-
Like Homer and like Virgil, Milton intends to soar above the wheeling poles of the visible world and describe the otherwise invisible comings and goings of the gods.
像荷马和维吉尔那样，弥尔顿想屹立于现实世界之上,去描绘无形世界中上帝的来来往往。
-
If the soul is immaterial, doesn't it follow automatically, trivially, that the soul can't be destroyed by a material process?
如果灵魂是无形的,是否可以顺理成章地得出,灵魂无法被实体过程所摧毁呢
-
It's because the investment in the bodily world is so great here that Milton ultimately turns to the Christian vision, the more familiar Christian vision, of a bodiless afterlife.
对有形世界投入了这么多之后,弥尔顿最终转向了基督教视角，他更加熟悉的关于无形的来生的基督教视角。
-
And dualism simply says, "It's all nonphysical, it's part of the ether," and hence fails to explain it.
二元论只是说,"心灵是无形的,是世界的一部分",因此并不能给出合理的解释
-
So it's a seamless transition and experiments are done in context.
这就是一个无形的过渡,实验是在一定背景下完成的。
-
Is there a glass ceiling-- the zero?
有无形的障碍，零点吗？
-
So, to summarize, in Genesis 1, The view of god is that there is one supreme god, who is creator and sovereign of the world, who simply exists, who appears to be incorporeal, And for whom the realm of nature is separate and subservient.
那么，我们来总结《创世纪》第一章，对上帝的认识是只有一个无上的上帝，他就是世界的创造者和主宰者，是毋庸置疑的存在，他看起来无形无体，对于他来说，自然界是分隔的从属的。
-
You don't get the more modest conclusion invisible things can't be destroyed or it's a whole lot harder to destroy them.
不是得出个更谦虚的结论,无形的东西不会毁灭或者,要毁灭它是不容易的。
-
And the way to tell it doesn't have parts is because it's invisible, because invisible things can't have parts.
辨别它是否有部分的方法,是因为它是无形的，因为无形的东西没有部分。
-
All that Simmias needs to cause problems for Socrates' argument is the claim that harmony is invisible and harmony can be destroyed.
西米亚斯为苏格拉底的论证,带来问题的只需要是,和声是无形的,但是可以毁灭。
-
This is how this logic goes -- we are all familiar with this: our body remains to molder in the earth or welter in the ocean , but our incorporeal spirit rises to heaven where it can enjoy an ethereal, a bodiless, world of eternity.
就是这种逻辑--我们都熟悉这个：,我们的肉体在地下或是海底归于腐朽,但灵魂却会升入天堂,在那里享受无形的永生。
-
Harmony is indeed invisible in sense Number 1, you cannot see it with your eyes, but for all that, it can be destroyed.
和声用无形的第一种解读方式理解，确实是无形的，你看不见它，但是它可以毁灭。
-
So Plato could still insist things that are invisible in the sense of undetectable can't be destroyed.
所以柏拉图仍旧可以坚持说无形的东西,无形这里指不能检测到,是不能毁灭的。
-
Let's call someting invisible not only it can't be seen, not only it can't be observed, but it can't be detected at all.
让我们把一些不仅是看不见的,不仅是观察不到的，而且是完全检测不到的，东西称为无形的。
-
As long as that is true, we can't continue to believe that invisible things can't be destroyed.
只要这是正确的,就不能相信无形的东西不能毁灭。
-
So there's not a counterexample, now that we interpret the relevant notion of invisibility as undetectibility.
所以就没有了反例，因为我们给出的无形这个词的解释,是无法检测。
-
When he talks about the soul being invisible, and invisible things being indestructible, maybe he means things that can't be observed through any of your five senses.
他谈到灵魂是无形的,无形的东西不会毁灭，也许他指的无形是通过五官,都无法觉察到的东西。
-
Because even if the soul is invisible, 5 if, nonetheless, contrary to what Socrates was claiming, invisible things can be destroyed, then maybe the invisible soul can be destroyed as well.
因为即使灵魂是无形的5,像第五点所说的那样,但是和苏格拉底的观点相反的是，无形的东西可以毁灭，那无形的灵魂,也许同样可以毁灭。
-
Simmias doesn't merely assert boldly invisible things can be desytroyed.
西米亚斯并非冒失地提出,无形的东西可以毁灭。
-
Is it true that the invisible things can't be destroyed.
无形的东西不能毁灭,这个说法是不是正确的。
-
So even if we grant that what Socrates meant by invisible was can not be observed, we still have to say with Simmias , you know, fourth is just not true.
所以即使我们认同苏格拉底,指的无形是不能被感知，我们仍旧站在西米亚斯这边，第四点是不正确的。
-
So the mere fact that we decide, if we do ultimately decide that there is a soul, something nonphysical, separate and distinct from the body, doesn't guarantee that we survive our physical death.
根据我们仅有的事实去判断,如果我们最终判定灵魂是存在的,它是一种无形的,独立的,与肉体截然不同的东西,但仍不能保证我们会在肉体死亡后活下来
-
it's not really invisible in the relevant sense.
根据相关定义它就不是完全无形的。
-
Am I a body end in immaterial soul?
肉体死后会不会有无形的灵魂？
-
We have to ask, when we say invisible things can't be destroyed, what did we mean by invisible?
我们要问，当我们说无形的东西不可毁灭，我们所说的无形是什么意思？
-
So even though it's invisible, you can destroy it by destroying the musical instrument on which it depends.
所以即使它是无形的,你可以通过毁掉它所依靠的乐器,来毁灭它。
-
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。
-
Doesn't it follow that a soul, an immaterial entity, can't be destroyed by a material, physical process?
而灵魂这种,无形的实体,是否会遵循这个规律被物质,也就是物理过程摧毁呢
-
More specifically, dualists like Descartes struggle to explain how a physical body connects to an immaterial soul.
更进一步,像笛卡尔一样的二元论者努力想要解释,生理客体是如何与无形心灵相联系的
-
Is the soul invisible in the way that the forms are, being indestructable, or is it invisible in the way that radio waves are, destructible.
灵魂的无形,是和形式的无形一样不可毁灭，还是和无线电波的无形一样,是可以毁灭的。
应用推荐