求翻译：在安万德尔看来, “从非正义中获益”与“导致非正义”不同, 前者只是被动地获得自然产生的利益, 而后者是积极地谋取利益。这种被动地获取利益并不是道德错误。从“非正义中获益”违反消极责任的可能性只有一种: 即将这种行为视为积极谋取利益。但安万德尔认为, 富裕公民并没有积极谋取利益。因而, 从安万德尔的角度看来, 富裕公民无须为是什么意思？

Wonder Seoul seems to benefit from the injustice "and" lead to injustice ", the former is passive natural interests, while the latter is actively seeking interests. Passively to obtain benefits is not a moral error. Only one: such an act as to actively seek benefits from the possibility of "unjust b

正在翻译，请等待...

Looked like in peaceful ten thousand Deuel that, “obtains benefits from the non-justice” and “causes non-justly” different, the former is only a benefit which obtains passively produces naturally, but the latter seeks the benefit positively.This kind gains the benefit is not passively the morals is

Anwander, "benefiting from injustice" and "lead to injustice" different, they just passively get natural interest, which is to actively pursue their interests. This passive profit is not morally wrong. From the "unjust benefit" violations only the possibility of a negative responsibility: is this co