Different philosophers agree that something's gone wrong in the Morning Star and the Evening Star case, but disagree about the best diagnosis of where the mistake went in.
很多哲学家都认为,在晨星和昏星的例子中,的确存在错误,但是错误出在哪里,哲学家们却各执一词
One of the reasons for thinking it's not clear whether the argument fails or not is because it's hard to pin down, where exactly did it go wrong?
并不能确定这个论证是否成立,的其中一个原因就是,我们很难确定,到底是哪里出了问题
You measure your temperature is a little up, you've got a fever, something's wrong, I better find out what that is' because temperature is a very highly controlled variable.
你测出体温偏高是,你就发烧了,身体哪里出问题了,我最好把问题找出来,因为体温是一个严格控制的身体指标
Then it basically stopped.
然后他们就不明白哪里出问题了。
Something is going on.
肯定哪里出了事端
So what we're going to do is we're going to figure out Player 1's best response quantity to each possible choice of Player 2, and then we're going to flip it around and figure out Player 2's best response quantity to each possible choice of Player 1, and then we're going to see where those coincide, where they cross.
下面我们就需要表示出,参与人1对于2不同产量下的最佳产量,然后反过来写出,在参与人1的不同产量下,参与人2的最佳产量,然后再来看看这两者在哪里相交
Saed." Natta, I wouldn't tell, for instance.
他说我叫Saed,-我就辩不出Natta来自哪里。
It's more difficult to pin down where it goes wrong.
这个论证更难分析出,哪里有错。
So where exactly does the argument break down?
那么究竟这个论证哪里出问题了呢
The interesting thing about Descartes' argument is that it's easy to see something has gone wrong in the case of the Morning Star and the Evening Star, but it's difficult to pin down what exactly went wrong.
笛卡尔论证的奇妙之处在于,我们能明显感觉到,晨星和昏星的例子中,有些东西不对劲,但很难确定,错误到底在出哪里
应用推荐