想象一下，你八岁的儿子回家后夸口说他在体育课上赢了比赛。正当你的心开始骄傲地膨胀时，他告诉你他不是唯一的赢家——整个班级都赢了比赛。事实证明，这位体育老师认为只说出一个获胜者是不公平的。如果我们对公平的痴迷导致了这样的荒谬，我们为什么要如此致力于公平呢?为什么不把最好的留给真正值得拥有它的人呢?在一个没有公平的世界上，还会有正义、善良和同情吗?John and Ken play favorites with Stephen Asma from Columbia College Chicago, author ofAgainst Fairness: In Favor of Favoritism.
John and Ken argue whether or not a fixation on fairness flattens out differences in merit. John draws some distinctions among situations that render equal treatment. He offers that fairness may not adequately apply to all situations.
John and Ken are joined by Stephen Asma, author ofAgainst Fairnessand Professor of Philosophy at Columbia College Chicago. Stephen looks at the history of nepotism and argues that it has only recently become a problem. He also takes a broad view, in particular toward how contemporary Chinese people often prioritize the family in their ethical decisions, which factors into their understanding of nepotism. Stephen further explores the basis of these preferences in our biological nature.
但约翰问:即使这些偏好可能植根于我们的本性，我们难道不应该考虑它们是对还是错吗?肯还想知道我们是否应该批评公平，因为我们生活在一个遭受许多不平等的历史时刻。斯蒂芬回答说，这些不平等不会通过诉诸于公平的主张来解决，而是通过可能需要某些形式的优惠待遇的行动来解决。回到更哲学的问题，约翰要求斯蒂芬回应罗尔斯的社会和公平正义的概念。
Roving Philosophical Reporter(Seek to 6:21): Natalie Jones looks at nepotism and interviews the son of Saul Bellow, Adam Bellow, author ofIn Praise of Nepotism: A Natural History. She also looks at the negative effects of nepotism in business.
Sixty-Second Philosopher(Seek to 45:32): Ian Shoales pokes fun at how certain powerful families have influenced and exerted their control over societies.
