Even though Socrates doesn't respond to that objection, we need to ask on Socrates' behalf, is there a possible answer to this objection?

即使苏格拉底没有回应它,我们要代表苏格拉底发问，这个观点有没有可能的答案？

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

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。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

So maybe Plato just thought it wasn't a good answer to Cebes' objection.

或者柏拉图只是觉得这对,赛贝斯反对观点回答得不好。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

Socrates never says Simmias, here's what your objection goes wrong: harmony is not really invisible or can't be destroyed, whatever it is, so we don't have a counterexample.

苏格拉底从没说过，西米亚斯,你的观点在这里有错,和声并非无形或者不可毁灭，所以我们没有了反例。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

So speaking personally,I don't find the Napoleon objection a telling one.

因此我个人认为，拿破仑例子并非是对人格理论的有效反对。

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

Now I don't mean to be utterly dismissive of the objection.

我现在不是轻视这些反驳

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

But the complaint then, or the objection to the physicalist, takes the form that we couldn't be a merely physical entity because no merely physical entity could have free will.

但人们对此的诟病,或物理主义的反驳者认为,人不可能仅仅是一个物理实体,因为物理实体不可能有自由意志

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选

Well, one way of course is to accept the objection and say " "You're right Death isn't really bad for me " And some philosophers have indeed accepted that very conclusion, maybe Epicurus Most of us want to say " "No, no Death is bad for me" So we need a better answer to the ?" "Oh yeah? When is it bad for you?"

一种方式当然是接受它并说,“你是对的，死亡对我来说真的没什么坏处“,而一些哲学家确实接受了,那个结论，也许比如伊壁鸠鲁,我们大多数人想说,“不，不，死亡对我来说有坏处“,于是我们需要一个更好的答案来回答,“是么？，它什么时候对你有坏处了“

耶鲁公开课 - 死亡课程节选