"There is no question about that. But we need to understand much more about that.
VOA: standard.2010.06.23
No, we call that work positive work. All right, so that means we need to put a negative sign right here, by convention.
历史上有过不同的习惯,这里我们规定,如果环境对系统做功。
In terms of why universities need Muslim chaplains, when I was at NYU as an undergrad, we had no central authority to figure.
就大学为什么需要穆斯林教士而言,当我还是纽约大学的学生时,我们没有一个核心领导。
If they're going to survive thinking about this case at all, we need to throw in a no branching rule.
如果要让这个案例说得通,我们必须加入无分支规则。
And we have been fighiting at where we had no need to fight, at least initially, in Iraq.
同时我们还在,不该去的地方发起了进攻,至少,最早在伊拉克时是这种情形。
That's why we need independence of the central bank; we want to have a central banker that can say no to the government.
这就是为什么我们需要独立自主的,中央银行;,我们希望有一个可以对政府说不得,中央银行家。
Then,we need to dismiss. No more questions?
那么就下课了,没有问题了吗?
So we don't need to add,in this ad hoc fashion,the no branching rule.
这样我们也就不用加入无分支规则了。
And notice by the by, that when we make choices about our future, from the hedonist point of view, at least, there's no particular need to dwell a whole lot on the past, because what's done is done.
需要注意的是,当我们,为未来作选择时,起码享乐主义者认为,不必过分着眼于过去,因为过去的已经过去。
So unlike those modern dualists who think we need to appeal to something immaterial in order to explain bodily sensations, Socrates thinks no, no, the body takes care of all the bodily sensations, all the desirings and the wantings and the emotions and the feelings and the cravings.
而现代的二元论者,认为需要用非物质的东西,来解释肉体上的感觉,但苏格拉底不这么想,他认为肉体负责所有的肉体上的感觉,所有的欲望,需求,感情,感觉和渴望
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“
应用推荐