2016年07月发表的文章(32)

追求幸福

【2016-07-13】

1)影响幸福感主要因素是相对社会地位及地位之近期变动,可以几个指标衡量:社会阶梯的级数(N),个体所能感知到的级数(M),个体处于哪一级(P),最近之升降(C),

2)处于各级的人口比例是不均匀的,至少从中位阶梯(即,站在该级上的人,其地位不低于一半人口)往上,数量呈指数下降,

3)社会大型化和复杂化将增加总的级数N,

4)密集居住、高流动性、发达媒体,将增加个体所能感知到的级数M,

5)增加M会让一些人(X)感觉自己相对地位下降了,同时让另一些人(Y)感觉自己相对地位上升了,因为(2),(more...)

标签: | | | |
7257
【2016-07-13】 1)影响幸福感主要因素是相对社会地位及地位之近期变动,可以几个指标衡量:社会阶梯的级数(N),个体所能感知到的级数(M),个体处于哪一级(P),最近之升降(C), 2)处于各级的人口比例是不均匀的,至少从中位阶梯(即,站在该级上的人,其地位不低于一半人口)往上,数量呈指数下降, 3)社会大型化和复杂化将增加总的级数N, 4)密集居住、高流动性、发达媒体,将增加个体所能感知到的级数M, 5)增加M会让一些人(X)感觉自己相对地位下降了,同时让另一些人(Y)感觉自己相对地位上升了,因为(2),X的比例远高于Y,所以增加M总是拉低社会总的幸福感水平, 6)城市化、大众媒体和网络社交都会提高M 7)高等教育也会提高个体的M值 8)传统社会的结构较为扁平,同等规模的N值小于现代社会 9)传统社会绝大多数人生活中小社会,城市规模也较小,社会视野和社交范围皆较小,故同等经济条件下M值更小 10)以上大概可以解释,为何当收入提高到某个水平之后,增加收入不再能提高幸福感 11)以上还可得出几个推断:同等经济条件下,都市人比小城市人幸福感低,博士生比高中生幸福感低,用微信的比不用微信的幸福感低…… 12)我认为『追求幸福』毫无意义  
[译文]沙特输掉了石油价格战

沙特阿拉伯可能会在美国石油行业崩溃之前倒下
Saudi Arabia may go broke before the US oil industry buckles

作者:Ambrose Evans-Pritchard @ 2015-8-5
译者:Veidt(@Veidt)
校对:Tankman
来源:每日电讯报,http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/oilprices/11768136/Saudi-Arabia-may-go-broke-before-the-US-oil-industry-buckles.html

If the oil futures market is correct, Saudi Arabia will start running into trouble within two years. It will be in existential crisis by the end of the decade.

如果石油期货市场是对的,那么沙特阿拉伯将会在两年之内开始陷入麻烦。这个国家将会在这个十年的尾声时陷入一场生存危机。

The contract price of US crude oil for delivery in December 2020 is currently $62.05, implying a drastic change in the economic landscape for the Middle East and the petro-rentier states.

目前2020年12月交付的美国原油期货价格是每桶62.05美元,这个价格体现了中东地区和石油租利国家经济版图的一场剧变。

The Saudis took a huge gamble last November when they stopped supporting prices and opted instead to flood the market and drive out rivals, boosting their own output to 10.6m barrels a day (b/d) into the teeth of the downturn.

沙特人在去年11月【译注:本文作于2015年,此处指2014年11月】开始了一场豪赌,他们停止了对石油价格的支撑,转而选择在市场上倾销以挤出竞争对手,他们在市场急转直下的时候将自己的原油产量提升到了每日106万桶。

Bank of America says OPEC is now “effectively dissolved”. The cartel might as well shut down its offices in Vienna to save money.

美国银行认为OPEC目前“实际上已经解体了”。这个垄断联盟也许会关闭它在维也纳的办公室以节省资金。

01-Saudi-02-large_trans++qVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8

If the aim was to choke the US shale industry, the Saudis have misjudged badly, just as they misjudged the growing shale threat at every stage for eight years. “It is becoming apparent that non-OPEC producers are not as responsive to low oil prices as had been thought, at least in the short-run,” said the Saudi central bank in its latest stability report.

如果这么做的目的是打击美国的页岩产业,那么沙特人就犯了个大错,就像他们在过去八年中的每个阶段都错判了成长中的页岩产业的威胁一样。“很显然那些非OPEC产油国对于低油价的反应并不像我们之前所设想的那样剧烈,至少在短期内是这样,”沙特央行在最近的稳定性报告中表示。

“The main impact has been to cut back on developmental drilling of new oil wells, rather than slowing the flow of oil from existing wells. This requires more patience,” it said.

这份报告称:“(这项政策)的主要影响是减少了新油井的开发钻探量,而并非降低现有油井的生产速度。这需要更多的耐心。”

One Saudi expert was blunter. “The policy hasn’t worked and it will never work,” he said.

一位沙特专家则更加直白。“这项政策显然没起作用,而且它也永远起不了作用,”他说。

By causing the oil price to crash, the Saudis and their Gulf allies have certainly killed off prospects for a raft of high-cost ventures in the Russian Arctic, the Gulf of Mexico, the deep waters of the mid-Atlantic, and the Canadian tar sands.

通过让油价崩溃,沙特人和他们的海湾盟友们显然杀死了那些试图在俄罗斯北极地区,墨西哥湾,大西洋中部深海和加拿大油砂中提炼原油的昂贵冒险活动。

Consultants Wood Mackenzie say the major oil and gas companies have(more...)

标签: | | |
7249
沙特阿拉伯可能会在美国石油行业崩溃之前倒下 Saudi Arabia may go broke before the US oil industry buckles 作者:Ambrose Evans-Pritchard @ 2015-8-5 译者:Veidt(@Veidt) 校对:Tankman 来源:每日电讯报,http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/oilprices/11768136/Saudi-Arabia-may-go-broke-before-the-US-oil-industry-buckles.html If the oil futures market is correct, Saudi Arabia will start running into trouble within two years. It will be in existential crisis by the end of the decade. 如果石油期货市场是对的,那么沙特阿拉伯将会在两年之内开始陷入麻烦。这个国家将会在这个十年的尾声时陷入一场生存危机。 The contract price of US crude oil for delivery in December 2020 is currently $62.05, implying a drastic change in the economic landscape for the Middle East and the petro-rentier states. 目前2020年12月交付的美国原油期货价格是每桶62.05美元,这个价格体现了中东地区和石油租利国家经济版图的一场剧变。 The Saudis took a huge gamble last November when they stopped supporting prices and opted instead to flood the market and drive out rivals, boosting their own output to 10.6m barrels a day (b/d) into the teeth of the downturn. 沙特人在去年11月【译注:本文作于2015年,此处指2014年11月】开始了一场豪赌,他们停止了对石油价格的支撑,转而选择在市场上倾销以挤出竞争对手,他们在市场急转直下的时候将自己的原油产量提升到了每日106万桶。 Bank of America says OPEC is now "effectively dissolved". The cartel might as well shut down its offices in Vienna to save money. 美国银行认为OPEC目前“实际上已经解体了”。这个垄断联盟也许会关闭它在维也纳的办公室以节省资金。 01-Saudi-02-large_trans++qVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8 If the aim was to choke the US shale industry, the Saudis have misjudged badly, just as they misjudged the growing shale threat at every stage for eight years. "It is becoming apparent that non-OPEC producers are not as responsive to low oil prices as had been thought, at least in the short-run," said the Saudi central bank in its latest stability report. 如果这么做的目的是打击美国的页岩产业,那么沙特人就犯了个大错,就像他们在过去八年中的每个阶段都错判了成长中的页岩产业的威胁一样。“很显然那些非OPEC产油国对于低油价的反应并不像我们之前所设想的那样剧烈,至少在短期内是这样,”沙特央行在最近的稳定性报告中表示。 "The main impact has been to cut back on developmental drilling of new oil wells, rather than slowing the flow of oil from existing wells. This requires more patience," it said. 这份报告称:“(这项政策)的主要影响是减少了新油井的开发钻探量,而并非降低现有油井的生产速度。这需要更多的耐心。” One Saudi expert was blunter. "The policy hasn't worked and it will never work," he said. 一位沙特专家则更加直白。“这项政策显然没起作用,而且它也永远起不了作用,”他说。 By causing the oil price to crash, the Saudis and their Gulf allies have certainly killed off prospects for a raft of high-cost ventures in the Russian Arctic, the Gulf of Mexico, the deep waters of the mid-Atlantic, and the Canadian tar sands. 通过让油价崩溃,沙特人和他们的海湾盟友们显然杀死了那些试图在俄罗斯北极地区,墨西哥湾,大西洋中部深海和加拿大油砂中提炼原油的昂贵冒险活动。 Consultants Wood Mackenzie say the major oil and gas companies have shelved 46 large projects, deferring $200bn of investments. 咨询公司Wood Machenzie表示,大型油气公司们已经将46个大型项目束之高阁,这推迟了大约2000亿美元的投资支出。 The problem for the Saudis is that US shale frackers are not high-cost. They are mostly mid-cost, and as I reported from the CERAWeek energy forum in Houston, experts at IHS think shale companies may be able to shave those costs by 45pc this year - and not only by switching tactically to high-yielding wells. 沙特人所面临的问题是,美国的页岩油气生产商们的成本并不高。正如我在休斯顿举办的CERAWeek能源论坛上所报告的,这些公司中的大多数成本都处于适中的水平,IHS公司的专家们认为这些页岩油气公司也许能在今年将这些成本削减45个百分点——而这并不仅是靠战术性地转向那些高产的油井来做到的。 Advanced pad drilling techniques allow frackers to launch five or ten wells in different directions from the same site. Smart drill-bits with computer chips can seek out cracks in the rock. New dissolvable plugs promise to save $300,000 a well. "We've driven down drilling costs by 50pc, and we can see another 30pc ahead," said John Hess, head of the Hess Corporation. 先进的井台批量钻探技术让页岩油业者能在同一处钻探点打出5口或10口不同方向的油井。植入了计算机芯片的智能钻探装置能够自动发现岩层中的裂缝。最新的可溶解油栓技术有望为每口油井节省30万美元的成本。“我们已经将钻探成本降低了百分之五十,而且我们认为目前的成本还有百分之三十的下降空间,”Hess集团总裁John Hess表示。 It was the same story from Scott Sheffield, head of Pioneer Natural Resources. "We have just drilled an 18,000 ft well in 16 days in the Permian Basin. Last year it took 30 days," he said. 先锋自然资源公司总裁Scott Sheffield也持相同看法。“我们最近在16天内在二叠纪盆地钻出了一口深达一万八千英尺的油井。而在去年,这样的工程还需要花上30天,”他说。 The North American rig-count has dropped to 664 from 1,608 in October but output still rose to a 43-year high of 9.6m b/d June. It has only just begun to roll over. "The freight train of North American tight oil has kept on coming," said Rex Tillerson, head of Exxon Mobil. 北美工作中的钻机数量从去年十月的1608台下降到了目前的664台,但原油产量却在今年六月升至43年来的最高水平——每日960万桶。而这仅仅只是个开始。“运送北美页岩油的货运火车正源源不断地开来,”埃克森美孚公司总裁Rex Tillerson表示。 01-Saudi-03-large_trans++mRnaWIkzDVpCKltYOKrpmR1NfXqjyxAjf9-9h2iOWsQ He said the resilience of the sister industry of shale gas should be a cautionary warning to those reading too much into the rig-count. Gas prices have collapsed from $8 to $2.78 since 2009, and the number of gas rigs has dropped 1,200 to 209. Yet output has risen by 30pc over that period. 他说,页岩气作为姊妹行业其适应能力应该引起那些过多关注钻机数量的人们的深切警醒。天然气价格已经从2009年的8美元暴跌至目前的2.78美元,而工作中的天然气钻机数量则从当时的1200台降至了目前的209台。但产量却在同一时期上升了超过三十个百分点。 Until now, shale drillers have been cushioned by hedging contracts. The stress test will come over coming months as these expire. But even if scores of over-leveraged wild-catters go bankrupt as funding dries up, it will not do OPEC any good. 直到目前,页岩钻探者们一直受到了对冲合约的保护。而未来的几个月中,随着这些合约到期,真正的压力测试将会到来。但即便这些过度使用杠杆的风险弄潮儿最终因为资金枯竭而破产,OPEC也无法从中得到任何好处。 The wells will still be there. The technology and infrastructure will still be there. Stronger companies will mop up on the cheap, taking over the operations. Once oil climbs back to $60 or even $55 - since the threshold keeps falling - they will crank up production almost instantly. 油井仍然在那里。技术和基础设施也仍然在那里。更加强大的公司将会廉价扫货,并接管他们的生意。一旦油价重新回到每桶60美元甚至55美元——这个阈值正在持续降低——他们将会立即重新启动钻机开始生产。 OPEC now faces a permanent headwind. Each rise in price will be capped by a surge in US output. The only constraint is the scale of US reserves that can be extracted at mid-cost, and these may be bigger than originally supposed, not to mention the parallel possibilities in Argentina and Australia, or the possibility for "clean fracking" in China as plasma pulse technology cuts water needs. OPEC目前面临着一个挥之不去的困境。每一波油价上涨就会被一波美国原油产量的激增抵消。对此的唯一限制是全美能够以适中成本开采的原油总储量,而这个数字则很可能比人们之前设想的要大,更不用提在阿根廷和澳大利亚的那些类似的可供开采储量,还有中国未来因等离子脉冲技术降低了对水量的需求,实现“清洁开采”的可能性。 Mr Sheffield said the Permian Basin in Texas could alone produce 5-6m b/d in the long-term, more than Saudi Arabia's giant Ghawar field, the biggest in the world. Sheffield先生表示,单单是德州的二叠纪盆地在长期内的日产出量就能达到500到600万桶,而这个数字比目前世界上最大的石油产区——沙特阿拉伯的大Ghawar油田的产出还要大。 Saudi Arabia is effectively beached. It relies on oil for 90pc of its budget revenues. There is no other industry to speak of, a full fifty years after the oil bonanza began. 沙特阿拉伯这艘大船实际上已经搁浅了。这个国家预算收入中的90%都依赖石油。而在经历了整整50年的石油大繁荣之后,它并没有发展出任何其它值得一提的产业。 01-Saudi-04-large_trans++qVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8 Citizens pay no tax on income, interest, or stock dividends. Subsidized petrol costs twelve cents a litre at the pump. Electricity is given away for 1.3 cents a kilowatt-hour. Spending on patronage exploded after the Arab Spring as the kingdom sought to smother dissent. 该国的国民不需要为他们的收入,利息或者股利交税。在加油站可以用每升12美分的补贴价格购买汽油。每千瓦时的电价仅仅是1.3美分。在“阿拉伯之春”开始之后,由于王室试图平息民间的不满情绪,该国用于收买支持的开支也迅速地增长。 The International Monetary Fund estimates that the budget deficit will reach 20pc of GDP this year, or roughly $140bn. The 'fiscal break-even price' is $106. 据国际货币基金组织估计,沙特的财政赤字将在今年占到GDP的20%,也就是大约1400亿美元。而让该国的财政收支达到均衡的油价水平是每桶106美元。 Far from retrenching, King Salman is spraying money around, giving away $32bn in a coronation bonus for all workers and pensioners. 而当今沙特国王萨勒曼却完全没有想要缩减开支的意思,反而四处撒钱,单单是在一次加冕礼上,他就为全国的所有工人和退休者发放了320亿美元的奖金。 He has launched a costly war against the Houthis in Yemen and is engaged in a massive military build-up - entirely reliant on imported weapons - that will propel Saudi Arabia to fifth place in the world defence ranking. 此外,他还对也门的胡塞武装发动了一场代价高昂的战争,并且大肆扩张军备——沙特的军备完全依赖从外国进口武器——这会使沙特的军费开支排到全球第5位。 The Saudi royal family is leading the Sunni cause against a resurgent Iran, battling for dominance in a bitter struggle between Sunni and Shia across the Middle East. "Right now, the Saudis have only one thing on their mind and that is the Iranians. They have a very serious problem. Iranian proxies are running Yemen, Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon," said Jim Woolsey, the former head of the US Central Intelligence Agency. 沙特王室还需要肩负领导逊尼派对抗东山再起的伊朗的重任,为争夺霸权,整个中东地区的逊尼派和什叶派之间展开了艰苦的斗争。“现在沙特人满脑子都只想着一件事情,那就是来自伊朗人的威胁。他们面临着一个非常严峻的问题,伊朗的代理人目前正控制着也门,叙利亚,伊拉克和黎巴嫩,”美国中央情报局前任局长吉姆·伍尔西表示。 01-Saudi-05-large_trans++qVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8 Money began to leak out of Saudi Arabia after the Arab Spring, with net capital outflows reaching 8pc of GDP annually even before the oil price crash. The country has since been burning through its foreign reserves at a vertiginous pace. 在“阿拉伯之春”发生后,资本开始流出沙特阿拉伯,即使在油价崩溃之前,每年资本净流出也占到了GDP的8%。从那时开始,该国的外汇储备就以惊人地速度直线下降。 The reserves peaked at $737bn in August of 2014. They dropped to $672 in May. At current prices they are falling by at least $12bn a month. 沙特的外汇储备在2014年8月达到峰值7370亿美元。而到今年5月,这个数字下降到了6720亿美元。以目前的汇率计算,沙特的外汇储备每月至少会下降120亿美元。【编注:2016年4月 已降至5720亿美元01-Saudi-06-large_trans++ySkuuxUK4LTxT1WX70dVCRfLU-xOUtCF4wrCYXn1-hA Khalid Alsweilem, a former official at the Saudi central bank and now at Harvard University, said the fiscal deficit must be covered almost dollar for dollar by drawing down reserves. 沙特央行的一位前任官员Khalid Alsweilem(目前在哈佛大学担任研究员)表示,沙特政府财政赤字中的几乎每一美元都需要以外汇储备的同等下降为代价来弥补。 The Saudi buffer is not particularly large given the country's fixed exchange system. Kuwait, Qatar, and Abu Dhabi all have three times greater reserves per capita. "We are much more vulnerable. That is why we are the fourth rated sovereign in the Gulf at AA-. We cannot afford to lose our cushion over the next two years," he said. 在该国的固定汇率体系之下,留给沙特人的缓冲余地并不是很大。科威特,卡塔尔和阿布扎比所拥有的人均外汇储备是沙特的三倍。“我们相对而言要脆弱得多。这就是为何我们的主权债评级在海湾地区只排第四,评级水平也仅是AA-。在未来两年中,我们承受不起失去外汇储备缓冲的后果,”他说。 Standard & Poor's lowered its outlook to "negative" in February. "We view Saudi Arabia's economy as undiversified and vulnerable to a steep and sustained decline in oil prices," it said. 标普在今年二月将沙特主权债务的评级展望降为“负面”。“我们认为在油价持续急剧下降的过程中,沙特阿拉伯的经济没有多元化,并且十分脆弱,”标普在他们的报告中表示。 Mr Alsweilem wrote in a Harvard report that Saudi Arabia would have an extra trillion of assets by now if it had adopted the Norwegian model of a sovereign wealth fund to recyle the money instead of treating it as a piggy bank for the finance ministry. The report has caused storm in Riyadh. Alsweilem先生在哈佛大学的一份报告中写道,如果沙特之前采用挪威的主权财富基金模式让外汇储备循环投资,而不是像他们所做的那样仅仅把它当作财政部的一头现金奶牛,目前沙特阿拉伯的资产也许会多出1万亿美元。这份报告在沙特首都利雅得引发了风暴。 "We were lucky before because the oil price recovered in time. But we can't count on that again," he said. “上一次我们很幸运,因为油价适时地恢复了。但是这次我们不能再次指望同样的事情会,”他说。 OPEC have left matters too late, though perhaps there is little they could have done to combat the advances of American technology. OPEC做出反应时已经太晚了,虽然即使早一些意识到问题,他们也做不了太多事情来对抗美国的技术进步。 In hindsight, it was a strategic error to hold prices so high, for so long, allowing shale frackers - and the solar industry - to come of age. The genie cannot be put back in the bottle. 事后看来,让油价在如此长的时间维持在这么高的位置实际上是一个战略性错误,这样那些页岩油气的勘探者们——还有太阳能产业——就能够成长壮大。一旦被放出来,你就无法再将精灵放回瓶子里了。 The Saudis are now trapped. Even if they could do a deal with Russia and orchestrate a cut in output to boost prices - far from clear - they might merely gain a few more years of high income at the cost of bringing forward more shale production later on. 沙特人如今陷入了困境。即使他们能与俄罗斯达成一致共同减产以支撑油价——虽然这样的愿景目前看来一点也不清晰——这也仅仅能让他们享受多几年的高收入,而这样做的代价却是在未来面临更多的页岩油产出的竞争。 Yet on the current course their reserves may be down to $200bn by the end of 2018. The markets will react long before this, seeing the writing on the wall. Capital flight will accelerate. 而如果当前的趋势维持下去,沙特的外汇储备将在2018年底前降至2000亿美元以下。一旦前景明白无误了,市场会在它成为现实前就早早做出反应。资本外流将会加速。 The government can slash investment spending for a while - as it did in the mid-1980s - but in the end it must face draconian austerity. It cannot afford to prop up Egypt and maintain an exorbitant political patronage machine across the Sunni world. 沙特政府可以在一段时间内削减资本开支——就像它在1980年代中期所做的那样——但最终它将面临严峻的紧缩。沙特将无法负担起支撑埃及政权并在逊尼派穆斯林世界里维持一台昂贵的资助机器的开支。 Social spending is the glue that holds together a medieval Wahhabi regime at a time of fermenting unrest among the Shia minority of the Eastern Province, pin-prick terrorist attacks from ISIS, and blowback from the invasion of Yemen. 庞大的社会开支是将一个仍然处在中世纪状态的瓦哈比政权维系在一起的粘合剂,这个政权正面临着东部省份的什叶少数派中正在发酵的动荡,ISIS时而发动的针刺般的恐怖袭击,还有入侵也门所带来的反作用力。 Diplomatic spending is what underpins the Saudi sphere of influence in a Middle East suffering its own version of Europe's Thirty Year War, and still reeling from the after-shocks of a crushed democratic revolt. 庞大的外交开支则是维系沙特在中东地区影响力的基础,而目前中东地区正在经历着类似欧洲“三十年战争”般的苦难,同时还在蹒跚地试图爬出镇压民主反抗运动带来的余震。 We may yet find that the US oil industry has greater staying power than the rickety political edifice behind OPEC. 我们也许会发现,虽然同样处在低谷中,但相比OPEC身后的那座虚弱的政治大厦,美国的石油行业其实拥有着更强的生命力。 (编辑:辉格@whigzhou) *注:本译文未经原作者授权,本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利,如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容,请私信联系,我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

日式封建

【2016-07-12】

@whigzhou: 日本封建系统区别于西欧封建系统的一个重要方面,是缺乏教会和自由市镇这两类契约主体,相应的,后来的宪政结构中也缺少这两条腿,日本的产业界多半由贵族和武士阶层转变而来,并且转变过程很短,保留了许多封建特性,这对日本社会影响深远,政治结构,产业模式,财阀体系,企业文化中,皆可看出痕迹。

@琉璃魄新年要认真: 近代以来上级武士从政居多,下级武士“创业”也是成功者寥寥,居于财阀顶点的三井和住友都是商业世家,三菱创始人来自地下浪人,安田是从两替店小伙计(more...)

标签: | | | | |
7247
【2016-07-12】 @whigzhou: 日本封建系统区别于西欧封建系统的一个重要方面,是缺乏教会和自由市镇这两类契约主体,相应的,后来的宪政结构中也缺少这两条腿,日本的产业界多半由贵族和武士阶层转变而来,并且转变过程很短,保留了许多封建特性,这对日本社会影响深远,政治结构,产业模式,财阀体系,企业文化中,皆可看出痕迹。 @琉璃魄新年要认真: 近代以来上级武士从政居多,下级武士“创业”也是成功者寥寥,居于财阀顶点的三井和住友都是商业世家,三菱创始人来自地下浪人,安田是从两替店小伙计干起的足轻之子,谁都算不到封建传统上去。 @whigzhou: 嗯嗯,原po说『贵族直接转变成财阀』不太对,说『财阀克隆了封建结构』可能更准确 @琉璃魄新年要认真: 这要看怎么定义这两种主体了,就组织形态和实际效果来说,日本从来就不缺少宗教和商业性质自治体,即使近世统一时期也有门前町,檀家体系以及城下町,只不过近似于英国存在着统合自治体的“王权”。 @whigzhou: 谢指教~我的意思是宗教和工商业者没有像西欧那样被纳入封建结构 @whigzhou: 比如在英格兰,起初修道院长/主教以封臣身份领有土地,在与土地相关的封建权利/义务方面,其地位与其他封臣一样,市镇以特许状取得自治地位,也成为封建结构的一个常规主体,后来,两者分别通过在上院的席位和下院的代表而在宪政结构中取得地位 @whigzhou: 相比之下,日本的宗教团体和工商业者似乎没有类似的政治组织资源,他们或许也有组织,但并未进入封建结构,因而只能以非制度性的关系依靠某位领主,比如三菱之于土佐,三井之于幕府,其组织模式也在相当大程度上克隆了土地贵族,而不像自由市镇那样自有一套。  
[译文]『妈妈语』如何帮助婴儿学习语言

It may be baby talk, but ‘parentese’ is an infant’s pathway to learning the language, international study shows
跨国研究表明:“妈妈语”虽然萌萌哒,但却是婴儿学习语言的必经之路

作者:Joel Schwarz @ 1997-7-31
译者:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy)
校对:Drunkplane(@Drunkplane-zny)
来源:UWToday
网址: http://www.washington.edu/news/1997/07/31/it-may-be-baby-talk-but-parentese-is-an-infants-pathway-to-learning-the-language-international-study-shows/

Parentese, the exaggerated, drawn-out form of speech that people use to communicate with babies, apparently is universal and plays a vital role in (more...)

标签: | | |
7245
It may be baby talk, but ‘parentese’ is an infant’s pathway to learning the language, international study shows 跨国研究表明:“妈妈语”虽然萌萌哒,但却是婴儿学习语言的必经之路 作者:Joel Schwarz @ 1997-7-31 译者:沈沉(@你在何地-sxy) 校对:Drunkplane(@Drunkplane-zny) 来源:UWToday 网址: http://www.washington.edu/news/1997/07/31/it-may-be-baby-talk-but-parentese-is-an-infants-pathway-to-learning-the-language-international-study-shows/ Parentese, the exaggerated, drawn-out form of speech that people use to communicate with babies, apparently is universal and plays a vital role in helping infants to analyze and absorb the phonetic elements of their parents’ language. An international study shows that infants are so good at analyzing this speech that by the age of 20 weeks they are beginning to produce the three vowel sounds common to all human languages — “ee,” “ah” and “uu.” 妈妈语,指的是人们在和幼儿交流时使用的那种夸张、拖长的说话方式。它似乎是普天下皆有的现象,而且在帮助婴儿分析和掌握父母语言的语音要素方面发挥着关键作用。一项跨国研究表明,婴儿分析这种说话方式的能力极高,以至于他们在20周那么大时就开始发出所有人类语言都共有的三个元音,即ee,ah和uu。 “Parentese has a melody to it. And inside this melody is a tutorial for the baby that contains exceptionally well-formed versions of the building blocks of language,” explains Patricia Kuhl, a University of Washington neuroscientist. Kuhl recently headed a team of nine researchers from the United States, Russia and Sweden investigating how infants master the complex task of acquiring speech. Their findings are being published in tomorrow’s issue (Aug. 1) of the journal Science. “妈妈语具有内在的韵律。对幼儿的辅导就藏在这一韵律之中,其内容包括了语言基本材料的极为成熟的形式”,华盛顿大学神经系统科学家Patricia Kuhl如此解释道。Kuhl近来带领一个9人团队对婴儿如何得以完成学会说话这种复杂任务进行了研究,研究者分别来自美国、俄罗斯和瑞典。他们的发现将于明天(8月1日)发表于《科学》杂志上。【编注:注意本文发表于1997年。】 The new study examined differences in how American, Russian and Swedish mothers speak to their infants and to other adults. The study shows that parentese is characterized by over- articulation that exaggerates the sounds contained in words. Mothers in the study were, in effect, sounding out “super-vowels” to help their infants learn the phonetic elements of language, says Kuhl, who is the chair of speech and hearing sciences and the William P. and Ruth Gerberding professor at the UW. 这项新研究考察了美国、俄罗斯和瑞典的妈妈们在和她们的婴儿说话时跟她们和其他成人说话时的区别。研究表明,妈妈语的特征是夸张发音,对词语中的音素进行夸张。Kuhl说,实际上,被研究的妈妈们都会发出“超级元音”来帮助她们的孩子学习语言中的语音要素。Kuhl在华盛顿大学担任言语及听觉学院主席,同时还是该校的“盖博丁夫妇”讲席教授。 “In normal, everyday speech adults generally race along at a very fast pace,” Kuhl says. “But we know it is easier to understand a speaker when they stretch out sounds. That’s why we tend to speak more slowly and carefully to increase understanding when we teach in the classroom or talk to strangers. We also do this unconsciously with babies, giving them an improved verbal signal they can capitalize on by slowing down and over articulating.” “在正常的日常交谈中,成年人一般都会以非常快的速度放连珠炮”,Kuhl说。“但我们知道,如果说话者拉长声音,就更容易被人听懂。这就是为什么我们在进行课堂教学或和陌生人说话时会把话说得更慢更仔细,这是为了增进理解。面对幼儿时,我们也会下意识地这么做。通过放慢语速、夸张发音,我们向幼儿提供了一种改良过的语言信号,以便他们利用。” The mothers in the study were not aware of what they were doing, she says, and so parentese was produced unconsciously and automatically. “When women across three different cultures, speaking three different languages, show the same pattern when speaking to their infants, biology is telling us something about it’s necessity and value to their babies. It’s our job to figure out why they do it and what it’s good for,” Kuhl adds. 她还说,被研究的妈妈们对于自己的作为并没有自觉意识,因此妈妈语是无意识、不经意产生的。“来自三种不同文化、使用三种不同语言的妇女在和她们的婴儿交谈时都呈现出同一种模式,这是生物学在向我们透露某些东西,关乎其必要性及其对幼儿的价值。我们的任务就是要搞清她们为什么要这么做以及这么做的好处”,Kuhl补充说。 To explore differences in the way people communicate with infants and adults, 10 women from each of the three countries were first recorded talking for 20 minutes to their infants, ranging in age from two to five months. Then they were recorded in conversation with an adult. 为了查明人们与婴儿及他们与成人交流时的区别,研究者首先对分别来自上述三国的各10位妇女与其婴儿的交谈进行了20分钟的录音,婴儿年龄从2至5个月不等。然后又录制了她们与某一成人的谈话。 In both cases, the mothers were told to talk naturally and were given a small list of target words containing the three common vowel sounds and asked to include them in the conversations.. The selected English words were “bead” for the “ee” sound, “pot” for “ah” and “boot” for “uu.” Similar common words were selected in Russian and Swedish. The three languages were chosen because they represent substantially different vowel systems occurring in human languages: Russian has five vowels, English has nine vowels and Swedish has16. 在两种情形中,妈妈们都被要求进行自然交谈,并拿到了一份简短的目标词汇表,这些词汇都包含有常见的三种元音。妈妈们被要求在对话中使用到这些词汇。被选中的英文单词包括bead(含元音ee),pot(含元音ah)和boot(含元音uu)。俄语和瑞典语中也选的是类似的常见词汇。之所以选这三种语言,是因为它们代表着人类语言中存在本质区别的不同元音体系:俄语有5个元音,英语有9个,而瑞典语有16个。 The more than 2,300 recorded target words spoken by the subjects were then isolated and acoustically analyzed by spectrograph. This analysis showed speech directed at infants had more extreme or stretched out vowel sounds than speech with an adult. This was true among all 30 mothers across the three languages, says Kuhl. 然后,研究者把研究对象说过且被录制的2300多个目标词汇单独提取出来,并用声谱仪对之进行声学分析。分析表明,跟对成人说的话相比,对婴儿说的话中包含有更过分或更为拖长的元音发音。Kuhl说,使用三种语言的30位母亲全都如此。 The use of parentese seems to benefit infants in three ways, she believes. It makes the sounds of vowels more distinct from one another, and it produces expanded vowel sounds not produced in ordinary adult conversations. This exaggerated speech allows mothers to produce a greater variety of vowel pronunciations without overlapping other vowels. Kuhl相信,使用妈妈语似乎会从三种途径有利于婴儿。它能使元音发音彼此之间区分得更为清楚,同时能发出成人们在日常对话中不会发出的拖长元音。这种夸张的说话方式能让妈妈们发出更为多样化的元音读法,且不与其它元音重叠。 To speak, an infant must be able to reproduce the appropriate features of individual phonetic elements using a tiny vocal tract which is about only one-quarter the size and lacks the same frequency range of an adult’s. The exaggeration of parentese helps the infant separate sounds into contrasting categories and helps the baby distinguish between different categories, she believes. 婴儿的小声道在大小上只有成人的大约四分之一,缺乏成人所具备的那种频率范围。为了说话,婴儿必须要用这种声道来再现每个语音要素的恰当特征。Kuhl相信,妈妈语的夸张发音能帮助婴儿将声音分为对比鲜明的类别,并帮助他们区分不同类别。 “What infants are doing with this information is not memorization. Their minds are not working like a tape recorder,” says Kuhl. “Because their mouths and vocal tracts can’t form the same sounds as adults, they have to transform adult sounds to frequencies they can use. So they must be analyzing speech.” “针对这些信息,婴儿们做的并不是熟记。他们的心智并不像是录音机那样运转”,Kuhl说。“因为他们的小嘴和小声道无法发出成人那样的声音,他们必须将成人的发音转化为他们能够使用的频率。因此,他们必定分析发声。” Babies’ brains, like their bodies, need to be nourished, she says, and parentese provides them with “essential nuggets” of information about language that their lightning fast brains analyze and absorb. 她说,幼儿的大脑跟他们的身体一样需要滋养,而妈妈语则为他们提供了语言信息的“基本材料”,以便他们能用其闪电般快速运转的大脑进行分析和吸收。 The use of parentese seems to be universal, she says, and parents don’t have to worry about learning it when they take a newborn home from the hospital. 她说,使用妈妈语似乎是普天下共有的现象,父母们把新生儿从医院抱回家后并不需要担心如何学会妈妈语。 “Moms, dads, caretakers, younger siblings and even college students who were handed a baby in the classroom have been observed speaking parentese. Talking that way seems to be a natural communications mode we all use. That means parents don’t have to work hard at this. Just by talking and communicating with their infants they are playing a vital role without being aware of it,” Kuhl says. “人们已经发现,妈妈、爸爸、保姆、小哥哥小姐姐都会说妈妈语,甚至是在课堂上被塞给了一个小宝宝的大学生也是如此。以这种方式说话似乎是我们所使用的一种自然的交流模式。这就是说,父母们无需在这方面用功。只要和他们的婴儿说话交流,他们就在不自觉的扮演一个关键的角色”,Kuhl说。 Collaborating researchers in the study come from the Early Intervention Institute in St. Petersburg, Russia, and Stockholm University in Sweden. The research was funded by grants from the National Institutes of Health, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation. 参与本研究的合作研究者分别来自俄罗斯圣彼得堡的早期介入研究所和瑞典斯德哥尔摩大学。研究得到了美国国立卫生研究院、加拿大社会科学与人文研究委员会及瑞典银行三百年基金会的基金资助。 (编辑:辉格@whigzhou) *注:本译文未经原作者授权,本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利,如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容,请私信联系,我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

[译文]勿忘普通法

Remember the Common Law
勿忘普通法

作者:Jim Harper  @ 2016-4
译者:小册子(@昵称被抢的小册子)
校对:小橘子
来源:Cato Institute,http://www.cato.org/policy-report/marchapril-2016/remember-common-law

Good economists are familiar with Frédéric Bastiat’s parable of the broken window, which illustrates that visible economic activity may have unseen costs. When a broken window leads to the purchase of a new window, it’s easy to think that the broken window helped society by increasing production and trade. In fact, breaking a window makes society worse off; wealth has been destroyed, not increased. Bastiat’s essay on this topic was titled “What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen.”

优秀的经济学家都熟知弗雷德里克•巴斯夏的破窗理论,这个理论说明了,在可见的经济活动之下,可能潜藏了不可见的成本。打破一扇窗户,就要买一扇新的,所以人们很容易认为,通过促进生产和贸易,打破窗户会改善社会境况。而实际上,打破窗户使社会境况恶化了;财富被破坏了,而不是增加了。巴斯夏给讨论此问题的那篇论文起的标题正是“看得见的和看不见的”。

A similar dynamic exists in the legal world. Legislative and regulatory processes are easy to see. Elections routinely draw public attention to legislative and administrative government. Elected and unelected regulators have media operations to tell reporters what they are doing. Common-law rules, on the other hand, are mostly u(more...)

标签: | | |
7242
Remember the Common Law 勿忘普通法 作者:Jim Harper  @ 2016-4 译者:小册子(@昵称被抢的小册子) 校对:小橘子 来源:Cato Institute,http://www.cato.org/policy-report/marchapril-2016/remember-common-law Good economists are familiar with Frédéric Bastiat’s parable of the broken window, which illustrates that visible economic activity may have unseen costs. When a broken window leads to the purchase of a new window, it’s easy to think that the broken window helped society by increasing production and trade. In fact, breaking a window makes society worse off; wealth has been destroyed, not increased. Bastiat’s essay on this topic was titled “What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen.” 优秀的经济学家都熟知弗雷德里克•巴斯夏的破窗理论,这个理论说明了,在可见的经济活动之下,可能潜藏了不可见的成本。打破一扇窗户,就要买一扇新的,所以人们很容易认为,通过促进生产和贸易,打破窗户会改善社会境况。而实际上,打破窗户使社会境况恶化了;财富被破坏了,而不是增加了。巴斯夏给讨论此问题的那篇论文起的标题正是“看得见的和看不见的”。 A similar dynamic exists in the legal world. Legislative and regulatory processes are easy to see. Elections routinely draw public attention to legislative and administrative government. Elected and unelected regulators have media operations to tell reporters what they are doing. Common-law rules, on the other hand, are mostly unseen. Legal doctrines such as property and contract emerged quietly from series of court decisions over decades and even centuries, so they often go unconsidered and unspoken. Many people may believe that legislation and regulation do most of the work of ordering society. 在法律领域,类似的情况也同样存在。立法与监管程序是显而易见的。大选会定期让民众注意到立法与行政机构,选举的与非选举的官员会通过媒体来阐述他们的举措。相比之下,普通法下的规则绝大部分是看不见的。有关财产与契约等范畴的法律原则,在数十年甚至数百年来的法庭判例中悄无声息地形成,因此往往既不为人留意,也未经言明。许多人可能会认为,规范社会的,主要是法典与规条。 Libertarians should remember the common law and generally prefer it. The common law process for making the rules of a free society has much to commend it. And where it falls down, it is more readily fixable than legislation and government regulation. 自由意志主义者应该谨记普通法,并将其置于优先地位。普通法体系在形成自由社会规则方面确有不少令人赞许之处。而且与成文法和行政规制体系相比,普通法在其失足跌倒之处也更便于调整修正。 American law students learn early that the common law is an important inheritance from England that differs from the civil-law tradition dominant on the European continent. In the common-law tradition, the basic rules that govern our interactions arise from years of experience over generations. Our forebears learned that justice is served and benefits accrue when people avoid violence, stick to their promises, and allocate things in an orderly way. 美国法学学生很早就认识到普通法体系是继承自英国的一项重要遗产,该法系与欧洲大陆盛行的民法传统大相径庭。在普通法传统下,基本法律规范由一代代人的长期经验积累而来。我们的祖先发现,当人们免于暴力,信守承诺,分配有序时,正义便得到伸张,福祉便得到增长。 The law of battery, contract law, and property law all emerged as common practice solidified into common law. It’s often called “judge-made” law, but at its best common law is “judge-found” law— that is, judges discover law in common practices that are deeply ingrained in society. 有关殴打的法律、契约法以及财产法,都是由惯例凝结固化而成的普通法。普通法常被称为“法官制造的”法律,但最恰当的说法应该是“法官发现的”法律——意思是说,法官们发掘出社会上根深蒂固的惯例中所蕴含的规则。 In contrast, the source of rules in civil-law countries is the code books issued by rulers and governments. Civil codes establish the rules governing contracts, trade, property, criminal law, and so on. The civil-law tradition extols the great law-givers—Solon, Hammurabi, Napoleon—who wrote down the law codes purporting to govern their societies. 对比之下,民法体系国家的规则来源是统治者与政府颁布的法律条文。有关契约、商业、财产、刑法等各方面的规则,均由民法法典确立。民法传统推崇伟大的立法者——梭伦、汉穆拉比、拿破仑——他们一手制订治理社会的法典。 But the founding of civil law is something of a myth. In the times when civil law originated, the bulk of most populations was illiterate. These citizens did not have copies of the civil codes that purported to govern them. The civil-law tradition relies on the fiction that certain powerful men produced laws—but they actually arose like common law from the time-worn habits and customs of their subjects. 然而,民法起源于一个神话。在民法最初形成的时候,大部分民众还是文盲,他们并没有读过那些用来管辖他们的民法法典。民法传统建基于强人立法的虚构故事——实际上它们和普通法一样,源自于古老的习惯与惯例。【编注:作者的意思大概是,有关强人立法的虚构故事为民法赋予了其被广泛接受所需的权威性。】 Part of the genius of the common law is its mix of adaptability and consistency. When new circumstances arise, common-law courts, urged on and educated by the parties to disputes, adapt existing rules in ways that they believe produce the most just and fair outcomes. 普通法的优越之处,部分表现在它在适应性和连贯性之间的平衡。当新的环境条件出现时,普通法的法庭在争讼各方的敦促与启发下,会灵活理解运用现有规则,以期达到一个他们都认为公正公平的结果。 They look for comparable cases in their own and other jurisdictions to learn what adaptation of existing law will produce the best results. Over time, new doctrines emerge and old ones may die out. But at any given time there is a stable rule-set people can use to organize their lives and business activities. 法庭将在本身与其他司法管辖区中查找可供比附的案例,以研究如何调整现有规则才能达致最佳的结果。随着时间的推移,新的法律原则形成,旧的则被淘汰。但在任何一个时间点上,人民生活经商都有一套相对稳定的规则可供遵循。 THE COMMON LAW OF PRIVACY 有关隐私的普通法 The field of privacy protection illustrates how common law develops. In 1890 a Harvard Law Review article entitled “The Right to Privacy” made the original argument that law should address privacy. Samuel Warren and Louis D. Brandeis, later to become a U.S. Supreme Court justice, catalogued the legal doctrines that might control certain abuses of private life arising from photography and mass circulation newspapers. They argued that the law should explicitly protect privacy. 普通法规则的发展演变,从保护隐私领域就可觅一斑。1890年,一篇刊载在《哈佛法学评论》上题为《隐私权》的文章首次提出,法律需要处理隐私问题。萨缪尔•沃伦与后来成为美国最高法院大法官的路易斯•布兰代斯,整理出了能够制止因拍照和大发行量报纸而引致侵犯私生活的法律原则。他们认为法律应明确保护隐私。 Over time, a new branch of common law was born. Courts across the country began to recognize privacy torts—legally recognized wrongs that give victims of privacy invasions the right to sue invaders. In 1960 eminent legal scholar William L. Prosser documented how privacy as a legal concept had come to constitute four distinct torts: intrusion upon seclusion or solitude, or into private affairs; public disclosure of embarrassing private facts; publicity that places a person in a false light in the public eye; and appropriation of name or likeness. 随着时间推移,普通法的一个新分支出现了。全国的法庭都开始承认隐私侵权——从法律上确认侵犯隐私是错的,受害者可以控告侵权者。1960年,杰出的法律学者威廉•普罗萨总结了隐私权这一法律概念,并界定了四种不同的侵权类型:侵扰他人独处或私人领域;曝光令人困窘的私人信息;不当报道,以造成对个人的错误印象;盗用人名等个人标记。 The common law of privacy continues to develop and advance. In 1998, the Minnesota Supreme Court recognized invasion of privacy as a tort in that state for the first time. The case was Lake v. Wal-Mart Stores. The defendant’s photo-developing shop failed to deliver two women their vacation photos, but an employee distributed a photo of the two showering together, spurring the court to adopt the “public disclosure” branch of the privacy torts. 有关隐私权的普通法不断地发展和推进。1998年,明尼苏达州最高法院首次裁定侵犯隐私在该州构成民事侵权行为。该案为“莱克诉沃尔玛”(Lake v. Wal-Mart)案。被告的照片冲印店未能交付两位女顾客度假时拍的照片,但被告的一名员工却对外散布了这两名女顾客一起淋浴的照片。法庭认为此举适用于隐私侵权分类中的“公开泄露私人信息”。 Like most law, the privacy torts work in the background, through the threat of lawsuits and not actual days in court or big damage awards. The rarity of lawsuits under the privacy torts may show how consistent these baseline privacy rules are with society’s general mores. Some would argue, of course, that they’re not strict enough and that debatable uses of information should produce successful privacy lawsuits more often. Legal evolution will decide who is right. 与大多数的其他法律一样,隐私侵权的法规在社会背景中默默运作,通过潜在的诉讼威胁,而不是大量的实际庭审或高额赔偿来发挥作用。有关隐私侵权的实际案件之少,可能正说明了保护隐私的法律规则与社会上普遍的道德观念高度一致。当然,可能有些人会认为这些法规不够严厉,信息的争议性使用应该产生更多的隐私案胜诉。孰是孰非,在法律演变中自有定夺。 Privacy law may be in tension with free speech and the First Amendment, so it’s not clear that the privacy torts are a permanent fixture in the common-law pantheon. On the other hand, privacy-law professors and others often use the phrase “privacy harm” in a tacit effort to impress into common language— and ultimately common law—that more offenses against privacy or data security should be recognized as legally actionable harms. It’s all part of a quiet but important debate about our privacy values and what may become our privacy laws. 隐私法也许与言论自由和宪法第一修正案有一定的矛盾,因此隐私侵权能否成为普通法神殿的永久基石之一,并未有定论。而在另一方面,隐私法领域的教授与其他学者经常引用“隐私伤害”来试图与普通用语挂钩——最终与普通法挂钩——并试图将更多侵害隐私或信息安全的行为纳入可采取法律行动的伤害行为。 这些争论虽然悄然进行,但对于我们确立有关隐私的价值观,以及确立针对隐私的法律,都非常重要。 But people don’t often ask how common law torts, property rights, and contracts protect privacy. They ask: “What will Congress and our state legislatures do?” Legislation and regulation get most of the attention. 但人们并不会经常过问,隐私权如何得到普通法的侵权法、财产法,以及契约法的保护。他们会问:“国会和我们的州立法机构会怎么做?”。引人注目的是立法与规制。 The top-down process that established federal privacy regulation of health information illustrates some differences between understated common-law development and cacophonous civil-law-style rule-writing. 有关健康信息隐私的联邦管制规则,是通过一个由上至下的程序确立的,从中可以看出低调的普通法发展与喧闹的民法式规则制定之间的某些区别。 In 1996 Congress revamped the rules around health insurance. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) also addressed health privacy, but it didn’t set new privacy rules. Instead, Congress instructed the secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to make recommendations about the privacy of individually identifiable health information. It told HHS to go ahead and write privacy regulations based on those recommendations if Congress did not act. 1996年,国会对有关医疗保险的法规进行修订。《健康保险隐私及责任法案》(HIPAA)也涉及健康隐私,但其并未对隐私做出新规定。相反,国会要求卫生及公共服务部(HHS)部长就个人可辨识医疗信息的隐私提供建议,并指示HHS,如果国会没有采取相应行动,该部可根据这些建议撰写隐私相关规定。 When HHS reported back to Congress, it downplayed many safeguards for privacy that already existed. These included medical ethics, explicit and implied contract rights, malpractice claims, and state privacy torts— non regulatory privacy protections that got only a few cryptic lines buried deep in the report. In addition to largely ignoring them, HHS advocated eliminating some of them. 此后,当HHS向国会汇报时,对已有的隐私保护措施予以淡化处理,这些措施包括医疗道德,明确及隐含的契约权利,针对专业失当的索赔,以及各州的隐私侵权法——即非行政的隐私保护,仅在报告的某个角落以寥寥数行隐晦提及。HHS不仅对其几近无视,甚至建议将它们当中的一部分予以剔除。 Today, with the HIPAA privacy regulations in place, people seeking health care sign a lot of forms and see a lot of notices discussing health privacy—but it’s not at all clear that their privacy is well protected. The HIPAA rules preserved and helped solidify behind the- scenes information-sharing practices in the health care industry that may or may not serve consumers and society well. Every year, it seems, there is less and less of a free market in health care to test for and discover consumers’ true interests in health privacy and every other dimension of health care. The common law of health privacy is widely ignored. 如今,由于HIPAA的隐私条文已付诸实施,人们接受医疗保健服务需要签署大量表格,阅读大量讨论健康隐私的告示,但他们的隐私是否得到很好的保障,却根本不清楚。医疗行业幕后的信息共享机制未必能很好地满足消费者和社会整体的要求,而HIPAA的条文则保护了这一机制,并使之更加稳固。年复一年,自由的医疗保健市场似乎正在日益萎缩,我们难以探知与发掘消费者在健康隐私乃至医疗保障其他方面的真正利益之所在。健康隐私方面的普通法原则被普遍忽略了。 INDUCTIVE COMMON LAW VS. DEDUCTIVE REGULATION 归纳式的普通法与推论式的立法 Common law is inductive. Building on experience in case after real-world case, common- law courts accrete knowledge about the rule-set that best serves society. Because rule development occurs with reference to real life cases, it takes advantage of local knowledge about the precise disputes that occur. This allows better approximation of what the truly just rules will be for most cases. 普通法是归纳性的。在众多真实案例的经验基础上,普通法法庭在不断积累认知,寻求最适合社会的法则。由于规则在参照真实案例的过程中发展,其优势是能够利用实际发生的真切争议中所包含的局部知识。在绝大多数情况下,这种方式都能达致较为接近公平法则的效果。【编注:此处作者援引的是哈耶克在1948年的论文《社会中的知识利用》中阐述的思想,哈耶克认为,中央计划者或理性建构者的根本困难在于,无法收集和利用作出正确决定所需的分散的局部知识。】 Hayek emphasized the value of local knowledge in economic decision making. He also emphasized the distinction between common law and top-down legislation in his three-volume work Law, Legislation and Liberty. The Italian lawyer Bruno Leoni is another great thinker in this area. His book Freedom and the Law extolled the virtue of English common law compared to Roman jus civile. The two systems have very different ways of developing rules. Common-law systems hew closer to common justice. 哈耶克强调过局部知识对于经济决策的重要价值,也在他的三卷本著作《法律、立法与自由》中强调了普通法与由上至下立法的区别。意大利律师布鲁诺•莱奥尼在这一领域也颇有研究,他在其著作《自由与法律》中赞扬了英式普通法较之罗马市民法的优点。两套体系在发展法规方面大相径庭,普通法更倾向于追求常理上的正义。 Legislation and regulation more often produce rank re-ordering of rights and liabilities because legislation is deductive. At a single point in time, based on all the knowledge it has drawn together at that moment, a legislature establishes the rule-set that it believes to make the most sense. This is often what it perceives as pleasing the most— or the most important—constituencies. That imperative to please constituencies means that the information legislatures codify often comes from well-organized interests with substantial resources. Special- interest pleading is a hallmark of legislation and regulation. 由于立法是演绎性的,因此权利与义务的轻重经常通过订立法律与规章来编排。在某个给定的时点上,立法机关基于当时所知,建立一整套它认为最合理的法规。这又被认为是在迎合最多数或者最重要的选民。迎合选民,意味着立法机关为之编写法规的诉求,经常会来自于掌握重要资源的有组织团体。因而,制定法律与规章带有满足特殊利益诉求的印记。 Judges in common law courts have fewer of the perverse incentives that legislators and regulators do, particularly when judges are appointed for life terms. A tenured judge gets professional acclaim from developing a reputation for fairness, from clearing dockets, and from suffering few reversals in higher courts. Judges generally don’t anticipate growing their courts’ budgets, getting post-service perks, or being re-installed in office due to the outcomes in their cases, as legislators and regulators often do. Legislation and regulation are systematically subject to a kind of intellectual corruption in which self interest diverges from the public interest. 与立法者和监管者相比,普通法法庭的法官带有的不当动机较少,尤其当法官职位是终身制的时候。为赢得专业上的赞誉,一个终身制的法官需要建立断案公正的名声,避免案件积压,以及减少其裁定被高一级法院推翻的案件。与立法者和监管者不同,法官一般来说并不需要担心他们的判决会对法庭的收入,个人离任津贴,或者恢复职位造成影响。而立法与监管机构则由于自身利益与公众利益有所偏离,容易系统性的滋生智识上的腐败。 WRITING THE RIGHT RULES 编写正确的规则 Rules produced by the deductions of legislators and regulators don’t always fail, of course, and they aren’t always wrong. But it is better to arrive at just rules through a long, society-wide deliberation than through a legislative debate. To illustrate this subtle point, consider the rules that govern the liability of interactive computer services like YouTube, Yelp, craigslist, and Facebook. 当然,立法者与监管者通过推导演绎编写的规则并非必然失败,也并非总是错的。但为了得到公正的规则,经由全社会参与的长期讨论始终还是比经由立法辩论为好。为了体现这当中的微妙之处,让我们来研究规管诸如YouTube、Yelp、Craigslist和Facebook等电脑互动服务供应商之责任的规则。 In the mid-1990s courts were considering whether interactive online services would be considered publishers of the information people uploaded and posted to them. If they were publishers, websites might be liable for defamation and other causes of action because of the material users contributed to them. Had this rule taken hold, operators of online services would probably have allowed only tightly controlled and monitored interactions among users. The rollicking, interactive Internet we know today would have been sharply curtailed. 1990年代中期,法庭在研究在线互动服务是否应该被视为其用户张贴上载信息的发布人。如果是的话,这些网站可能将会因为其用户所提供的信息,而负上诽谤及其他法律责任。如果确立了这一规则,在线服务运营商就很可能会对用户间的交流进行严密的控制与监视,我们今天所见到的生动活泼、积极互动的互联网必将大打折扣。 In response to this concern, Congress passed legislation saying that interactive computer services are not publishers or speakers of any information others provide using their services. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) is one of the most important protections for online speech in the United States. 出于这一顾虑,国会通过法案表明,电脑互动服务供应商并非其用户上载信息的发布人或发言人。《通信规范法案》(CDA)第230条,便是美国网上言论最重要的保障之一。 But CDA section 230 is often talked about as an “immunity” Congress gave to online service providers, a carve-out from general liability rules, put in place to advance a certain public policy goal. The perception of CDA section 230 as a special-interest favor means that other interests are on relatively strong footing when they come to Congress seeking to overturn it. Today, CDA section 230 is under attack from groups who would like to see it reversed. The rule against liability for online service providers would be stronger if courts had arrived at a rule of “no liability” based in considerations of natural justice. 但CDA第230条经常被认为有异于一般的责任条款,是国会旨在推动某一特定的公共政策,而赋予网络服务运营商的“豁免权”。该条款给人以一种照顾特殊利益的印象,这意味着当其他利益的代表寻求在国会推翻这一条款的时候,将会有较强的理据。如今,一些持反对立场的团体正在挑战该条款。如果在线服务供应商的“免责”是经由法庭考虑自然正义原则之后确立的话, 该规则就将会有较强的说服力。 When the rules that organize our society are temporal products of legislation, they may always be “in play” for a legislative reversal. Online service providers must always remain vigilant in Washington, D.C., for attempts to undercut their special “immunity.” The rules that govern online liability were established quickly, which is good, but they are less settled than they otherwise would be, and there is one more reason for private businesses to maintain a stable of lobbyists and lawyers in Washington. 如果规制社会的规则是因应时势的立法产物,那么这些规则就处于一种随时可能被立法推翻的状态之下。在线服务供应商就必须在华盛顿特区保持高度警觉,以防有人破坏他们的特殊“豁免权”。迅速订立规制网上责任的规则是好事,但这些规则的认受性本来可以更高一些,而且这也为私营企业在华盛顿豢养着一班说客和律师提供了多一个理由。 There is no guarantee, of course, that the common-law rule would be the same right now as what CDA section 230 produced. The common-law process might still be searching for the right rule. Common-law development would probably find, though, that online service providers are not liable for the acts of others. 当然,普通法体系下订立的规则,未必就和CDA第230条的内容一样。在普通法程序下,我们可能仍在寻找恰当的规则,当然,普通法体系很可能会认为在线服务供应商无需为他人的行为负责。 FAR FROM PERFECT, BUT BETTER IN PRACTICE 虽远未完美,但在实践中占优 This is no argument that common-law courts are perfect. They are not. It takes a very long time for just rules to be found out and settled on through common-law development. Elected judges often have incentives to please powerful constituencies. The class-action mechanism is prone to abuse and often used to reward plaintiffs’ lawyers. Punitive damages are too often a source of windfalls to lucky plaintiffs. The rules about who pays for litigation may be changed to improve the delivery of justice in the courts. 没有人会认为普通法法庭运作得很完美。并非如此。在普通法体系下,确立公平规则,并得到认受,需要很长的时间;选举产生的法官常有动机去迎合强大的利益团体;集体诉讼机制容易被滥用,而且常常有利于原告的律师;幸运的原告经常从惩罚性赔偿中大捞一票;为了正义能更好地在法庭上体现,诉讼费用的分担规则可能需要进行修改。 But these challenges are more correctable than the dynamics in legislation and regulation. Public choice economics teaches that actors in all these rule-making processes will pursue their own self-interest, but the interests of legislators and regulators are likely to diverge from justice more often than the interests of judges. 但这些难题,要比立法与规制过程中的纠葛易于解决。公共选择经济学指出,在规则制定的过程中,相关各方会追求自身的最大利益,但与法官比起来,立法者与监管者的利益很可能更容易与社会公义有分歧。 There is a fair argument that legislation and government regulation create certainty, which may make it worthwhile to accept their many costs. This is particularly acute in the area of high tech, where the application of common law may be unclear. 一种意见认为,明文立法与政府规章带来了确定性,因此随之而来的众多代价也就变得可以接受。这不是没有道理,特别在普通法的适用性并不明确的高科技领域,这显得尤其突出。 But regulation produces certainty in theory better than it does in practice. Witness the recent “BitLicense” fiasco in New York State. When Bitcoin, a digital currency, first captured public attention a few years ago, New York superintendent of financial services Ben Lawsky saw it as an opportunity to make his mark in a hot new area. He proposed an ill-defined “BitLicense” that would require registration of Bitcoin businesses in New York. During the rule-making process, his office declined to release “research and analysis” backing the necessity of a BitLicense, in violation of New York’s Freedom of Information Law. 成文法规理论上能带来确定性,但在实践中却未必。近来“比特登记证”(BitLicense)在纽约州的惨败便是一例。当电子货币比特币在几年前引起公众关注的时候,纽约金融服务主管本•洛斯基将其视为他在这个炙手可热的新领域留名的机会。他提议推出含混不清的“比特登记证”条例,要求纽约的比特币业务进行注册登记。在条例制定过程中,他的部门不惜违反纽约的《信息自由法》,拒绝提供与证明“比特登记证”之必要性相关的“研究与分析”。 The final “BitLicense” was a hodgepodge of regulations like the ones that burden the mainstream financial services sector. They were an ill fit with this emerging technology and a hindrance to innovation because they drove up the cost of starting new businesses. They didn’t acknowledge the technology’s inherent capability to provide consumer protections that surpass existing financial services. Shortly after the “BitLicense” was finalized, Lawsky stepped down from his post to establish a financial regulation consultancy. 和那些为主流金融服务增加负担的规章一样,最终出台的“比特登记证”条例是个大杂烩。这些条例完全不适应这一新兴技术,并且因提高创业成本而妨碍了创新。它们无视新技术内在的保护消费者的能力,这种保护超越了现有的金融服务。“比特登记证”条例推出不久,洛斯基就下台创立了一家金融监管咨询公司。 Today, it is anyone’s guess whether and how the New York Department of Financial Services will amend or enforce the technology- specific regulation that Lawsky produced. The “BitLicense” did not create certainty about the rules of the road for Bitcoin businesses in New York, and it did not create an upwelling of Bitcoin business activity in New York. America’s financial capital appears to be ceding ground on financial innovation to London, in the birthplace of common law. 今天,大家都在猜测纽约的金融服务管理局是否会修订或者执行洛斯基留下来的这一针对特定科技的条例,以及具体如何修订或执行。“比特登记证”并没有为比特币业务在纽约的发展之路带来确定性,也没有令比特币业务在纽约蓬勃发展。美国的金融之都在金融创新方面似乎正在让位于伦敦,普通法的发源地。 Common-law rules foster innovation because they allow anyone with a new idea or process to experiment with it, subject only to background rules, such as “stick to your promises” and “do no harm.” There are no forms to fill out or licensing fees. There is no oversight body that must examine how an innovation fits into pre-existing regulation. “Permissionless innovation” does mean some more risk to consumers and society, but our experience with high tech shows just how great the reward is when behavior is controlled with light-touch, simple, fair common-law rules. 普通法规则有利于创新,因为它允许人们去试验新主意和新方法,只要遵守诸如“履行承诺”、“避免伤害”等基本规则即可。不需要填表格,不需要付牌照费,也没有监管部门去检验一项创新在现行规章下如何自处。“免许可创新”的确意味着消费者和社会将面对较高的风险,但经验已经告诉我们,当我们的行为处于简单、公平的普通法规则的规制之下时,高科技将会给我们带来多么巨大的回报。 The United States and England today live under a dual system. In many areas, they continue to enjoy the benefits of the common law. But legislatures increasingly insert themselves, making temporal judgments that rejigger the rules that people and businesses must live by. In many fields, people look to legislation and regulation first, rather than examining how time-honored rules can be adapted to solve new problems. 现今的美国与英格兰生活在一个双重体系之下。在很多方面,她们继续享受着普通法的益处。但立法机关正不断强化自己的作用,用世俗的判断来改变日常生活与商业活动所需遵守的规则。在很多领域,人们首先寄望于立法与规管,而不是去审视自古以来的规则可以如何调适,以解决新生的问题。 Legislatures and regulatory agencies have a lot of smart people working in them. They universally believe they are pursuing the best interests of their jurisdictions. But the system they work in has perverse incentives, and they have little of the knowledge that common-law processes gather and pass down through the ages. “The life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience,” wrote jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., in his 1881 book, The Common Law. 立法机关与监管部门当中不乏能人,他们普遍认为他们在为其辖区的最大利益而努力。但他们所供职的体系有着不当的激励,并且他们对普通法体系经年累月累积传承下来的知识知之甚少。法学家小奥利佛•温德尔•霍姆斯在他1881年所著的《普通法》一书中写道,“法律的生命从不在于逻辑,而在于经验,” The common law is an important part of structuring and ordering a free and prosperous society. It is preferable to legislation and government regulation. Even when we confront new problems, we lovers of liberty should remember the common law. 构建与规范一个自由繁荣的社会,普通法体系乃重要一环,它比成文的法律与政府规章更为可取。即便遭遇新的挑战,热爱自由的我们也不应该忘记普通法。 (编辑:辉格@whigzhou) *注:本译文未经原作者授权,本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利,如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容,请私信联系,我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组,致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

同态迷信

【2016-07-07】

@海德沙龙 《阿米绪人的生意经》 在进步主义者眼里,阿米绪人恐怕是最落后、最愚昧、最守旧、最不开窍的一群人了,他们不看电视、不用手机、不开汽车,不领福利,醉心于17世纪的乡村生活,遵循着古老而朴素的教义,上学只上到八年级,然而也正是他们,在创办小企业上有着北美最出色的记录……

@whigzhou: 阿米绪人教会我很多事情,多得我都很难一一罗列,社会科学家总是抱怨社会无法做实验,可是阿米绪人的(还有摩门教徒的)经历难道不是(more...)

标签: | | |
7237
【2016-07-07】 @海德沙龙 《阿米绪人的生意经》 在进步主义者眼里,阿米绪人恐怕是最落后、最愚昧、最守旧、最不开窍的一群人了,他们不看电视、不用手机、不开汽车,不领福利,醉心于17世纪的乡村生活,遵循着古老而朴素的教义,上学只上到八年级,然而也正是他们,在创办小企业上有着北美最出色的记录…… @whigzhou: 阿米绪人教会我很多事情,多得我都很难一一罗列,社会科学家总是抱怨社会无法做实验,可是阿米绪人的(还有摩门教徒的)经历难道不是很好的实验吗?还能指望更理想的实验条件吗?可是当他们无法将它与自己的社会理论协调起来时,他们宁愿假装没看见。 @whigzhou: 本文是又一项教益,在一个自由市场里,或者(用更古老的术语)资本主义体系里,信奉自由市场(或资本主义)的人会表现更好,更加成功吗?请看犹太人,请看耆那教徒,请看阿米绪人 @whigzhou: 这一同态迷信的另一种表现是:以为在自由市场里如鱼得水成就辉煌的商人企业家一定是亲市场爱市场的,现实告诉我们,这完全是一厢情愿  
不会有太大差别

【2016-07-04】

@whigzhou: 常有人说,人类个体间99.5%的DNA是相同的,所以我们在遗传上不会有太大差别,这么说的人对数字不太敏感,0.5%的单核苷酸差异意味着每200个碱基中就有一个是不同的,每个基因平均2000个碱基对,平均可能摊上10个差异,实际上没那么多,那是因为编码段受自然选择约束,变异率低于非编码段,

@whigzhou: 但这一极简单计算即表明,不同个体的每个基因都*有机会*是不同的,只要他们各自的种系发生历史(more...)

标签: | |
7235
【2016-07-04】 @whigzhou: 常有人说,人类个体间99.5%的DNA是相同的,所以我们在遗传上不会有太大差别,这么说的人对数字不太敏感,0.5%的单核苷酸差异意味着每200个碱基中就有一个是不同的,每个基因平均2000个碱基对,平均可能摊上10个差异,实际上没那么多,那是因为编码段受自然选择约束,变异率低于非编码段, @whigzhou: 但这一极简单计算即表明,不同个体的每个基因都*有机会*是不同的,只要他们各自的种系发生历史上所面临的选择压力不同,就很可能不同,而且每个基因可能有多个不同之处。 @whigzhou: 理解这一点的最佳类比是程序代码,把DNA想象成一个软件的源代码,其中98.5%是注释,剩下1.5%是有用编码,现在为它建立一亿个副本,拷贝时平均每200个字符随机出现一个拷贝错误,然后将无法正常工作的副本剔除,剩下能工作的副本会表现出多大功能差异? @whigzhou: 没写过代码的同学可以考虑做菜,让使用同样主料的两道菜味道变得十分不同,需要在调料上有多大不同?从寡淡无味变成巨咸无比需要几克盐?从不辣变成超辣需要几克辣椒汁?制造难以忍受的麻味需要几克花椒汁?  
Game of Thrones

【2016-07-01】

@whigzhou: 喜欢Game of Thrones首先是因为一条底线:不迎合恶俗趣味,不落大俗套,其次是一条顶线:三观很赞,封建价值观和骑士精神得到颂扬,各种乌托邦理想主义逐个被嘲讽,实在难得。

@whigzhou: 好莱坞大俗套之一:一个坏结果必定是某个坏人在邪恶动机驱使下通过不端行为所造成,即多重同态:人是坏的,动机是恶的,行为是不端的,结果是坏的。

@whigzhou: 纯真爱情高于责任?被关门屠灭了。无条件和平主义?全吊(more...)

标签: |
7231
【2016-07-01】 @whigzhou: 喜欢Game of Thrones首先是因为一条底线:不迎合恶俗趣味,不落大俗套,其次是一条顶线:三观很赞,封建价值观和骑士精神得到颂扬,各种乌托邦理想主义逐个被嘲讽,实在难得。 @whigzhou: 好莱坞大俗套之一:一个坏结果必定是某个坏人在邪恶动机驱使下通过不端行为所造成,即多重同态:人是坏的,动机是恶的,行为是不端的,结果是坏的。 @whigzhou: 纯真爱情高于责任?被关门屠灭了。无条件和平主义?全吊死在树上了。社会平等与道德纯洁乌托邦?神权专制。解放者之名可以让权力意志毫无约束?女拿破仑。 @whigzhou: 最近两季里我最喜欢的形象是麻雀教,这个隐喻真是太棒了,里面可以看到很多东西的影子,大主教的表演也非常到位,特别是他谦卑的姿态、慈祥的面容,谆谆的口吻、和阴森恐怖的氛围,完美结合。 @whigzhou: 第六季最让我失望的是挑了个歪嘴软蛋演青年Ned,不久前看到篇文章 http://t.cn/R5R4CZO 说新一代演员里已经找不出男子气十足的了,不是没需求,需求一直很旺盛,就是没供给了,看来是真的。 @天无邪:可是龙妈不是乌托邦吗。。 @whigzhou: 是啊,所以这还是个悬念,假如最后一季以龙妈光荣胜出收场,并且被赋予极为正面的解放者形象,那我对该剧的好感就没了,算我一厢情愿
自作多情

【2016-06-28】

@whigzhou: 没有什么不言而喻的、先验的、普适的、永恒的、自动确立的价值,即所谓普世价值,只有从某些特定社会开始的,在某些特殊文化背景在孕育的,经由某条特定历史路径而被特定共同体接受的,并且仍然需要特定文化条件支撑的特殊价值。

@whigzhou: 当然,幸运的话,你可以努力推行你所珍爱的那套特殊价值,帮助它取得主导地位,令其普及于世,但这不是普世主义者说的普世价值。

@不知说些啥168: 人不能吃人肉是不是普世价值?

@whigzhou: 当然不是,除非你把以往众多食人族统统开除人籍

@whigzhou: 人文主义/启蒙主义/进步主义者曾(自觉或不自觉的)将普适价值论用作推行其特殊价值的策略工具,以为将其宣扬为普世价值,会为自己的推行措施赋予合法性和说服力,有时确有如此效果,但更多时候那只会带来失败,因为要让人相信普世价值,必须对人性和文化持一种不切实际的乐观假定。

@whigzhou: 反殖民主义,威尔逊主义,联合国,非洲悲剧,阿拉伯之春,都是这一虚幻假定的产物,在天真民主派看来,只要拿掉(more...)

标签: | | | |
7228
【2016-06-28】 @whigzhou: 没有什么不言而喻的、先验的、普适的、永恒的、自动确立的价值,即所谓普世价值,只有从某些特定社会开始的,在某些特殊文化背景在孕育的,经由某条特定历史路径而被特定共同体接受的,并且仍然需要特定文化条件支撑的特殊价值。 @whigzhou: 当然,幸运的话,你可以努力推行你所珍爱的那套特殊价值,帮助它取得主导地位,令其普及于世,但这不是普世主义者说的普世价值。 @不知说些啥168: 人不能吃人肉是不是普世价值? @whigzhou: 当然不是,除非你把以往众多食人族统统开除人籍 @whigzhou: 人文主义/启蒙主义/进步主义者曾(自觉或不自觉的)将普适价值论用作推行其特殊价值的策略工具,以为将其宣扬为普世价值,会为自己的推行措施赋予合法性和说服力,有时确有如此效果,但更多时候那只会带来失败,因为要让人相信普世价值,必须对人性和文化持一种不切实际的乐观假定。 @whigzhou: 反殖民主义,威尔逊主义,联合国,非洲悲剧,阿拉伯之春,都是这一虚幻假定的产物,在天真民主派看来,只要拿掉坏蛋和暴君,移除障碍,热爱普世价值的人民便会自动建立美好家园 @whigzhou: 普世主义祸害极深,其内在困境在当前西方的共同体危机中已暴露无遗 @疯旗Virus: 那你们是如何判断一件事情是好的还是不好的呢?又是如何使一个族群接受的呢? @whigzhou: 特殊价值论不是价值虚无论,作为个体,你当然会持有某种特殊价值观,可以让你基于此而做判断 @构成单恋寂: 价值相对算不算一种普世价值 @whigzhou: 现实中的相对主义实际上是自我否定主义,特殊主义者承认存在不同价值体系,同时坚持自己的价值体系,相对主义者也承认存在不同价值体系,同时抛弃、否定、贬低自己所在共同体的价值体系,在西方白左中,相对主义表现为反西方、反现代、反文明 @只配叫猪_: 加了这么多规定,还是一般所言的普世价值吗。各种特殊价值之间有没有交集呢,这个交集是不是普世价值? @whigzhou: 据我所知,没多少人如此理解普世价值 @只配叫猪_: 两种特殊价值的群体间是否可能订立契约,订约的共同理念基础是否是普世价值?如果人类文明存在趋势,主导趋势的理念是否可称为普世价值? @whigzhou: 契约可以扩大共同体,推行某种特殊价值,但此类努力从未达到过近乎于普世的程度,远远没有 @只配叫猪_: 如果人类文明存在趋势,主导趋势的理念是否可称为普世价值? @whigzhou: 历史或许表现出了某种趋势,但不是历史决定论意义上的必然,而『不言而喻、先验、自动确立』要求或暗示着这种必然性 @只配叫猪_:殖民和这个是什么关系呢 @whigzhou: 如果我们相信自己所珍爱价值是普世的,那就可以指望其他共同体一有机会便欣然接受它,反之,我们只能努力让自己的共同体处于支配地位,才能确保我们的价值观得以盛行,至少安全存在下去 @只配叫猪_:我指的是双方订约所需的共同理念基础,至少守诺是双方都要认可的 @whigzhou: 契约关系的维持需要一大套价值观的保障,这组价值本身就是非常特殊的,远远没有接近过普世的程度 @whigzhou: 通俗的说,我们特殊主义者不自作多情,我们热爱自由,但不一厢情愿的以为别人也都热爱自由,所以为了确保自由,我们需要谋求或维持自由共同体的强大 @whigzhou: 你们不妨暂时离开你们通过自我选择而为自己构建的信息环境,随便找些小区居民问问,有几个把个人自由放在其价值序列靠前位置的?你们也可以去了解一下各民族的传统文化,有几个把个人自由视为重要价值的? @窝头没吃饱:辉格老师觉得自然法是不存在的吗? @whigzhou: 是的,洛克意义上的自然法不存在,哈耶克意义上的自然法(如果可以这么叫的话)存在,两者的区分见旧文:http://t.cn/zWCeTRJ 另外还可参见我的《罗斯巴德批判》前两篇 @人造史诗:《独立宣言》第一句就是普世价值啊。我们认为下面这些真理是不言而喻的:人人生而平等,造物主赋予…… @whigzhou: 像独立宣言这样的政治文件,不能指望他的严谨性,无论是道德哲学的,法学的,还是历史学的 @whigzhou: 序言里刚说完不言而喻,对国王的指控清单倒数第二条却是:他竭力招引印第安野蛮人(进犯我们边境),众所周知,这些印第安人的战争法则便是不分年龄性别状况的无差别屠戮 @whigzhou: 在国父们心目中,这个不言而喻对印第安野蛮人显然不成立 @whigzhou: 实际上,占据独立宣言大部分篇幅的对国王控诉绝大多数是胡扯,仅仅是宣传需要 @王蓬朋: 否则你无法解释作为奋斗的人的存在理由。独立宣言即使是一份政治宣传文件,即使没有学术性的严谨,但是你不能因此否定普世价值的存在,人人生而平等,民主自由本来就是普世的,即使世界范围内无法实现但是其作为最完美的价值观,确实值得我们为之奋斗。 @whigzhou: 为何特殊价值就不值得为之奋斗? @xqmxqm:因为丧失了统战全天下的幻觉,发现一切得靠自己打出来,自然就容易缩(当然对基于宗教理由主张普世价值的人窝从来是尊重的 @whigzhou: 没错,普世主义往往就是用来给自己壮胆的,在实践中,基督徒在多数历史阶段其实并不奉行普世主义,口头上有,行动上没有 @whigzhou: 宗教改革后普世主义一度复兴,但经历连绵宗教战争后幸存下来的,行动上都放弃了普世主义 @whigzhou: 北美清教精神明显是特殊主义,旧大陆已堕落无可救药,转而寻求自我拯救,回到了早期基督徒『福音专属于一小撮上帝选民』的态度 @隐藏的火星人:有可能的普世主义的行动吗 @whigzhou: 有啊,很多,为阿拉伯之春欢呼,欧洲多元主义政策,默奶奶张开怀抱大迎难民 @意识形象:总有几个的公约数吧?自由?温饱?安全?这些总没人反对吧? @whigzhou: 吃饱穿暖健康长寿男欢女爱儿孙绕膝,这些几近于生物本能的价值确实相当程度上是共通的,但人们谈论『普世价值』是通常不是指这些,而是关乎道德的那些,也就是鲁滨逊世界或伊甸园里没有的那些 @意识形象:我喜欢吃饱所以社会应该让每个人都吃饱否则他们要揭竿而起——我的最小公约数可以成为道德(道德并非虚无缥缈的其实也是资源分配方式的一种)的基石。实际上事实应该就是这样。 @whigzhou: 要是你喜欢一妻三妾并且相信至少一半男人都喜欢那怎么办?责令上帝改变出生性别比? @whigzhou: 『否则他们要揭竿而起』?1960年的河南人揭竿而起了?1933年的乌克兰人呢? @whigzhou: 英格兰历史上唯一一次大型揭竿而起发生在1381年,不是因为没吃饱,恰好相反,揭竿者是近代之前吃得最饱的农民,黑死病刚刚消灭了英格兰近一半人口,幸存农民条件大幅改善
朗朗上口

【2016-06-26】

@whigzhou: @sw小橘子 问我『制度决定下限,文化决定上限』这句话是不是我说的,我说这么格拉德维尔的话不像是我说的,不过这句话确实道出了一些真相,并且和我的社会进化理论相合,我的理论就是雪球模型,从人性到文化到基础政治结构到制度到可见的繁荣状况,每一外层的可能性皆受制于内层的性质与禀赋,

@whigzhou: 所以从短期看,内层结构的性质限制着外层的可能性,而从长期看,特定性质的外层的持续存在,对内层也构成了选择压力,因而也改变着内层的性质,我将这一改变称为(广义的)鲍德温效应。

@whigzhou: 我也(more...)

标签: | | | |
7226
【2016-06-26】 @whigzhou: @sw小橘子 问我『制度决定下限,文化决定上限』这句话是不是我说的,我说这么格拉德维尔的话不像是我说的,不过这句话确实道出了一些真相,并且和我的社会进化理论相合,我的理论就是雪球模型,从人性到文化到基础政治结构到制度到可见的繁荣状况,每一外层的可能性皆受制于内层的性质与禀赋, @whigzhou: 所以从短期看,内层结构的性质限制着外层的可能性,而从长期看,特定性质的外层的持续存在,对内层也构成了选择压力,因而也改变着内层的性质,我将这一改变称为(广义的)鲍德温效应。 @whigzhou: 我也曾为这套理论找过一句格拉德维尔式的警句『英国人无论到哪里都能建立起自由社会,德国人和日本人无论到哪个自由社会都会成为模范公民,犹太人和华人无论到哪个自由社会都比其他民族会挣钱……』,无奈还是不够短不够朗朗上口。 @whigzhou: 还要加上后半句『在长期经历不同制度之后,香港文化已不同于广州文化,东德人也已不同于西德人,北朝鲜人更不同于南朝鲜人』 @whigzhou: 有关个人认知能力和人格特质的研究很多,但针对族群比较的研究还很少,历时性的研究则更少,所以我们远未弄清那些特质(及相应的遗传基础)在支撑着宪政、法治、宽容、开放等文明的关键元素,但我们可以设想一下,某些重要特质的改变可能会引出何种结果。 @whigzhou: 不妨从一个分歧最小的特质开始,假如英国人的IQ分布拉低两个标准差,顶级科学家就消失了,再拉低一个标准差,整个科学社区就没了,这大概不会有疑问, @whigzhou: 再考虑经验开放性,假如一个民族的经验开放性的统计分布拉低两个标准差,该民族就不会有出色艺术家了,再拉低一个标准差,所有艺术活动都消失了,这一点不太确定,或许经验开放性不是很好的指标,但我很确信必定可以找到某项特质来评估这一点 @whigzhou: 再考虑法治,法治能够存续的前提是绝大多数人在绝大多数场合愿意自觉遵守规则,否则再强大的司法机器也没用,那么一个族群的尽责性分布拉低两个标准差结果会如何?情绪稳定性也拉低两个标准差呢? @whigzhou: 道德感又如何?普通法的要义便是:凭良心和常识即可自行判断某一行为是否正当,在一个普遍缺乏道德感的群体,这样的体系能够存续吗?道德感无关于人格特质吗? @沉默的马大爷: 智商拉低两个标准差,意味着有一半人是弱智,别说科学社区,整个社会都崩溃了。。大部分族群差异达不到这个量级,组内差异一般要高于组间差异 @whigzhou: 两个标准差是夸张了点,但绝非不现实,请看右表 http://t.cn/hByJ2N 不许随便说人弱智,人家要不高兴的 @whigzhou: 确实,消灭顶级科学家大概一个标准差就够了  
哐嘡一记

【2016-06-26】

@高寒老师和考官:Brexit三大诉求:控制欧盟移民,不给EU预算,废除EU法规。您觉得谈判结果对英国有利吗?我感到悲观。1现在EFTA四个国家都接受人口自由流动,瑞士14年公投反对暂未实施;2挪威瑞士都缴纳EU预算,比英国少缴17%和58%;3均部分接受欧盟法规。

@whigzhou: 那要看下届英国政府打算往哪个方向走

@whigzhou: 以及他们得到反应是否积极。A)假如下届政府打算朝封闭方向走,总归是死路,B)若想朝自由与开放的方向走,那么,B1)谈EFTA,那么,B1.1)未遭排斥,结果不会比留欧差,B1.2)遭排斥,转B2,B2)(more...)

标签: | |
7224
【2016-06-26】 @高寒老师和考官:Brexit三大诉求:控制欧盟移民,不给EU预算,废除EU法规。您觉得谈判结果对英国有利吗?我感到悲观。1现在EFTA四个国家都接受人口自由流动,瑞士14年公投反对暂未实施;2挪威瑞士都缴纳EU预算,比英国少缴17%和58%;3均部分接受欧盟法规。 @whigzhou: 那要看下届英国政府打算往哪个方向走 @whigzhou: 以及他们得到反应是否积极。A)假如下届政府打算朝封闭方向走,总归是死路,B)若想朝自由与开放的方向走,那么,B1)谈EFTA,那么,B1.1)未遭排斥,结果不会比留欧差,B1.2)遭排斥,转B2,B2)到欧洲外面找出路,加入北美自由贸易区,与澳新恢复自由贸易,印度缅甸新加坡,等等, @whigzhou: 总之,离开欧盟单一壁垒,很多大门开放了,只要真愿意往自由方向走,机会多的是 @whigzhou: 下任美国总统的态度也很重要,这一点不是很乐观 @whigzhou: 无论哪条路,谈判和立法过程都要好多年,这期间说不定波兰匈牙利奥地利已经被欧盟开除了,到时候英国拉一个新欧洲同盟也不是没可能 @高寒老师和考官:唉,这下只剩信念了。我觉得商人和投资者最怕uncertainty,英国估计得皮软几年,国家不会崩盘吧 @whigzhou: 大的转向哪有不吃几年苦的?当年新西兰被哐嘡一记关在英国市场外面,几近崩溃,现在怎么样?苏格兰是会离,不脱欧也会离,也不算什么坏事 @whigzhou: 基本的判断是欧盟这条船正在沉,没有这个共识,当然想不到一起,余下都是废话了。 @剪刀手霍德华:周老师对这次公投表现出来的老年人决定年轻人命运的情形怎么看? @whigzhou: 老人相对懂事一点,幸亏有他们拉着,不然科宾就是下任首相桑德斯就是下届总统了 【2016-06-30】 @whigzhou: 从最新情况看,我能想到的最可能前景是:欧元资产贬值/劣化→希腊彻底崩盘→其他南欧国家告急→德国出于迫切需要的欧洲团结决定出大血救助→德国选民不高兴,换上疏欧政府→英国带着庆幸和一丝窃喜加速逃跑→欧元资产外逃,伦敦是主要避难地→欧元区实施资本流动管制→欧元区大萧条→南欧退出…… @whigzhou: 现有制度结构下,希腊问题(乃至整个南欧问题)不可能解决,1870年代英国为了解决埃及债务问题,把埃及变成了保护国,而德国显然没办法把希腊变成自己的保护国,就算人家连选18个无赖上来你也没辙。  
眼不见心不烦

【2016-06-23】

@whigzhou: 【福利主义的最佳总结】社会主义制度下,贫穷是不被允许的,你会被强制吃好、穿好、住好、受教育、受雇佣,无论你是否喜欢。那些被证明缺乏必要品格与勤劳因而不值得如此对待的人,将被以仁慈的方式处决,但只要你被允许活着,你就必须优裕的活着。——萧伯纳(英国社会主义大本营费边社早期领袖之一)

@whigzhou: 这种念头背后的动机显然是一种『眼不见心不烦』的审美需要,和推动废除肉刑(more...)

标签:
7222
【2016-06-23】 @whigzhou: 【福利主义的最佳总结】社会主义制度下,贫穷是不被允许的,你会被强制吃好、穿好、住好、受教育、受雇佣,无论你是否喜欢。那些被证明缺乏必要品格与勤劳因而不值得如此对待的人,将被以仁慈的方式处决,但只要你被允许活着,你就必须优裕的活着。——萧伯纳(英国社会主义大本营费边社早期领袖之一) @whigzhou: 这种念头背后的动机显然是一种『眼不见心不烦』的审美需要,和推动废除肉刑的动机类似,别让脏兮兮的穷人在我眼前晃悠,看着烦,正如缺手缺脚的受刑者在眼前晃悠让我心烦意乱一样,不如把他们都吊死,实际上肉刑废除确实导致了死刑数量大幅上升。  
往死里操

【2016-06-21】

1)大众从来不是政治角斗场的主动力量,

2)有时他们确实会扮演重要角色,比如被一部分精英动员起来,用作棍子去打另一部分精英或大众,

3)充当棍子不会给他们带来好处,拿他们当棍子使的人当然也会把他们往死里操:看看烟草税、可乐税、最低工资法、禁毒禁娼、欧洲油价电价、医药管制、土地规划……

4)所以围绕福利制度、累进税、普选权等等的制度之争根本不是什么阶级斗争,那从来都是不同精英团体之间的斗争,各自努力将社会竞争规则朝自己希望的方向改变,

(more...)

标签: | |
7219
【2016-06-21】 1)大众从来不是政治角斗场的主动力量, 2)有时他们确实会扮演重要角色,比如被一部分精英动员起来,用作棍子去打另一部分精英或大众, 3)充当棍子不会给他们带来好处,拿他们当棍子使的人当然也会把他们往死里操:看看烟草税、可乐税、最低工资法、禁毒禁娼、欧洲油价电价、医药管制、土地规划…… 4)所以围绕福利制度、累进税、普选权等等的制度之争根本不是什么阶级斗争,那从来都是不同精英团体之间的斗争,各自努力将社会竞争规则朝自己希望的方向改变, 5)在实行自由规则的社会,穷人/弱者/笨蛋往往也会失败,但那是有尊严的失败,而在福利制度下,穷人/弱者/笨蛋还是会失败,但那将是被骗走了尊严的、堕落的、污秽的失败,就像The Wire里那个拖着鼻涕的线人 @振华-Citywanderer:土地规划?何解 @whigzhou: 没有土地规划时,穷人可以住偏一点、差一点、挤一点的房子,甚至拖车,有了土地规划,穷人睡在公园椅子上 @whigzhou: 很多人说有了普选权就不可能收人头税了,蠢,换个名字而已,德国电价中的70%不是人头税是啥?  
分明以人代畜

【2016-06-18】

@希波克拉底门徒 今天听说一个朋友要退党,我问他有没有读过圣经,他说没有,我说去信这个的人大多数没完整读完圣经。我最后跟他讲:我尊重你,尊重你的信仰自由权利,但不会尊重基督教信仰。我替你最后选择基督教信仰感到惋惜。希望你在选择一种信仰前,先了解它的来龙去脉、真实面貌,完全不了解就去信,跟不知道对方性格、历史就去领结婚证有什么区别?over

@黄章晋ster: 宗教提供的价值体系的非理性化,恰恰是一个社会道德伦理体系能相对稳定的保证。如果一个社会的道德伦理是可以讨论的,是服从理性的,它必然是不稳定甚至是无从建立的,它必然很快会讨论人肉是否好吃这样(more...)

标签: | | |
7216
【2016-06-18】 @希波克拉底门徒 今天听说一个朋友要退党,我问他有没有读过圣经,他说没有,我说去信这个的人大多数没完整读完圣经。我最后跟他讲:我尊重你,尊重你的信仰自由权利,但不会尊重基督教信仰。我替你最后选择基督教信仰感到惋惜。希望你在选择一种信仰前,先了解它的来龙去脉、真实面貌,完全不了解就去信,跟不知道对方性格、历史就去领结婚证有什么区别?over @黄章晋ster: 宗教提供的价值体系的非理性化,恰恰是一个社会道德伦理体系能相对稳定的保证。如果一个社会的道德伦理是可以讨论的,是服从理性的,它必然是不稳定甚至是无从建立的,它必然很快会讨论人肉是否好吃这样的话题。我们反对器官人肉的自由买卖,其实是自觉使用了宗教提供的绝对伦理。 @黄章晋ster:从社会功能而言,除了为一个社会提供稳定的价值锚链,它还早就衍生出为社会提供反哺和救济功能,社区的化精神纽带功能,跨阶层交流沟通的调适功能……这些社会功能,都是世俗政府无法有效提供的,而西方社会提供类似功能的非宗教社会组织,本身就是宗教组织启发的产物。 @黄章晋ster:我们不用去做历史表现的对照,仅从将来的可能性而言,在彼岸建立天国的信仰和在现世建立人间天国的社会,必然是前者造成灾难的可能性更小。 @黄章晋ster:基督教诞生前的希腊罗马世界,只有崇拜英雄、强者、理性的价值取向,并无同情弱者之类的价值取向,虽然多数人有共情同理心,但不意味着它能上升为稳固的群居规则,尤其是在生产力低下的时代。虽然中国两千年来儒表法里,但儒家伦理若不成意识形态,以韩非子价值观造就的社会必然是斗兽场。 @whigzhou: 前面几点我都没意见,这条不同意 @whigzhou: 需要注意到,所有文明都经历了一个残忍行为逐渐减少的过程,特别是人牲和肉刑的普遍消亡,这个过程发生的很早,宗教在其中似乎并未扮演关键角色 @whigzhou: 去残忍化的过程可能是社会大型化及和平秩序长期持续的自然后果,宗教或意识形态未必是前导因素 @whigzhou: 类似对战场(和角斗场)上的失败者缺乏同情的残酷文化在罗马存续得较久,可能和他的普遍兵役义务有关,当军事职业与其他职业分化更明确,壁垒更森严之后,军事阶层之外的文化就会改变 @whigzhou: 另一方面,就『同情弱者』的经济方面而言,罗马帝国向其公民大派面包可是福利国家的先驱 @baidu冷兵器吧: 希腊和基督教前罗马世界有着长期的慈善行为和组织,这不可能是没有同情价值观的社会 @whigzhou: 对,以后世标准,罗马人表现得缺乏同情心的方面主要是针对战斗中的失败者,依我看这是尚武精神与普遍兵役的结果 @whigzhou: 说起同情心,想到个事情,轿子从北宋开始流行,起初士大夫都鄙视坐轿子的,认为太残忍(也太娘炮),程颐还说『吾不忍乘,分明以人代畜』,但此后轿子地位不断提升,到清代已是官绅富家主要交通工具,是个官没有不坐的,毫无压力,原因显然不是儒家意识形态衰弱,而是人口压力提高,人力益发便宜了。 @whigzhou: 明廷已重新控制北方,清廷更控制了草原,所以这事情不能以缺驴马解释,只能说人比驴便宜。
严重低估

【2016-06-13】

@海德沙龙 《美国铁路已经落伍了?》 新干线子弹头,欧洲之星,中国高铁……这些耀眼夺目的宏伟工程,在许多人眼里都是现代
工业文明的杰出代表,也是工业党和技术治国论者引为自豪(或艳羡自怜)的对象,即便在美国这个技术治国论素不吃香的地方,
也不乏有人高声质问:我们的高铁在哪里?

@whigzhou: 美国铁路业的活力一度被州际贸易委员会(ICC)的僵硬管制几近扼杀,不过从1970年代中期福特政府所发动的一
系列去管制化改革开始,铁路业又逐渐恢复了活力,此后表现一直不错,只是很少为世人所知。

< (more...)
标签: | | | |
7212
【2016-06-13】 @海德沙龙 《美国铁路已经落伍了?》 新干线子弹头,欧洲之星,中国高铁……这些耀眼夺目的宏伟工程,在许多人眼里都是现代 工业文明的杰出代表,也是工业党和技术治国论者引为自豪(或艳羡自怜)的对象,即便在美国这个技术治国论素不吃香的地方, 也不乏有人高声质问:我们的高铁在哪里? @whigzhou: 美国铁路业的活力一度被州际贸易委员会(ICC)的僵硬管制几近扼杀,不过从1970年代中期福特政府所发动的一 系列去管制化改革开始,铁路业又逐渐恢复了活力,此后表现一直不错,只是很少为世人所知。 @whigzhou: 福特是战后历史上被严重低估的一位总统,里根之后的一系列创新浪潮和经济繁荣的制度源头其实都可以追溯到福特 ,他所启动的去管制化改革有幸在卡特、里根和克林顿时期一直得以延续,没有这一系列改革,后来的运输、医疗和互联网发展都 会大打折扣,不过在主流公知叙事中,从来不会有这种人的位置。 @whigzhou: 制度变革与经济/社会表现之间的滞后关系也是现代选举政治所面临的一大困境,碰上那些特别愚蠢的选民时,这问 题就更严重,我敢打赌,今天跺脚痛骂马杜罗的委内瑞拉人里,不少还在怀念查韦斯呢 @PlusKing2022: 福特还是任期太短 没足够时间形成自己的政策 @whigzhou: 但他任内参与谋划经济政策的几员大将政治生命可不短:唐纳德·拉姆斯菲尔德、迪克·切尼、艾伦·格林斯潘 @whigzhou: 而且福特本人是国会老江湖,纸牌屋游戏高手,政策推动能力强