我们会被我们祖先的罪孽所玷污，约翰说。看看亚当和夏娃的行为和他们给我们带来的后果吧!然而，肯并不这么认为。他说，毕竟是亚当和夏娃吃了苹果——为什么上帝要让其他人类为不是我们的错负责呢?约翰指出，不仅是《圣经》规定了这种联系，律法也是如此。他举了未成年人驾驶导致车祸的例子——在这种情况下，父母将承担责任。约翰接着又举了一个例子，但肯认为这些都是特殊情况，问题的核心是一个人不能也不应该为自己以外的行为负责。Ken和John接着谈到了羞耻感在关联犯罪概念中所扮演的角色并简要讨论了奴隶制和赔款的争议，这在《流动的哲学记者》中有更深入的探讨。

Ken and John are joined by guest Larry May, Professor of Philosophy at Vanderbilt University and author ofSharing Responsibility. John asks Larry what sparked his interest in the topic of moral taint and collective responsibility. Larry explains that his interest goes back to his teenage years, when the Vietnam War was taking place and he felt ashamed for the actions of his country, which was rather unlike him at the time. John asks Larry to explain one of the principles that determine to what extent we can legitimately feel responsible for another’s actions. Larry brings up the interconnectedness of human lives and how this results in our facilitation of the actions of others in ways that make us responsible for them; the indirect role played is crucial, with the main question being whether a person who is indirectly responsible for a crime has the same degree of responsibility as a person who is directly responsible. Larry opines that the degree of responsibility lessens as closeness to the act decreases.

Ken agrees that a person should be responsible if he or she somehow, albeit inadvertently, causes a certain harmful action. But exactly how much responsibility should the person be charged with? He gives the example of a worker in a factory that produces bombs that kill thousands. Here, Larry brings up the idea of moral taint, meaning how a person should feel or regard him or herself. The notion stems from that of the Ancient Greeks and is different from the concept of guilt – taint is a pollution of sorts, a feeling of being somewhat responsible. It is not as strong as being directly responsible for a certain action or being guilty of a crime. Larry provides the example of Oedipus, who sleeps with his mother and kills his father but is not aware of the familial relationship – he is thus tainted but not blameworthy.

肯问拉里，让每个人承担某种程度责任的原则是什么，拉里解释说，关于一个人是否从有害行为中受益，也有一条责任规则。他举了一个例子，肯拿着他祖父的手表，它最初是从拉里的祖父那里偷来的。在这个时候，肯的手表所有权应该被推翻吗?拉里简要地解释了美国法律是如何处理所有权变更案件的，即只回溯两代人。约翰问肯在这样的情况下他会用手表做什么，肯回答说，虽然项目有一个丑陋的历史，时间不能倒带-肯会得到手表从不公正的彩票，生活在出生时分发，就像机会。

Larry, Ken, and John continue to discuss distributions of responsibility. Larry suggests that the concept not be thought of at an individual level but rather as collective schemes of redistribution, which are not as fraught, and he quotes Thomas Jefferson’s statement on the fear of incessant responsibility. Questions from the audience are welcomed, and topics such as whether disconnecting oneself fully from ancestors or groups that influenced a person is sociopathic or even an option, wiping oneself clean from moral taint, and the relationship between distributive justice and politics of reparation are discussed. The show concludes with Larry speaking about public policy recommendations for reparations, including the difficulties of devising a scheme that does not disadvantage any particular person or group, and with Larry’s “silver bullet” advice.

• Roving Philosophical Report(寻找到5:37):娜塔莉·琼斯(Natalie Jones)与《大西洋月刊》(the Atlantic)国家记者塔-内希西·科茨(Ta-Nehisi Coates)探讨了有关奴隶制赔偿的辩论。赔偿是否真的有助于修复已经造成的损害?杜克大学经济学教授威廉•达里蒂认为，他们确实可以——赔偿将为奴隶的后代提供“购买”出路的机会，绕过奴隶制遗留下来的障碍。2022世界杯小组赛分组娜塔莉还就此事与加州大学洛杉矶分校的教授罗宾·凯利进行了交谈。
  
• 60-Second Philosopher(寻求46章16节):Ian Shoales讨论了不良影响、罪恶，以及个人在多大程度上受到历史和家庭的影响。他谈到了时间带来的遗忘，并提到了圣经中所多玛和两个天使的例子。