With "Shutter Island" Scorcese navigates the shadowy, occasionally invisible line between reality and imagination: "It was revealed to be many different realities and, without giving away too much, there are certainly different levels with the characters."

VOA: standard.2010.02.27

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。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

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。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

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？

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

And then if 5 is true that the soul is really invisible, we are entitled to conclude 6 The soul can't be destroyed.

然后如果5正确,即灵魂确实无形，我们有资格得出6这个结论6,灵魂不会毁灭。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

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。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

So the crucial point right now is that, thinking about harmony is offered as a counterexample to the generalization that invisible things can't be destroyed.

所以现在的重要问题是，和声的例子现在作为,灵魂不可毁灭,这一概括说法的反例。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

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。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

If he could show us, he could convince us that harmony is not really invisible, then we would no longer have a counterexample to the claim that the invisible can't be destroyed.

如果他可以说服我们,和声并非无形，那我们就没有了,灵魂不可毁灭,这一论断的反例。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

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。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

So I think it's pretty clear when Socrates starts talking about what's visible versus what's invisible, he doesn't limit himself to vision, he means to be talking about all of the 5 senses.

所以我认为很清楚的是，苏格拉底,在谈论何为有形,何为无形的时候，并没有局限在看这一种感官上,他要谈的是所有的五种感官。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

So could Plato continue to claim things that are fully invisible, meaning undetectable, t be destroyed.

所以柏拉图可以继续称,完全无形的东西，意思是无法检测的，这些东西是不可毁灭的，those，things，can’

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选