超級強化講義lv2翻譯

Present-dayphilosophers?Present-dayphilosophersusuallyenvisiontheirdisciplineasanendeavorthathasbeen,sinceantiquity,distinctfromandsuperiortoanyparticularinlectualdiscipline,suchastheologyorscience.?Suchphilosophicalconcernsasthemind-bodyproblemor,moregenerally,thenatureofhumanknowledge,theybelieve,arebasichumanquestionswhosetentativephilosophicalsolutionshaveservedasthenecessaryfoundationsonwhichallotherinlectualspeculationhasrested.?哲學(xué)家通把他們的學(xué)想象為自古來直區(qū)別并且優(yōu)于如或科這種特定智科的一種努力。他們相信，如哲學(xué)對于問題的關(guān)注或者更一般，對于人類識性?Thebasisforthisview,however,liesinaseriousmisinterpretationofthepast,aprojectionofmodernconcernsontopastevents.?Theideaofanautonomousdisciplinecalled“philosophy,”distinctfromandsittinginjudgmentonsuchpursuitsastheologyandscienceturnsout,oncloseexamination,tobeofquiterecentorigin.?When,intheseventeenthcentury,DescartesandHobbesrejectedmedievalphilosophy,theydidnotthinkofthemselves,asmodernphilosophersdo,asproposinganewandbetterphilosophy,butratherasfurthering“thewarfarebetweenscienceandtheology”.?Theywerefighting,albeitdiscreetly,toopentheinlectualworldtothenewscienceandtoliberateinlectuallifefromecclesiasticalphilosophyandenvisionedtheirworkascontributingtothegrowth,notofphilosophy,butofresearchinmathematicsandphysics.?Thislinkbetweenphilosophicalinterestsandscientificpracticepersisteduntilthenineteenthcentury,whendeclineinecclesiasticalpoweroverscholarshipandchangesinthenatureofscienceprovokedthefinalseparationofphilosophyfromboth.?然而，這個觀點的依據(jù)存在于對過去的嚴重誤解之中，把現(xiàn)代的關(guān)注投射在過去的上。?仔 于近代。?當17世紀Descartes和Hobbes 是更新穎的、更完善的哲學(xué)，而是認為自己在和科學(xué)的。?他們力爭為新科學(xué)開辟智力世界，并且為了把智力生活從哲學(xué)中解放出來而奮斗，盡管這種奮斗是謹慎的，他們把自己的工作憧憬為對數(shù)學(xué)和物理學(xué)研究的促進，而不是對哲學(xué)本身的促進。?哲學(xué)上的點與科學(xué)實踐之間的聯(lián)系持續(xù)到19世紀，那時候?qū)τ趯W(xué)術(shù)研究控制的削弱以及科學(xué)性質(zhì)的改變將哲學(xué)從神?Thedemarcationofphilosophyfromsciencewasfacilitatedbythedevelopmentintheearlynineteenthcenturyofanewnotion,thatphilosophy’scoreinterestshouldbeepistemology,thegeneralexnationofwhatitmeanstoknowsomething.?ModernphilosophersnowtracethatnotionbackatleasttoDescartesandSpinoza,butitwasnotexplicitlyarticulateduntilthelateeighteenthcentury,byKant,anddidnot ebuiltintothestructureofacademicinstitutionsandthestandardself-descriptionsofphilosophyprofessorsuntilthelatenineteenthcentury.?Withouttheideaofepistemology,thesurvivalofphilosophyinanageofmodernscienceishardtoimagine.?Metaphysics,philosophy’straditionalcore—consideredasthemostgeneraldescriptionofhowtheheavensandtheearthareputtogether—hadbeenrenderedalmostcompleymeaninglessbythespectacularprogressofphysics.?Kant,however,byfocusingphilosophyontheproblemofknowledge,managedtorecemetaphysicswithepistemology,andthustotransformthenotionofphilosophyas“queenofsciences”intothenewnotionofphilosophyasaseparate,foundationaldiscipline.?Philosophybecame“primary”nolongerinthesenseof“highest”butinthesenseof“underlying”.?AfterKant,philosopherswereabletoreinterpretseventeenth-andeighteenth-centurythinkersasattemptingtodiscover“Howisourknowledgepossible?”andtoprojectthisquestionbackevenontheancients.?一個新觀點的發(fā)展在19世紀初推動了哲學(xué)與科學(xué)的劃分，這個新觀點認為哲學(xué)應(yīng)該是溯到了Descartes和Spinoza18世紀末期才被Kant清楚地闡述出來，并且直到19世紀末期它才融合到學(xué)術(shù)機構(gòu)中以及哲學(xué)教授自我描述的標準的學(xué)科中。?要是沒有認識論這個概念，我們難以想象哲學(xué)學(xué)科在現(xiàn)代科學(xué)的時代中如何能生存下去。?作為哲學(xué)的傳統(tǒng)，形而上學(xué)?然而，Kant把哲學(xué)聚焦到認識問題上，想方設(shè)法用認識論來取代形而上學(xué)，因此把哲學(xué)看作是“科學(xué)高在上”，而是一個“基礎(chǔ)”?哲學(xué)家們以Kant1718世紀思想家重新解釋為Althoughahistorical?AlthoughahistoricallackofaccesstoformalSpanish-languageeducationinitiallylimitedtheopportunitiesofsomeChicanostohonetheirskillsaswritersofSpanish,theirbilingualcultureclearlyfosteredanexuberantandcompellingoraltradition.?Ithasthusgenerallybeenbywayoftheemphasisonoralli creativitythattheseChicanowriters,whoseEnglish-languageworksaresometimesuninspired,developedthepowerfulandarrestinglanguagethatcharacterizedtheirSpanish-languageworks.?ThisSpanish-Englishdifferenceisnotsurprising.?WhenwritinginSpanish,theseauthorsstayedclosetothespokentraditionsoftheircommunitieswherepublication,support,andinstructiveresponsewouldcomequicklyinlocalorregionalnewspapers.?WorksinEnglish,however,oftenrequiredtheeliminationofnuanceorcolloquialism,theadoptionofaformaltone,andtheadjustmentofthemesorideastosatisfythedifferentdemandsofnational?雖然歷史上正規(guī)西班牙語教育的機會的缺乏起初限制了某些Chicano人磨練自己的技術(shù)以及成為通過強調(diào)口語文學(xué)的創(chuàng)造性，這些Chicano作家才形成了鏗鏘有力且讓人著迷的語言，這也是他們西班法、采取正式的語氣、調(diào)整或想法來滿足性物的不同的需要。Itistheirsensitive?Itistheirsensitiveresponsetohumancircumstancethataccountsforthepersistenceofcertainuniversalideas.?RabbiMeir,asecond-centuryscholar,admonishedhisdisciplestolooknotatthepitcherbutatitscontentsbecause,hestated,“Manyanewpitcherhasbeenfoundtobefullofoldwine.”?Thiswashiswayofemphasizingtheimportanceofthedistinctionbetweenformandidea,andofstressingthattheintegrityofanideaismoreimportantthantheformofitsexpression.?對人類環(huán)境的敏銳反應(yīng)可以解釋某些普適思想存在的原因。?RabbiMeir告誡自己的，要看罐子裝了什么、而不要看罐子本身，他說：“這是因為許多新罐裝的是舊酒”。?這?Creativeideasnotonlyproducetheirowninstrumentsofsurvivalastimeandcircumstancesdemand,butpermitthesubstitutionofnewformsforoldunderthepressureofchangedcircumstances.?Forexampledemocracy,asanidea,originatedinancientGreeceandwascarriedfromtheretoWesternEuropeandtheAmericas.?ButitdidnotretaintheancientGreekform:itpassedthroughseveralreformingprocessesandexiststodayinmanycountries.?Democratic ernmentsdifferinformbecausedemocracyisinprincipledynamicandhasthereforerespondedtolocalneeds.持古希臘的形式：它經(jīng)歷數(shù)次，現(xiàn)在存在于多個國家之中。?也在形式上不同，因為Thisisnottodenythat?ThisisnottodenythattheBlackmusicoftheearlytwentiethcenturydifferedinimportantwaysfromtheslavespirituals.?Whereasspiritualswerecreatedanddisseminatedinfolkfashion,musicwascomposed,published,copyrighted,andsoldbyprofessionals.?Nevertheless,improvisationremainedcentraltomusic.?OnehasonlytolistentotherecordedrepertoireofsongstorealizethatBlacksingersrarelysangasongpreciselythesamewaytwiceandneveraccordingtoitsexactmusicalnotation.?Theyperformedwhatjazzmusicianscall“headarrangements”proceedingfromtheirownfeelingsandfromtheway“thespirit”movedthematthetime.?Thisimprovisatoryelementwasreflectedinthemannerinwhichmusicwaspublished.?BlackcomposersscoredthemusicintendedforWhitesinginggroupsfully,indicatingthevariousvocalpartsandthe paniment,butthemusicproducedforBlacksingersincludedonlyavocallineandpiano 歌的形式被創(chuàng)造和的，而音樂是由專業(yè)創(chuàng)作、、拿到后的。?可是，即興創(chuàng)作對于音樂仍然是很重要的。?人們?nèi)ヂ牳枨浿频娜壳烤蜁私獾礁枋謳缀醪皇钩霭l(fā)，演唱的是爵士音樂家口中的“天資編排”的曲目。?這種即興元素反映在音樂的方式Bythetimethe?BythetimetheAmericancoloniststookuparmsagainstGreatBritaininordertosecuretheirindependence,theinstitutionofBlackslaverywasdeeplyentrenched.?Butthecontradictioninherentinthissituationwas,formany,asourceofconstantembarrassment.?“Italwaysappearedamostiniquitousschemetome,”AbigailAdamswroteherhusbandin1774,“tofightourselvesforwhatwearedailyrobbingandplunderingfromthosewhohaveasgoodarightto domaswehave.”?在殖民地人民為了獨立拿起 總會使很多人感覺尷尬。?“這對我來說好像是一個極其的，”AbigailAdams在1774年寫信給 ?ManyAmericansbesidesAbigailAdamswerestruckbytheinconsistencyoftheirstandduringtheWarofIndependence,andtheywerenotaversetomakingmovestoemancipatetheslaves.?Quakersandotherreligiousgroupsorganizedantislaverysocieties,whilenumerousindividualsmanumittedtheirslaves.?Infact,withinseveralyearsoftheendoftheWarofIndependence,mostoftheEasternstateshadmadeprovisionsforthegradualemancipationofslaves.?和AbigailAdams一樣，許多 期間都他們自相的立場，并且他們并不解放這些黑奴。?公誼會 團體組織了反的團體，而同時許多人也解放了他們的。?事實上，在獨立 Tocqueville,apparently,was?Tocqueville,apparently,waswrong.?JacksonianAmericawasnotafluid,egalitariansocietywhereindividualwealthandpovertywereephemeralconditions.?AtleastsoarguesE.PesseninhisiconoclasticstudyoftheveryrichintheUnitedStatesbetween1825and1850.?Tocqueville顯然是錯了。?在Jackson執(zhí)政時期，并不是一個流動的主義社會，也不是一個個人貧富瞬息萬變的社會。?至少，在EPessen18251850?Pessendoespresentatyofexamples,togetherwithsomerefreshinglyinligiblestatistics,toestablishtheexistenceofaninordinaywealthyclass.?Thoughactiveincommerceortheprofessions,mostofthewealthywerenotself-made,buthadinheritedfamilyfortunes.?Innosensemercurial,thesegreatfortunessurvivedthefinancialpanicsthatdestroyedlesserones.?Indeed,inseveralcitiesthewealthiestonepercentconstantlyincreaseditsshareuntilby1850itownedhalfofthecommunity’swealth.?Althoughtheseobservationsaretrue,PessenoverestimatestheirimportancebyconcludingfromthemthattheundoubtedprogresstowardinequalityinthelateeighteenthcenturyintheJacksonianperiodandthattheUnitedStateswasaclass-ridden,plutocraticsocietyevenbeforeindustrialization.?Pessen確實列舉了大量事例以及一些讓人耳目一新且簡單易懂的統(tǒng)計數(shù)字，來證明確實存在極度富有的。?盡管他們在商界業(yè)界非?；钴S，但大部分不是他們白手起家獲得的，而是通過繼承家業(yè)獲得的。?可以肯定的是，這些繼承來的巨大經(jīng)受住了金融大的沖擊，而較小規(guī)模的卻被摧毀。?實際上，幾個城市里最富有的1%一直到1850年持續(xù)不斷地積累自己的，他們擁有了全社會一半的。?盡管這些觀察結(jié)果是正確的，但Pessen還是由于高估了這種情況的重要性而得出了這樣的結(jié)論：18世紀末發(fā)展起來的不現(xiàn)象一直延續(xù)到19世紀中葉Jackson總統(tǒng)時期是的，并且在工業(yè)化之前就是一個，財閥的社會。Inlargepartasa?Inlargepartasaconsequenceofthefeministmovement,historianshavefocusedagreatdealofattentioninrecentyearsondeterminingmoreaccuraythestatusofwomeninvariousperiods.?Althoughmuchhasbeen plishedforthemodernperiod,premoderncultureshaveprovedmoredifficult:sourcesarerestrictedinnumber,fragmentary,difficulttointerpret,andoftencontradictory.?Thusitisnotparticularlysurprisingthatsomeearlierscholarshipconcerningsuchcultureshassofargoneunchallenged.?AnexampleisJohannBachofen’s1861treatiseonAmazons,women-ruledsocietiesofquestionableexistencecontemporarywithancientGreece.女在各個歷史時期的地位。?雖然對現(xiàn)當代的研究成績斐然，但對古代文化的研究則被證明是更加?Startingfromthepremisethatmythologyandlegendpreserveatleastanucleusofhistoricalfact,Bachofenarguedthatwomenweredominantinmanyancientsocieties.?HisworkwasbasedonacomprehensivesurveyofreferencesintheancientsourcestoAmazonianandothersocietieswithmatrilinealcustoms—societiesinwhichdescentandpropertyrightsaretracedthroughthefemaleline.?SomesupportforhistheorycanbefoundinevidencesuchasthatdrawnfromHerodotus,theGreek“historian”ofthefifthcenturyB.C.,whospeaksofanAmazoniansociety,theSauromatae,wherethewomenhuntedandfoughtinwars.Awomaninthissocietywasnotallowedtomarryuntilshehadkilleda inbattle.?從史實的至少存在于神話、中這一前提出發(fā)，Bachofen認為女性在許多古代社會中占據(jù)著地位。?他的研究對古料來源中的參考材料進行綜合考慮，而這些參考材料涉及到Amazonian和其他帶有母系習(xí)俗的社會——在這些社會內(nèi)，親緣關(guān)系和財產(chǎn)所均經(jīng)由女性這條線來追溯。?可以找到一些支持他理論的，如從Herodotus那里獲取的曾談到某個Amazonian社會，即Sauromatae，在此社會內(nèi)，女性進行狩獵并在中。該社會中的女性必須在戰(zhàn)斗中殺死一?Nonetheless,thisassumptionthatthefirstrecordersofancientmythshavepfactsisproblematic.?IfonebeginsbyexaminingwhyancientsrefertoAmazons,it esclearthatancientGreekdescriptionsofsuchsocietiesweremeantnotsomuchtorepresentobservedhistoricalfact—realAmazoniansocieties—butrathertooffer“morallessons”onthesupposed eofwomen’sruleintheirownsociety.?TheAmazonswereoftencharacterized,forexample,astheequivalentsofgiantsandcentaurs,enemiestobeslainbyGreekheroes.?Theircustomswerepresentednotasthoseofarespectablesociety,butastheveryantithesesofordinaryGreekpractices.眼目睹的歷史事實——真正的Amazon社會——還不如說是為女性可能產(chǎn)生的進行“道德訓(xùn)導(dǎo)”?Thus,Iwouldargue,thepurposeofaccountsoftheAmazonsfortheirmaleGreekrecorderswasdidactic,toteachbothmaleandfemaleGreeksthatall-femalegroups,formedbywithdrawalfromtraditionalsociety,aredestructiveanddangerous.?MythsabouttheAmazonswereusedasargumentsforthemale-dominatedstatusquo,inwhichgroupscomposedexclusivelyofeither werenotpermittedtosegregatethemselvespermanentlyfromsociety.?Bachofenwasthusmisledinhisrelianceonmythsforinformationaboutthestatusofwomen.?Thesourcesthatwillprobablylcontemporaryhistoriansmostaboutwomenintheancientworldaresuchsocial sasgravestones,wills,andmarriagecontracts.?Studiesofsuch havealreadybeguntoshowhowmistakenwearewhenwetrytoderiveourpictureoftheancientworldexclusivelyfromli rysources,especiallymyths.因此，我認為對于述神話的希臘來描述mon人的目的是，要教誨古臘的男性和女性這樣一道理，即那脫離了傳統(tǒng)會形成的純女性群是有破壞性、是 的。有關(guān)mon人的神話是用來為的狀作護的，在這種狀下，僅僅由一 構(gòu)成群不允許與社會永性隔絕開來。如此說來Bhon依賴神話來獲取有關(guān)女性地位的料是有誤導(dǎo)性的。有關(guān)古代界的婦女的可能對當學(xué)家最具價值的料是這樣一社會性文獻如墓碑、遺囑、婚約。這類文獻料的研究很證明我們犯了多大的錯誤，當我們試圖從文學(xué)材料中，尤其從神話中，取我們對古世的理解時犯的錯，。Traditionalresearchhas?TraditionalresearchhasconfrontedonlyMexicanandUnitedStatesinterpretationsofMexican-Americanculture.?NowwemustalsoexaminethecultureasweMexicanAmericanshaveexperiencedit,passingfromasovereignpeopletocompatriotswithnewlyarrivingsettlersto,finally,aconqueredpeople—acharter(agrantorguaranteeofrights,franchises,orprivilegesfromthesovereignpowerofastateorcountry)minorityonourownland.?對墨西哥文化的傳統(tǒng)研究一直著只有來自墨西哥的和的兩種解釋。?對于這種文化，現(xiàn)在我們也必須按照美籍墨西哥人所經(jīng)歷的那樣來，從一個獨立自主的民族變成新來居民的同胞，最后變成一個被征服的民族，一個在自己的土地上持有的少數(shù)民族。?WhentheSpanishfirstcametoMexico,theyintermarriedwithandabsorbedthecultureoftheindigenousns.?Thisofcolonizationthroughacculturationwas whenMexicoacquiredTexasintheearly1800’sandbroughttheindigenousnsintoMexicanlifeand ernment.?Inthe1820’s,UnitedStatescitizensmigratedtoTexas,attractedbylandsuitableforcotton.?Astheirnumbersbecamemoresubstantial,theirofacquiringlandbysubduingnativepopulationsbegantodominate.?Thetwoideologiesclashedrepeatedly,culminatinginamilitary thatledtovictoryfortheUnitedStates.?Thus,suddenlydeprivedofourparentculture,wehadtoevolveuniquelyMexican-Americanmodesofthoughtandactioninordertosurvive.19世紀初的墨西哥取得Txs19世紀20年代時，民因Txs土地適宜種植棉花而遷移到那。民人數(shù)越來越多時，用征服本地人的辦法來獲取土地的政策開始盛行。?兩種思想不斷發(fā)生，發(fā)展到頂點就爆發(fā)了軍事，結(jié)果獲勝。?這樣，墨西哥人突然被了自己的傳統(tǒng)文化，為了Throughouthuman?Throughouthumanhistorytherehavebeenmanystringenttaboosconcerningwatchingotherpeopleeatoreatinginthepresenceofothers.?Therehavebeenattemptstoexinthesetaboosintermsofinappropriatesocialrelationshipseitherbetweenthosewhoareinvolvedandthosewhoarenotsimultaneouslyinvolvedinthesatisfactionofabodilyneed,orbetweenthosealreadysatiatedandthosewhoappeartobeshamelessly?Undoubtedlysuchelementsexistinthetaboos,butthereisanadditionalelementwithamuchmorefundamentalimportance.?Inprehistorictimes,whenfoodwassopreciousandth