We can certainly think about the forms, but if they're non-physical they can't be grasped by something physical like the body.

我们当然能想象型相,但假如他们是非现实的,他们将不能被现实的事物,比如肉体,所认知

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

Two-- that which is eternal or non-physical can only be grasped by the eternal and the non-physical.

前提二,永恒和非现实的事物只能被,永恒和非现实的事物所认知

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

If the forms are not physical objects, then Socrates thinks it follows they can't be grasped.

如果型相不是物理实体,那么苏格拉底认为他们不可被认知

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

So Socrates has what he wants, once we give him premise number two, that the eternal, non-physical can only be grasped by the eternal, non-physical.

所以如果我们同意他的前提二,苏格拉底就得到了他想要的,前提二说永恒,非现实的事物,只能被永恒,非现实的事物认知

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

Is it or isn't it true that those things which are eternal or non-physical can only be grasped by something that is itself eternal and non-physical?

我们是否可以说,那些永恒,或非现实的事物只能被,本身是永恒和非现实的其他事物认知呢

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

They've got to be grasped by something non-physical--namely, the soul.

他们只能被,非现实的事物认知,比如灵魂

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

It could be that even though the general claim, "It takes one to know one" Is false, the particular claim, "Eternal, non-physical can only be grasped by the eternal, non-physical," Maybe that particular claim is true.

即使一般来说,同类互知这个观点是错的,但它的特例,也就是永恒的非现实的东西只能被永恒的,非现实的东西所理解,这可能是对的

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选