【TED演讲】失落了的民主辩论艺术（5/10)
成功的民主来自于公民辩论，Michael Sandel说－但我们对这门技艺已荒废许久。他与TED一起，带领我们进入一堂有趣的演讲，以近来美国最高法院判例（美国职业高尔夫球协会与Martin的诉讼），揭示了正义的关键本质。Sandel在哈佛教了二十多年关于正义的课程，超过一万学生听了他的课，这是哈佛有史以来听众最多的课程。2007年秋季有1115人参加了这门课。2005年秋季的课程被放到网上作为哈佛开放大学（Harvard Extension School）课程供哈佛以外的人观看。Hints:
Jack Nicklaus
Arnold Palmer
Warren
strenuous
Supreme Court
Casey Martin
注：不包括观众对话
听写以音频为准
翻译&注解：WXC1234567
任何疑问请短消息主持人
http://t1.g.hjfile.cn/listen/201311/201311090237371519870.mp3You know, it's interesting. In the case, in the lower court, they brought in golfing greats to testify on this very issue. Is walking the course essential to the game? And they brought in Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer. And what do you suppose they all said? Yes. They agreed with Warren. They said, yes, walking the course is strenuous physical exercise. The fatigue factor is an important part of golf. And so it would change the fundamental nature of the game to give him the golf cart. Now, notice, something interesting -- Well, I should tell you about the Supreme Court first. The Supreme Court decided. What do you suppose they said? They said yes, that Casey Martin must be provided a golf cart. Seven to two, they ruled. What was interesting about their ruling and about the discussion we've just had is that the discussion about the right, the justice, of the matter depended on figuring out what is the essential nature of golf. And the Supreme Court justices wrestled with that question. And Justice Stevens, writing for the majority, said he had read all about the history of golf, and the essential point of the game is to get a very small ball from one place into a hole in as few strokes as possible, and that walking was not essential, but incidental.好吧！大家看，这很有意思吧。为了这个案子，初级法院特意请来了几位高尔夫名将出庭，讨论在球场上走动究竟是否为高尔夫运动的要素。他们请来了杰克.尼可拉斯和阿诺德.帕尔默 ，你们猜他们怎么说？是的，他们同意沃伦的看法。他们说，在球场上行走是一项非常耗费体力的活动，但这项耗费体力的活动是高尔夫运动中重要的组成部分，所以，让马丁使用高尔夫球车会改变这项运动的本质。接下来有意思的事情来了。哦，我先说一下最高法院的审理结果吧。最高法院判定，你们猜是怎样？最高法院同意了马丁的请求，判决他可以使用高尔夫球车，投票表决七比二胜出。关于他们的判决以及我们刚才的讨论，一件很有意思的事情是，此案的公平公正取决于判断什么才是高尔夫运动的本质，最高法院的大法官们就这一问题展开了激烈交锋。大法官史蒂文斯，站在大多数人一边，他号称他读了所有关于高尔夫运动的历史文献，得出的结论是：这项运动本质是把一个很小的球从某处打入洞中，击打杆数越少越好，场上的走动并非本质，而是附带事件。
页:
[1]