In Genesis 1, humans are not the menials of God, And in fact Genesis expresses the antithesis of this.
在《创世纪》第一章中,人类并不是上帝的奴仆,事实上,《创世纪》第一章中表达的恰是对立的观点。
And so Chudleigh attempts to demonstrate - and this is the passage at the top of the handout - Chudleigh attempts to demonstrate that the Genesis story of Adam and Eve establishes no such thing.
因此恰德莱试图说明,-这是讲义中最上面的一段,-恰德莱试图说明,上帝创造亚当夏娃的故事并不能证明性别地位一说。
So although I don't like, I don't believe the argument is sound-- Premise one doesn't happen to be the premise I myself would want to reject.
尽管我不喜欢,或是我不认为这条论证可靠,但前提一恰是我想要反驳的,它作为前提并非偶然
Well, in '26, the-- i've shorted the one-period bond and so I have to pay out one dollar, but that's exactly what I wanted to do.
6年 我卖空的一年期债券到期了,我需要偿还一美元,不过这恰是我要做的
So as a very "grave author" - and this is what Chudleigh is implying -- Milton can tell us something potentially true about the priority of the sexes.
因此作为一个“严肃的作家“,-这是恰德莱暗示的--弥尔顿能告诉我们,关于性别优先地位的一些真相。
He's the very voice of traditional wisdom for some, as he was for Lady Mary Chudleigh.
对于一些人来说,正如对玛丽·恰德莱夫人,弥尔顿是传统智慧的发言人。
What's important for our immediate purposes is her identification of Milton as a cultural authority.
这里重要的,我想引起你们注意的是,恰德莱将弥尔顿定位为一个文化权威。
It's been said that to quote anybody is necessarily to misrepresent him, and this fact is obviously a very good thing for Lady Mary Chudleigh since Milton would certainly not himself have wanted to suggest that women are superior to men.
有这样一种说法,引用任何人的话都难免曲解其原意,很显然这对玛丽·恰德莱夫人的论证是有利的,因为弥尔顿的原意绝对不可能是说,女人的地位要高于男人。
应用推荐