I am going to discuss two fictional characters, each of whom embodies opposite reactions to the problem of moral luck identified by Thomas Nagel and Bernard Williams. The two characters are Noah Cross, played by John Huston in Roman Polanski’s film Chinatown, and Father Zosima from Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s novel The Brothers Karamazov. Cross takes the existence of moral luck as a reason to fly from moral responsibility. Zosima leaps in the opposite direction, toward unlimited moral responsibility. The responses are the same to the extent that each embodies an alternative and a challenge to normative ethics. However, Zosima’s ethic of universal responsibility and altruism is opposed in practice and sentiment to Cross’s moral skepticism. It is striking that the possibility of the former reply to moral luck is not one that philosophers working on the problem of moral luck have foreseen. Moral luck “occurs when an agent can be correctly treated as an object of moral judgment, despite the fact that a significant aspect of what he is assessed for depends on factors beyond his control.”1 Moral luck can take several forms, two of which are relevant to the thoughts of

中文翻译：

---

对道德运气的两种反应

我将讨论两个虚构人物，他们每个人都对托马斯·内格尔和伯纳德·威廉姆斯提出的道德运气问题有着相反的反应。这两个角色分别是罗曼·波兰斯基电影《唐人街》中约翰·休斯顿饰演的诺亚·克罗斯和费奥多尔·陀思妥耶夫斯基小说《卡拉马佐夫兄弟》中的佐西马神父。克罗斯把道德运气的存在作为逃避道德责任的理由。佐西玛朝着相反的方向飞跃，朝着无限的道德责任迈进。回应是相同的，因为每个回应都体现了对规范伦理的替代和挑战。然而，佐西玛的普遍责任和利他主义伦理在实践和情感上与克罗斯的道德怀疑主义是对立的。令人吃惊的是，前一种对道德运气的回答的可能性并不是研究道德运气问题的哲学家所预见的。道德运气“当一个代理人可以被正确地视为道德判断的对象时就会发生，尽管他被评估的一个重要方面取决于他无法控制的因素。”1道德运气可以有多种形式，其中两种形式与思想有关