-
But, it doesn't guarantee it, because absent further argumentation, there's no guarantee that the soul survives the death of the body.
但这不能保证,由于缺乏进一步的论证,我们无法保证,在肉体死亡后灵魂仍然存活
-
Sure. So the first year in law school, we have to write a brief and then argue it in front of a judge.
好。在法学院的第一年，我们要写一篇辩护状，并在法官面前论证。
-
The soul, we now say, based on the argument from recollection, the soul is one of our prior parts.
我们现在讲灵魂,在源于记忆的论证的基础上，灵魂是我们之前的一部分。
-
Milton's argument in this treatise is directed exclusively at licensing.
弥尔顿在这个著作中的论证直指政府许可之事。
-
The kinds of arguments we have been considering so far all fall under the general rubric of "Inference to the best explanation."
目前为止 我们讨论的这些论证,都是在 "最佳解释推理",这个一般准则下进行的的
-
Thirteen: "He would work through arguments right in front of us, " which then helped me work through them on my own."
十三：，“他能在我们面前论证论点，这样帮助了我自己对它们进行论证“
-
We've been talking about the question, What arguments might be offered for the existence of a soul?
我们一直在讨论这样一个问题,用什么论证可以证明灵魂的存在
-
The argument is not saying, "If something is possible, if I can imagine it, it's true."
这个论证并不是在说,如果某件事是可能的,如果我能想象它,那它就是真实的
-
I'd be happy to discuss with you, outside class, at greater length my favorite theories as to where the argument goes wrong and why I think it goes wrong in Descartes' case as well.
就笛卡尔的论证到底错在哪儿的问题,我很愿意在课外,和你们详细谈谈,我最信服的理论,以及我个人的看法
-
These are not names that Plato gives, but it will make it easy for us to get a fix, roughly, on the different arguments as we move from one to the next.
这些名字不是柏拉图起的,但是这能方便我们,在逐一推进的时候粗略地了解一下,这些不同论证的定义
-
Now, bracket the fact that, as I just explained, I don't myself find the argument from recollection persuasive. I don't think we got any good reason to believe based on the sort of things Plato draws our attention to.
我刚刚解释了，我并不觉得源于记忆的论证,有说服力,在柏拉图让我们注意的,这些观点的基础上。
-
But there's one other complication that you've got to be warned about, which is this. Because these are dialogues and they take the form of philosophical arguments, people put forward views and then, over the course of the discussion, change their minds about things.
但是,还有一个地方,我要提醒你们,那就是,由于这些是对话作品,且它们全都采用了哲学论证的形式,即,人们先提出观点,然后,在讨论的过程中,改变自己的关于事物想法
-
But at any rate, our question shouldn't be what was Plato thinking, but is the argument any good.
总之，我们的问题不该是,柏拉图在想什么，而是这个论证好不好。
-
It's an argument that doesn't seem to have any empirical premises; it works from purely armchair philosophical reflection.
这是一个没有任何经验前提的论证,它完全只是躺在椅子上对哲学的思考得出
-
And I've got to tell you, to this day there's a debate in the philosophical community about whether or not this argument works.
我已经告诉过你们,现今哲学界依旧在争论,到底这个论证是否正确
-
That's the argument I put up on the board at the end of last class.
这是上节课结束时,我在黑板上所写的论证
-
"He would work through arguments right in front of--" I like this one, because this is what I at least aim to be inside my head.
他能在大家面前论证论点“,我喜欢这条，因为这是我对自己的最低目标。
-
Armed with your pet diagnosis of where the argument goes wrong there, you've got to ask, "Does it also go wrong in the mind and body case?"
当你找到了一种判断这个论证,是否错误的方法时,你肯定会问,在心灵与身体的问题上,是不是也出了同样的错误
-
Now we've got the kind of argument we were looking for.
现在我们得到了一直在寻找的那种论证
-
Maybe that's where the argument goes wrong.
也许那个论证就错在这里
-
Still, that doesn't mean that we should believe the argument for the existence of the soul from near-death experiences, because the question remains, "What's the best explanation of what's going on in near-death experiences?"
但是,这并不意味着,我们应该相信那些从濒死体验角度,来证明灵魂存在的论证,因为问题仍在,对于濒死体验的,最好解释是什么
-
But very nicely, is quite elegent structure this point, Socrates puts toghther the two arguments that we just been rehearsing, the argument from recollection and the argument that came before that, the one that I dubbed the argument from recycling.
但是这一观点的结构非常精妙,苏格拉底把我们刚才演练的,两个论证放在一块，即源于记忆的论证,和在此之前的论证，就是被我称作源于轮回的论证。
-
But I want to say, on Plato's behalf, no, it's not, on behalf of the argument, Socrates should never have concluded the argument with this odd qualifying phrase that the soul is indestructible or nearly so.
但是我想代表柏拉图说，不，是代表这个论证，苏格拉底绝不该,在这个结论里,加上这个奇怪的量的修饰词,灵魂几乎是不可摧毁的。
-
Now, if we push the dualist to explain what is it about free will that rules out the possibility that we are merely physical objects, I think the natural suggestion to spell out the argument goes like this, and this is where we were at the end of last time.
现在如果我们让二元论者去解释,什么是自由意志,它又是如何否定,人仅仅是物理实体这种可能性的,我认为他们自然会这样,阐述这个论证,这是就我们在上节课结束时讲到的内容
-
At the end of last class, we started sketching an argument that comes from Descartes, the Cartesian argument, that says merely by the process of thinking, on the basis of thought alone, it tends to show that the mind-- We all agree that there are minds.
在上次课的最后,我们开始简述一个,来自笛卡尔的论证,或称为卡氏论证,这个论证说仅仅通过思考,仅仅在思想的基础上,它就能证明心灵,我们都承认有心灵
-
Maybe the argument goes wrong by assuming that identity--when A is equal to B, it's always equal to B, no matter what.
也许这个论证就错在,假设了同一性,即当A等于B的时候,它总是等于B,无论情况如何
应用推荐