzi lui Warren?
08:29
Charley: I'll stick to my original thesis.
198
494000
2000
Charlie: Raman la argumentul initial.
08:31
(Laughter)
199
496000
6000
(Rasete)
08:37
MS: Warren, are you a golfer?
200
502000
2000
MS: Warren, joci golf?
08:39
Warren: I am not a golfer.
201
504000
2000
Warren: Nu joc golf.
08:41
Charley: And I am. (MS: Okay.)
202
506000
2000
Charley: Eu da. (MS: Bine.)
08:43
(Laughter)
203
508000
2000
(Rasete)
08:45
(Applause)
204
510000
4000
(Aplauze)
08:49
You know,
205
514000
2000
Stiti,
08:51
it's interesting.
206
516000
2000
e interesant.
08:55
In the case, in the lower court,
207
520000
2000
In acest caz, tribunalul de judecata,
08:57
they brought in golfing greats
208
522000
3000
au adus mari nume din golf
09:00
to testify on this very issue.
209
525000
3000
care sa depuna marturie tocmai in aceasta privinta.
09:04
Is walking the course essential to the game?
210
529000
3000
Este mersul pe traseu esential pentru joc?
09:07
And they brought in Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer.
211
532000
3000
Si l-au adus pe Jack Nicklaus si pe Arnold Palmer
09:10
And what do you suppose they all said?
212
535000
2000
Si ce credeti ca au spus toti?
09:12
Yes. They agreed with Warren.
213
537000
3000
Da. Au fost de acord cu Warren.
09:15
They said, yes, walking the course
214
540000
2000
Au spus ca da, mersul pe traseu
09:17
is strenuous physical exercise.
215
542000
2000
este un exercitiu fizic solicitant.
09:19
The fatigue factor is an important part of golf.
216
544000
3000
Factorul de oboseala este o parte importanta din golf.
09:22
And so it would change
217
547000
2000
Si astfel ar schimba
09:24
the fundamental nature of the game
218
549000
3000
fundamental esenta jocului.
09:27
to give him the golf cart.
219
552000
2000
daca i s-ar da dreptul la o masina de golf.
09:29
Now, notice,
220
554000
2000
Acum, vedeti,
09:31
something interesting --
221
556000
2000
ceva interesant --
09:33
Well, I should tell you about the Supreme Court first.
222
558000
2000
Ar trebui sa va spun intai despre Curtea Suprema.
09:35
The Supreme Court
223
560000
2000
Curtea suprema
09:37
decided.
224
562000
2000
a decis
09:39
What do you suppose they said?
225
564000
3000
Ce credeti ca au spus?
09:42
They said yes,
226
567000
2000
Au spus ca da,
09:44
that Casey Martin must be provided a golf cart.
227
569000
3000
Casey Martin trebuie sa aiba dreptul la o masina de golf.
09:47
Seven to two, they ruled.
228
572000
2000
Au decis printr-un vot de sapte la doi.
09:50
What was interesting about their ruling
229
575000
3000
Ceea ce a fost interesant cu privire la decizia lor
09:54
and about the discussion we've just had
230
579000
3000
si la discutia pe care tocmai am avut-o
09:58
is that the discussion about
231
583000
2000
a fost faptul ca problema
10:00
the right, the justice, of the matter
232
585000
2000
a ceea ce e bine, asupra dreptatii
10:02
depended on
233
587000
2000
depindea de
10:04
figuring out what is
234
589000
3000
identificarea
10:07
the essential nature of golf.
235
592000
3000
esentei jocului de golf.
10:10
And the Supreme Court justices
236
595000
2000
Iar judecatorii Curtii Supreme
10:12
wrestled with that question.
237
597000
2000
s-au luptat cu aceasta problema
10:14
And Justice Stevens, writing for the majority,
238
599000
2000
Iar judecatorul Stevens, semnand in numele majoritatii,
10:16
said he had read all about the history of golf,
239
601000
3000
a declarat ca a citit totul despre istoria golfului,
10:21
and the essential point of the game
240
606000
3000
iar esenta jocului
10:24
is to get very small ball from one place
241
609000
2000
este de a trimite o minge foarte mica dintr-un loc
10:26
into a hole
242
611000
2000
intr-o gaura
10:28
in as few strokes as possible,
243
613000
3000
in cat mai putine lovituri posibil,
10:31
and that walking was not essential, but incidental.
244
616000
2000
iar mersul nu era esential, ci o chestiune de conjunctura.
10:33
Now, there were two dissenters,
245
618000
2000
Erau totusi doi oponenti,
10:35
one of whom was Justice Scalia.
246
620000
3000
printre care se afla Judecatorul Scalia.
10:40
He wouldn't have granted the cart,
247
625000
3000
El nu ar fi acordat dreptul la masina,
10:43
and he had a very interesting dissent.
248
628000
2000
si a avut o justificare foarte interesanta.
10:45
It's interesting because
249
630000
2000
E interesanta pentru ca
10:47
he rejected the Aristotelian premise
250
632000
3000
a respins premisa lui Aristotel
10:50
underlying the majority's opinion.
251
635000
2000
pe care se baza opinia majoritatii.
10:52
He said it's not possible
252
637000
3000
El a afirmat ca e imposibil
10:55
to determine the essential nature
253
640000
3000
sa stabilesti natura esentiala
10:58
of a game like golf.
254
643000
2000
a unui joc precum golful.
11:00
Here's how he put it.
255
645000
2000
Iata cum a pus el problema.
11:02
"To say that something is essential
256
647000
2000
"A sustine ca un lucru este esential
11:04
is ordinarily to say that it is necessary
257
649000
2000
inseamna de regula ca acel lucru este necesar
11:06
to the achievement of a certain object.
258
651000
3000
pentru implinirea unui anumit scop.
11:09
But since it is the very nature of a game
259
654000
2000
Dar, din moment ce este tocmai ideea jocului
11:11
to have no object except amusement,
260
656000
3000
sa nu aiba alt scop decat distractia,
11:15
(Laughter)
261
660000
4000
(Rasete)
11:19
that is, what distinguishes games
262
664000
2000
adica, tocmai ceea ce deosebeste jocurile
11:21
from productive activity,
263
666000
2000
de activitatea productiva,
11:23
(Laughter)
264
668000
3000
(Rasete)
11:26
it is quite impossible to say
265
671000
2000
este imposibil sa sustii
11:28
that any of a game's arbitrary rules
266
673000
3000
ca oricare dintre regulile arbitrare ale jocului
11:31
is essential."
267
676000
2000
este esentiala."
11:33
So there you have Justice Scalia
268
678000
2000
Asadar iata-l pe judecatorul Scalia
11:35
taking on the Aristotelian premise
269
680000
3000
contestand premisa lui Aristotel
11:38
of the majority's opinion.
270
683000
3000
a opiniei majoritatii.
11:41
Justice Scalia's opinion
271
686000
3000
Opinia judecatorului Scalia
11:44
is questionable
272
689000
2000
este discutabila
11:46
for two reasons.
273
691000
2000
din doua motive.
11:48
First, no real sports fan would talk that way.
274
693000
3000
In primul rand, niciun iubitor de sport nu ar vorbi asa.
11:51
(Laughter)
275
696000
2000
(Rasete)
11:53
If we had thought that the rules
276
698000
2000
Daca am crede ca regulile
11:55
of the sports we care about
277
700000
2000
sporturilor la care tinem
11:57
are merely arbitrary,
278
702000
2000
sunt pur si simplu arbitrare,
11:59
rather than designed to call forth
279
704000
3000
in loc sa fie concepute pentru a evidentia
12:02
the virtues and the excellences
280
707000
3000
virtutile si excelenta
12:05
that we think are worthy of admiring,
281
710000
2000
pe care le credem demne de admirat,
12:07
we wouldn't care about the outcome of the game.
282
712000
3000
nu ne-ar mai pasa de rezultatul jocului.
12:10
It's also objectionable
283
715000
3000
Este de asemenea contestabila
12:13
on a second ground.
284
718000
2000
dintr-un al doilea motiv.
12:15
On the face of it,
285
720000
2000
La suprafata,
12:17
it seemed to be -- this debate about the golf cart --
286
722000
3000
parea -- aceasta dezbatere despre masina de golf --
12:20
an argument about fairness,
287
725000
3000
o dezbatere pe tema corectitudinii,
12:23
what's an unfair advantage.
288
728000
3000
despre ce anume constituie un avantaj nedrept.
12:27
But if fairness were the only thing at stake,
289
732000
3000
Dar daca corectitudinea ar fi fost singura miza,
12:30
there would have been an easy and obvious solution.
290
735000
3000
ar fi existat o solutie simpla si evidenta.
12:33
What would it be? (Audience: Let everyone use the cart.)
291
738000
2000
Care ar fi fost aceasta? (Public: Sa foloseasca toti masina.)
12:35
Let everyone ride in a golf cart
292
740000
3000
Sa mearga toti intr-o masina de golf
12:38
if they want to.
293
743000
2000
daca doresc.
12:40
Then the fairness objection goes away.
294
745000
3000
Atunci problema corectitudinii dispare.
12:43
But letting everyone ride in a cart
295
748000
3000
Dar a lasa pe toata lumea sa mearga cu masina,
12:46
would have been, I suspect,
296
751000
2000
ar fi fost, cred,
12:48
more anathema
297
753000
2000
un blestem mai mare
12:50
to the golfing greats
298
755000
2000
pentru mai-marii golfului
12:52
and to the PGA,
299
757000
2000
si pentru PGA,
12:54
even than making an exception for Casey Martin.
300
759000
2000
decat o concesie exceptionala pentru Casey Martin.
12:56
Why?
301
761000
2000
De ce?
12:58
Because what was at stake
302
763000
2000
Pentru ca miza
13:00
in the dispute over the golf cart
303
765000
3000
in dezbaterea despre masina de golf
13:03
was not only the essential nature of golf,
304
768000
3000
nu a fost doar natura esentiala a golfului,
13:06
but, relatedly, the question:
305
771000
3000
ci problema implicita
13:09
What abilities
306
774000
3000
referitoare la abilitatile
13:12
are worthy
307
777000
2000
care merita
13:14
of honor and recognition
308
779000
2000
respect si recunoastere
13:16
as athletic talents?
309
781000
3000
ca talent atletic?
13:19
Let me put the point
310
784000
2000
Sa exprim ideea
13:21
as delicately as possible:
311
786000
3000
pe cat de delicat posibil:
13:24
Golfers are a little sensitive
312
789000
2000
jucatorii de golf sunt putin sensibili
13:26
about the athletic status of their game.
313
791000
3000
in legatura cu statutul atletic al jocului lor.
13:29
(Laughter)
314
794000
5000
(Rasete)
13:35
After all, there's no running or jumping,
315
800000
3000
La urma urmei, nu exista alergari si sarituri,
13:38
and the ball stands still.
316
803000
3000
iar mingea sta pe loc.
13:41
(Laughter)
317
806000
3000
(Rasete)
13:44
So if golfing is the kind of game
318
809000
3000
Astfel ca, daca golful este genul de joc
13:47
that can be played while riding around in a golf cart,
319
812000
3000
care poate fi practicat in timp ce te plimbi cu masina de golf
13:50
it would be hard to confer
320
815000
3000
ar fi greu sa acordam
13:53
on the golfing greats
321
818000
2000
personalitatilor din golf
13:55
the status that we confer,
322
820000
2000
statutul pe care il acordam,
13:57
the honor and recognition
323
822000
2000
acelasi respect si aceeasi recunoastere
13:59
that goes to truly great athletes.
324
824000
3000
care revin sportivilor cu adevarat mari.
14:03
That illustrates
325
828000
3000
Aceasta ilustreaza
14:06
that with golf,
326
831000
3000
ca in golf,
14:09
as with flutes,
327
834000
2000
ca si pentru flaute,
14:11
it's hard to decide the question
328
836000
3000
e dificil sa decizi asupra
14:14
of what justice requires,
329
839000
3000
a ceea ce este necesar pentru infaptuirea dreptatii
14:17
without grappling with the question,
330
842000
2000
fara sa te lupti cu problema
14:19
"What is the essential nature
331
844000
2000
"Care este natura esentiala
14:21
of the activity in question,
332
846000
2000
a activitatii in cauza,
14:23
and what qualities,
333
848000
3000
si ce calitati,
14:26
what excellences
334
851000
2000
ce virtuti
14:28
connected with that activity,
335
853000
2000
legate de acea activitate
14:30
are worthy of honor and recognition?"
336
855000
3000
sunt demne de respect si recunoastere?"
14:34
Let's take a final example
337
859000
2000
Sa luam un exemplu final
14:36
that's prominent in contemporary political debate:
338
861000
3000
care se remarca in dezbaterea politica actuala:
14:39
same-sex marriage.
339
864000
2000
casatoria persoanelor de acelasi sex.
14:43
There are those who favor state recognition
340
868000
3000
Exista aceia care sunt in favoarea recunoasterii de catre stat
14:46
only of traditional marriage
341
871000
2000
numai a casatoriei traditionale
14:48
between one man and one woman,
342
873000
3000
dintre un barbat si o femeie,
14:51
and there are those who favor state recognition
343
876000
2000
si exista aceia care sunt in favoarea recunoasterii de catre stat
14:53
of same-sex marriage.
344
878000
2000
a casatoriei persoanelor de acelasi sex.
14:55
How many here
345
880000
2000
Cati de aici
14:57
favor the first policy:
346
882000
2000
favorizeaza prima politica:
14:59
the state should recognize traditional marriage only?
347
884000
3000
statul ar trebui sa recunoasca doar casatoria traditionala?
15:04
And how many favor the second, same-sex marriage?
348
889000
3000
Si cati o favorizeaza pe a doua, casatoria intre persoane de acelasi sex?
15:08
Now, put it this way:
349
893000
3000
Acum, ganditi-va asa,
15:11
What ways of thinking
350
896000
2000
ce moduri de a gandi
15:13
about justice and morality
351
898000
2000
despre dreptate si moralitate
15:15
underlie the arguments we have
352
900000
2000
fundamenteaza dezbaterile pe care le avem
15:17
over marriage?
353
902000
2000
referitoare la casatorie?
15:19
The opponents of same-sex marriage say
354
904000
3000
Opozantii casatoriei intre persoanele de acelasi sex sustin
15:22
that the purpose of marriage,
355
907000
2000
ca scopul casatoriei
15:24
fundamentally, is procreation,
356
909000
2000
este, in esenta, procrearea,
15:26
and that's what's worthy of honoring
357
911000
2000
iar aceasta merita respectata
15:28
and recognizing and encouraging.
358
913000
3000
si recunoscuta si incurajata.
15:31
And the defenders of same-sex marriage say no,
359
916000
3000
Iar sustinatorii casatoriei intre persoanele de acelasi sex spun ca nu,
15:34
procreation is not the only purpose of marriage;
360
919000
3000
procrearea nu este singurul scop al casatoriei.
15:38
what about a lifelong, mutual, loving commitment?
361
923000
3000
Cum ramane cu angajamentul de a iubi si a fi iubit, luat pe viata?
15:41
That's really what marriage is about.
362
926000
3000
La asta se refera de fapt casatoria.
15:45
So with flutes, with golf carts,
363
930000
3000
Asadar in privinta flautelor, a masinilor de golf,
15:48
and even with a fiercely contested question
364
933000
3000
si chiar in cazul unei probleme intens contestate
15:51
like same-sex marriage,
365
936000
3000
precum casatoria intre persoane de acelasi sex,
15:54
Aristotle has a point.
366
939000
3000
Aristotel are dreptate.
15:57
Very hard to argue about justice
367
942000
2000
Este foarte greu sa dezbatem dreptatea
15:59
without first arguing
368
944000
3000
fara sa dezbatem mai intai
16:02
about the purpose of social institutions
369
947000
3000
scopul institutiilor sociale
16:05
and about what qualities are worthy
370
950000
2000
si calitatile care sunt demne
16:07
of honor and recognition.
371
952000
3000
de respect si recunoastere.
16:10
So let's step back from these cases
372
955000
3000
Acum sa facem un pas inapoi de la aceste cazuri
16:13
and see how they shed light
373
958000
3000
si sa vedem cum ne pun ele in lumina
16:16
on the way we might improve, elevate,
374
961000
3000
felul in care putem sa imbunatatim, sa ridicam nivelul
16:19
the terms of political discourse
375
964000
3000
conditiilor discursului politic
16:22
in the United States,
376
967000
2000
din Statele Unite,
16:24
and for that matter, around the world.
377
969000
3000
si din toata lumea, de fapt.
16:27
There is a tendency to think
378
972000
2000
Exista o tendinta de a crede
16:29
that if we engage too directly
379
974000
3000
ca daca ne implicam prea direct
16:32
with moral questions in politics,
380
977000
2000
in probleme de ordin moral atunci cand dezbatem politica,
16:34
that's a recipe for disagreement,
381
979000
2000
ajungem sigur sa ne contrazicem,
16:36
and for that matter, a recipe for
382
981000
2000
si, implicit,
16:38
intolerance and coercion.
383
983000
2000
sa fim intoleranti si sa constrangem.
16:40
So better to shy away from,
384
985000
2000
Deci e mai bine sa nu ne bagam,
16:42
to ignore,
385
987000
2000
sa ignoram
16:44
the moral and the religious convictions
386
989000
2000
convingerile morale si religioase
16:46
that people bring to civic life.
387
991000
2000
pe care oamenii le aduc in viata publica.
16:48
It seems to me that our discussion
388
993000
3000
Mie mi se pare ca discutia noastra
16:51
reflects the opposite,
389
996000
2000
reflecta contrariul,
16:53
that a better way
390
998000
3000
si anume ca o cale mai buna
16:56
to mutual respect
391
1001000
2000
catre respect reciproc
16:58
is to engage directly
392
1003000
2000
este sa vorbim direct
17:00
with the moral convictions
393
1005000
2000
despre convingerile morale
17:02
citizens bring to public life,
394
1007000
3000
pe care cetatenii le aduc in viata publica,
17:05
rather than to require
395
1010000
2000
in loc sa ne asteptam
17:07
that people leave their deepest moral convictions
396
1012000
3000
ca oamenii sa isi lase cele mai profunde convingeri morale
17:10
outside politics
397
1015000
2000
in afara politicii
17:12
before they enter.
398
1017000
2000
inainte sa intre in dezbatere.
17:14
That, it seems to me, is a way
399
1019000
2000
Acesta, dupa parerea mea, este o cale
17:16
to begin to restore
400
1021000
2000
de a incepe sa reinstituim
17:18
the art of democratic argument.
401
1023000
2000
arta dezbaterii democratice.
17:20
Thank you very much.
402
1025000
2000
Va multumesc foarte mult.
17:22
(Applause)
403
1027000
3000
(Aplauze)
17:25
Thank you.
404
1030000
2000
Va multumesc.
17:27
(Applause)
405
1032000
3000
(Aplauze)
17:30
Thank you.
406
1035000
2000
Multumesc.
17:32
(Applause)
407
1037000
2000
(Aplauze)
17:34
Thank you very much.
408
1039000
2000
Multumesc foarte mult.
17:36
Thanks. Thank you.
409
1041000
2000
Multumesc. Va multumesc.
17:39
Chris.
410
1044000
2000
Chris.
17:41
Thanks, Chris.
411
1046000
2000
Multumesc, Chris.
17:44
Chris Anderson: From flutes to golf courses
412
1049000
2000
Chris Anderson: De la flaute la terenuri de golf
17:46
to same-sex marriage --
413
1051000
2000
si la casatorii intre persoane de acelasi sex.
17:48
that was a genius link.
414
1053000
2000
Asta a fost o conexiune geniala.
17:50
Now look, you're a pioneer of open education.
415
1055000
3000
Acum, tu esti un pionier al educatiei deschise.
17:53
Your lecture series was one of the first to do it big.
416
1058000
2000
Seria ta de prelegeri a fost printre primele care au avut succes.
17:55
What's your vision for the next phase of this?
417
1060000
3000
Cum vezi tu urmatoarea faza a acestui proiect?
17:58
MS: Well, I think that it is possible.
418
1063000
3000
MS: Pai, cred ca e posibil.
18:01
In the classroom, we have arguments
419
1066000
3000
In sala de clasa, avem dezbateri
18:04
on some of the most fiercely held
420
1069000
3000
despre unele dintre cele mai categorice
18:07
moral convictions that students have
421
1072000
2000
convingeri morale ale studentilor
18:09
about big public questions.
422
1074000
2000
in legatura cu mari chestiuni publice.
18:11
And I think we can do that in public life more generally.
423
1076000
3000
Si cred ca putem face asta in viata publica la o scara mai larga.
18:14
And so my real dream would be
424
1079000
2000
Asadar adevaratul meu vis ar fi
18:16
to take the public television series
425
1081000
2000
sa luam serialul de televiziune publica
18:18
that we've created of the course --
426
1083000
2000
pe care l-am creat pentru curs --
18:20
it's available now, online,
427
1085000
2000
este acum disponibil online
18:22
free for everyone anywhere in the world --
428
1087000
2000
pentru oricine, oriunde in lume --
18:24
and to see whether we can partner with institutions,
429
1089000
3000
si sa vedem daca putem colabora cu institutii,
18:27
at universities in China, in India,
430
1092000
2000
la universitatile din China, din India,
18:29
in Africa, around the world,
431
1094000
2000
din Africa, din jurul lumii,
18:31
to try to promote
432
1096000
3000
pentru a incerca sa promovam
18:34
civic education
433
1099000
2000
educatia civica
18:36
and also a richer kind
434
1101000
2000
si de asemenea o forma mai utila
18:38
of democratic debate.
435
1103000
2000
de dezbatere democratica.
18:41
CA: So you picture, at some point,
436
1106000
2000
CA: Deci iti imaginezi, la un moment dat,
18:43
live, in real time,
437
1108000
2000
in direct,
18:45
you could have this kind of conversation, inviting questions,
438
1110000
3000
ca ai putea avea acest gen de dialog, intrebari incitante,
18:48
but with people from China and India joining in?
439
1113000
3000
dar cu oameni din China si India care sa se alature discutiei?
18:51
MS: Right. We did a little bit of it here
440
1116000
2000
MS: Exact. Am facut o parte mica aici
18:53
with 1,500 people in Long Beach,
441
1118000
2000
cu 1500 de oameni, in Long Beach,
18:55
and we do it in a classroom at Harvard
442
1120000
3000
si o putem face intr-o clasa la Harvard
18:58
with about 1,000 students.
443
1123000
2000
cu aproximativ 1000 de studenti.
19:00
Wouldn't it be interesting
444
1125000
2000
N-ar fi interesant
19:02
to take this way
445
1127000
3000
sa mergem pe aceasta cale
19:05
of thinking and arguing,
446
1130000
2000
de a gandi si a dezbate,
19:07
engaging seriously with big moral questions,
447
1132000
3000
de a confrunta in mod serios mari probleme de ordin moral,
19:10
exploring cultural differences
448
1135000
2000
de a explora diferentele culturale
19:12
and connect through a live video hookup,
449
1137000
3000
si de pune in legatura printr-o conexiune video in direct,
19:16
students in Beijing and Mumbai
450
1141000
2000
studenti din Beijing si Mumbai
19:18
and in Cambridge, Massachusetts
451
1143000
2000
si din Cambridge, Massachusetts
19:20
and create a global classroom.
452
1145000
2000
si sa cream o sala de clasa globala?
19:22
That's what I would love to do.
453
1147000
2000
Asta mi-as dori sa realizez.
19:24
(Applause)
454
1149000
4000
(Aplauze)
19:28
CA: So, I would imagine
455
1153000
2000
CA: Ma gandesc
19:30
that there are a lot of people who would love to join you in that endeavor.
456
1155000
3000
ca sunt multi oameni care ar fi incantati sa se alature eforturilor tale.
19:33
Michael Sandel. Thank you so much. (MS: Thanks so much.)
457
1158000
2000
Michael Sandel. Multumesc foarte mult. (MS: Va multumesc mult.)
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Michael Sandel - Political philosopherMichael Sandel teaches political philosophy at Harvard, exploring some of the most hotly contested moral and political issues of our time.
Why you should listen
Michael Sandel is one of the best known American public intellectuals. The London Observer calls him "one of the most popular teachers in the world" and indeed his lectures at Harvard draw thousands of students eager to discuss big questions of modern political life: bioethics, torture, rights versus responsibilities, the value we put on things. Sandel's class is a primer on thinking through the hard choices we face as citizens. The course has been turned into a public TV series with companion website and book: Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do? In his newest book, What Money Can't Buy, he challenges the idea that markets are morally neutral.
"To understand the importance of his purpose," a Guardian reviewer wrote of the book, "you first have to grasp the full extent of the triumph achieved by market thinking in economics, and the extent to which that thinking has spread to other domains. This school sees economics as a discipline that has nothing to do with morality, and is instead the study of incentives, considered in an ethical vacuum. Sandel's book is, in its calm way, an all-out assault on that idea, and on the influential doctrine that the economic approach to "utility maximisation" explains all human behaviour."
Read more about his thinking on markets and morality: "Lunch with Michael Sandel" on FT.com >>
Michael Sandel | Speaker | TED.com