Simmias says we can't conclude that the soul is indestructible because we should not believe the subconclusion 4 invisible things can't be destroyed.

他说我们不能得出结论说,灵魂不朽或几乎不朽或其他什么,因为我们不该相信,4这个结论4,即无形的东西不可毁灭。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

Well, if that's the right thing to say about the France case, then why not say the same thing about the near-death experience case?

如果关于法国的例子是对的,那为什么关于濒死体验,我们就不能得出相同的结论呢

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

The fact that you could die and you don't know when you're going to die doesn't yet entail that you could die at any minute, at any moment.

你可能会死和你不知道,自己什么时候会死这个事实并不能得出,你可能随时随刻死的结论。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

Still, granted the premise, if you can't picture it or imagine it, you can't believe in it-- Should we conclude, therefore, that you can't believe you're going to be dead?

但让我们仍然基于，无法想象的东西是不能相信的这个前提-,我们就该得出，人不能相信自己的死亡,这一结论吗？

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

And of course even if in many cases, the engine continues to exist for a while, after the destruction of the car, certainly it doesn't follow the engine is immortal that continues to exist forever.

当然，即使在许多情况下，发动机在汽车毁坏后，能继续存在一段时间，但当然不能得出结论说,发动机是不朽的会永远存在下去。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

No. We shouldn't conclude that.

不，并不能得出这个结论。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

Harmony is not invisible in the relevant sense, so it could still be true that invisible things can't be destroyed, since the soul is invisible in that sense, it would follow the soul can't be detroyed.

和声在这个意义上不是无形的，所以无形的东西不能毁灭,仍然可以是正确的，因为灵魂在这个意义上仍是无形的，你可以得出灵魂不能毁灭的结论。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

should we conclude therefore, given that we've got the premise, "If you can't picture it or imagine it, then you can't believe in it," since I've just said, look, you can't imagine being dead, but that's not due to any failure of imagination, that's because there's nothing there to imagine or picture.

于是我们就应该基于这个前提，想象不了的东西就不能相信，得出结论吗“,我刚才已经说过，人不能想象自己的死亡，不是因为想象的失败，而是本来就没有东西可以想象。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选