But most of the objections to Plato's particular form of the philosophic kingship on the practicality of his idea.
但对柏拉图,特别形式之,哲学王权的异议,在其实践性。
One can, of course, as you've already imagined, raise several objections to this view and again Aristotle seems to take the lead.
有一个人,诚如你们已猜到,提出多重异议,而亚里士多德似乎再次拔得头筹。
And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their side of the question."
如果傻瓜或猪对此有异议,那只是因为他们未体验过更高级快乐“
Well, immediately you get an objection ? You say, how could nonexistence be bad for me?
你立刻就会提出异议,你说,不存在怎么可能对我来说有坏处?
And the third force, humanistic psychology came as a reaction to it.
第三势力,人本主义心理学作为对其的异议出现。
It's not fictional enough.
福克纳在另一方面有异议--情节的虚构度不够。
They were free to dissent.
他们可以自由地异议
We saw Kaufman in the 1930s reacted against this.
我们看到Kaufman在1930年对此提出异议。
Not thinking about those facts that I knew at one point-- just not all that objectionable.
不去想这些我一度知道的事实-,也不是那么有异议的。
Suppose the soul theorist answers that last objection by saying,Ain't ever going to happen.
假设灵魂理论者对上个异议的答案是,这事情根本不可能发生。
After all, most of us are inclined to think that inequality is morally objectionable.
毕竟,大多数人都倾向于认为,不平等会引起道德异议。
So here are the objections to Bentham's utilitarianism and now, we turn to someone who tried to respond to those objections, a latter-day utilitarian, John Stuart Mill.
以上就是对边沁功利主义的异议,现在再来看看另一位,他试图回应这些异议,近代功利主义者约翰·斯图尔特·穆勒。
What about Mill's attempt to reply to the objection about individual rights?
穆勒是如何回应对个体权利的相关异议呢?
The first was the objection, the claim that utilitarianism, " by concerning itself with the greatest good for the greatest number, fails adequately to respect individual rights.
第一点异议,是说功利主义,只关注“为最多的人谋求最大的幸福,没有充分地尊重个人权利。
It starts by raising a certain philosophical objection to the personality theory.
首先我们对人格理论提出一种哲学上的异议。
People raised two objections in the discussion we had.
讨论中提出了两点异议。
And so that led us to the second objection.
这也就是第二点异议。
First it is a reaction to behaviorism.
首先是对行为主义的异议。
He doesn't dispute that.
他对这点没有异议。
Who its challenges are?
谁在异议邦国?
Here's the objection.It's a common enough objection.
异议是这样的,是再常见不过的。
All right. That's an interesting objection.
很好,这是个有趣的异议。
If inequality is morally objectionable, then it's very likely we're going to think it's morally horrendous that there's this crucial inequality: some of us die a the age of 5 while others get to live to 90.
如果不平等会引起道德异议,那么很可能我们会认为这是道德沦丧,因为这里有种非常严重的不平等:,有些人在5岁就死了而有些人却活到90岁。
So the question, that question is posed, that objection is posed by Adeimantus, you remember, at the beginning of Book IV.
依循那个理性推断的话,所以问题被呈现出来,异议由,Adeimantus,提呈出来,记得吗?就在第,IV,册一开始的地方。
So we really have here two different objections to utilitarianism.
因此我们确实对功利主义有两点异议。
应用推荐