Both Hartman and Fish argued that the rhetorical strategies of Milton's similes work to reinforce the theological categories of good and evil.
哈特曼和费什都论述到这里修辞上的策略,起到了加强,善与恶在神学层面上的区分。
The simile sets out to establish the moral polarities between good and evil, but it then works almost systematically to undo that understanding.
这里的比喻开始创造出善与恶之间的,两极性,然而后来它又几乎自动的抹去了这种理解。
It is never right to give bad examples to others, even if one expects good to come from it.
给别人示范坏榜样绝对不行,就算期待结果会是良善也不行。
No divine evil agents. Again, in the pagan worldview the primordial womb spawns all sorts of beings, all kinds of divinities, good and evil that are in equal strength.
没有带有灵力的邪恶化身,同时,在异教的世界观中,万物孕育于一个原始的发源地,所有的神,善神和恶神,都具有相同的能力。
It also explains the phenomenal 6 degrees of separation: how we are all connected and interconnected in a web potentially of goodness.
它也解释了六度分隔理论:,我们都是关联和相互关联的,在一个潜在善的网络里。
Is it part of your nature to be good or bad or is it largely due to the situation that you fall in?
人性究竟是善还是恶,或者说是否应当更多地归因于所处的环境
What starts out looking very benign, once you look closer, is pretty fierce and filled with violence, and that's why people want to leave.
乍一看非常良善,一旦仔细看,会发现它粗暴且充满暴力,而这就是人们想脱离的原因。
They are born reciters, great memory retainers, diary keepers, letter exchangers and letter savers, history tracers and debaters, and outstaying all the rest they are just great talkers."
他们天生善背,记忆超群,爱写日记,乐于书信,尤喜收藏信件,爱追溯历史,天生的辩论家,总之他们就是很健谈"
Milton's interest in moments of blurriness and of visual indistinctness suggest that the distinction between good and evil is actually never that clear.
弥尔顿对偶尔的模糊不清,以及视觉上的难以区分的兴趣暗示出,善与恶之间的区分从来就没有清晰可辨过。
You can figure Milton asking in this poem Lycidas if it's true: is it true what the Elder Brother said, ? that virtue is always rewarded and evil punished?
可以看出在《利西达斯》中弥尔顿是在问:,《科玛斯》中哥哥所说的,善有善报恶有恶报是真的么?
That's because it's here where the rigid polarities between light and dark and good and evil, all of these absolute oppositions, begin to collapse.
这是因为这里就是光与暗,善与恶之间严格的两极分化,及所有绝对的对比开始崩塌的地方。
The good human being loves what is good simply not because it is his own but because it is good.
好人喜欢单纯良善的人事物,不只是因为那与他有关,而是因为那是良善的。
The similes work not to sew everything up but make it impossible for us to maintain anything like the official position on a moral distinction between heavenly good and satanic evil.
这些比喻不是为了简单的拼凑,而是让我们不能,维持住任何天堂之善与撒旦之恶之间的,清晰的官方界限。
This was deserved punishment and the person who was saved was righteous.
恶有恶报,善有善报。
This is simply another example of how moral goodness grows out of and even requires a context of moral evil. Machiavelli's advice to you is clear.
这只是道德良善怎样源自于而且甚至,需要一个道德败坏的情境的另一个例子,马基雅维利给你们的建议很清楚。
If we're going to talk about evil, we should also talk about good.
如果我们要谈论恶,那么我们也应该谈谈善
In other words, his point is that good is only possible because of the prior existence of bad.
换句话说,他的论点是,善存在的可能,仅在恶的事先存在。
So just as there are good gods who might protect human beings there are also evil gods who seek to destroy both humans and other gods.
所以正如有保护人类的善神一样,恶神同样存在,他们力图毁灭人类和其他神灵。
And then you might raise all sorts of questions about, well, was this part of God's plan that they ought to know this and should know this, so that their choice for good actually becomes meaningful.
你们也许会有很多疑惑,好,这是不是上帝的计划,人类理应知道这点,他们应该知道这点,那样他们择善也就变得有意义了。
Adam, by tasting the apple, came into a knowledge of good, and he was only able to know this good by means of the experience of the knowledge of evil.
亚当吃了苹果,遇到了善,他只有辨别善的能力,因为他经历了恶。
The quality that I am attempting to describe is that special understanding of public life which successful statesmen have whether they are wicked or virtuous.
是对公共生活有特别的了解,而那正是,成功政治家们所共有的特质,无论他们是从邪念或善念出发。
There was good in that forbidden fruit as well as evil.
善和恶都在禁果里。
that is to say, of knowing good by evil.
就是说,从恶中了解善。
You certainly could make the case that it is not... their wealth is not appropriate to the goodness in their hearts, but that's not really the morally relevant issue.
你当然可以举出例子来。,说他们的财富与他们的良善不相当,但这与道义无关。
Every child, every one of you, every one of us was brought up to know that one must never do wrong, even if good consequences are seen to follow.
每一个小孩,在座的各位,我们每一个人都从小被教育,不要做坏事,就算结果是善也不行。
Doing anything you like, it seems to be the opposite of the platonic understanding of justice as each one doing a special function ? or fulfilling or doing a special craft.
做你爱做的事,这似乎有别于,柏拉图所理解的正义,不是要每个人都拥有一样,特殊的功用或善尽或发挥一种特殊技能吗。
And we need to ask in the case of higher or worthier pleasures are there theories of the good life that can provide independent moral standards for the worth of pleasures?
我们要问,就更高的或更有价值的快乐而言,是否存在“良善生活“的理论,能为快乐的价值,提供独立的道德标准?
Morality is extremely central to our lives, and a deep question, which we will struggle with throughout most of the course, is the question of good and evil, evil and good.
道德在我们生活中是极为核心的,我们要在大部分课中探讨的,一个深入的问题,就是善与恶的问题,恶与善
Socrates tells us repeatedly that justice in the city consists of each member, each citizen fulfilling his task in the social division of labor, in the social hierarchy.
苏格拉底不断地告诉我们,城市正义的组合,是每一位成员,每一位公民都善尽,他们在社会劳动分工,或说是社会阶层中的职责。
This is the issue for Socrates, how to channel this wild and untamed passion of spirit or heart, how to channel this to some kind of common good.
这是苏格拉底面临的难题,如何引导,这野性不驯的精神或内心热情,如何将其引导至某种共同的良善。
应用推荐