Introduction to Political Philosophy Lecture 3 | Introduction to Political Philosophy
Chapter 1.
第一章。
Was Socrates Guilty or Innocent?
苏格拉底有罪还是无罪？
[00:00:00] Professor Steven Smith: Okay I want to begin with a question today, I have a question for you; well you've been reading the Apology , you've now read the--you've read the Apology and the Crito ; you've had a little chance to think about these works.
[00:00:00] 史蒂文·史密斯教授：好的，我今天想从一个问题开始，我有一个问题要问你；好吧，你已经阅读了《道歉》，你现在已经阅读了——你已经阅读了《道歉》和《克里托》；你有一点机会思考这些作品。
I'd just like to do a piece of survey research, how many of you, just a show of hands is all I need; how many of you believe Socrates is innocent and should be acquitted?
我只是想做一个调查研究，你们有多少人，举手就可以了；你们中有多少人相信苏格拉底是无辜的，应该被无罪释放？
Okay and how many of you believe he is guilty and more or less got what he deserved?
好吧，你们中有多少人相信他有罪并且或多或少得到了他应得的报应？
Higher please, okay.
请再高一点，好吧。
Not exactly the same proportion, I think, somewhat a greater number believe in his innocence than in the Athenian jury obviously.
我认为，比例并不完全相同，相信他无罪的人数显然比雅典陪审团的人数要多一些。
But let me just ask you in the brown shirt, just curious, why do you think he is innocent and should be acquitted?
但让我问穿棕色衬衫的你，只是好奇，为什么你认为他是无辜的，应该被无罪释放？
Student: Well I felt that he [inaudible] and it seemed to me that the [inaudible] more on personal views [inaudible] and not exactly by concrete charges.
学生：嗯，我觉得他[听不清]，在我看来，[听不清]更多的是个人观点[听不清]，而不是具体的指控。
Professor Steven Smith: And I noticed you had your, yes why do you believe he was guilty and got what he deserved?
史蒂文·史密斯教授：我注意到你有你的，是的，你为什么相信他有罪并得到了他应得的？
Student: [Inaudible] what is just isn't somehow [inaudible] what is just is what society agrees [inaudible] and I mean he was going against people who had the authority to define words like in [inaudible] what is just is what society says is just and society says [inaudible].
学生：[听不清]正义并不以某种方式[听不清]正义是社会同意的[听不清]，我的意思是他反对那些有权定义词语的人，例如[听不清]正义是社会所说的正义和社会所说的[听不清]。
Professor Steven Smith: S o, as Lincoln once said, both of you can't be right, neither of you may be right, but both of you can't be right.
史蒂文·史密斯教授：所以，正如林肯曾经说过的，你们不可能都是对的，你们可能都不是对的，但你们不可能都是对的。
So this is a question that I want to continue today, to consider what the trial of Socrates means and I want to begin by going back to a problem or a paradox that I ended the class with last time.
所以这是我今天想继续讨论的一个问题，思考苏格拉底的审判意味着什么，我想首先回到我上次结束课程时提出的一个问题或一个悖论。
That is to say that Socrates proposes, right, a new conception of what it is to be a citizen, he opposes, we have seen, the traditional, you might say Homeric conception, of the citizen, certain notions of citizen loyalty and patriotism, created, shaped by the poetic tradition going back to Homer.
也就是说，苏格拉底提出了一种关于什么是公民的新概念，我们已经看到，他反对传统的，你可能会说荷马式的公民概念，反对公民忠诚和爱国主义的某些概念，这些概念是由可追溯到荷马的诗歌传统创造和塑造的。
He wants to replace that with a new kind of, I want to call it rational citizenship, philosophical citizenship.
他想用一种新的，我想称之为理性公民，哲学公民的方式来取代它。
A view of citizenship that, again, relies on one's own powers of independent reason and judgment and argument and in the course of defending this point of view, Socrates says, in an interesting passage, that he has spent his entire life pursuing private matters rather than public ones and has deliberately avoided public issues, issues of politics and that raises a question.
公民观念再次依赖于一个人自己的独立理性、判断和论证的能力，在捍卫这一观点的过程中，苏格拉底在一段有趣的段落中说，他一生都在追求私人事务而不是公共事务，并刻意回避公共问题、政治问题，这就提出了一个问题。
How can a citizen, how can this new kind of citizenship that he is proposing, how can any kind of citizenship be devoted just to private matters and not public?
一个公民，他所提议的这种新型公民身份，任何一种公民身份，如何能够只致力于私人事务而不是公共事务？
Citizenship seems to require even the public sphere, the public realm.
公民身份似乎甚至需要公共领域、公共领域。
What does Socrates mean when he says his way of life has been devoted almost exclusively to private rather than to public matters?
当苏格拉底说他的生活方式几乎完全致力于私人事务而不是公共事务时，他的意思是什么？
Well, the first thing we might think about is whether that's entirely true, whether he's being entirely candid with his audience; after all, the kind of investigations, the kind of interrogations that he has been pursuing since going to the Delphic Oracle and then following at least his interpretation of its mandate, these investigations of the politicians, the poets, the craftsman and the like.
好吧，我们首先要考虑的是这是否完全正确，他是否对观众完全坦诚？毕竟，自从他去了德尔菲神谕之后，他就一直在进行那种调查，那种审问，然后至少遵循他对其使命的解释，对政治家、诗人、工匠等进行这些调查。
He says these have been carried out in public, he has gone around in the market and in the open and in the public forum questioning, interrogating and obviously making a variety of people look foolish.
他说这些都是公开进行的，他在市场、公开场合和公共论坛上进行质疑、审问，显然让各种各样的人看起来很愚蠢。
So this is hardly simply a private question or a private way of life but perhaps he means simply that by pursuing a private life that again he's going to rely almost exclusively on his own individual powers of reason and judgment, not to defer or rely on such public goods as custom, as authority, as tradition, things of this sort.
因此，这不仅仅是一个私人问题或私人生活方式，但也许他的意思只是，通过追求私人生活，他将再次几乎完全依赖他自己的个人理性和判断力，而不是推迟或依赖诸如习惯、权威、传统等公共物品。
But I think Socrates means more than that, more than simply he wishes to rely on the powers of private individual judgment.
但我认为苏格拉底的意思不止于此，不仅仅是他希望依靠个人判断的力量。
When he says that his way of life has been private, he means that he has pursued a policy of, let's call it "the principled abstinence from public life." Socrates is a great abstainer, he has abstained from participation in the collective actions of the city, actions that he believes could only entail a complicity in acts of public injustice.
当他说他的生活方式是私人的时，他的意思是他奉行的政策是“原则上远离公共生活”。苏格拉底是一个伟大的克制者，他不参与城市的集体行动，他认为这些行动只会导致公共不公正行为的共谋。
His own motto, if you want to ascribe him a motto, seems to be a variety of the Hippocratic Oath, you know, that doctors are famous for: "do no harm." And to do no harm he has required of himself a kind of principled abstention from public life.
他自己的座右铭，如果你想给他一个座右铭的话，似乎是希波克拉底誓言的变种，你知道，医生们以“不伤害”而闻名。为了不造成伤害，他要求自己原则上不参与公共生活。
If George Bush described himself not long ago as the decider, you might call Socrates the abstainer.
如果乔治·布什不久前将自己描述为决策者，那么你可能会称苏格拉底为弃权者。
But what does he mean by or what do I mean by referring to his policies of abstention from political life?
但他所说的或我所说的他不参与政治生活的政策是什么意思呢？
Do you remember he gives a couple of examples of this sort?
你还记得他举过几个这样的例子吗？
One of them, remember, concerned his refusal to join in the judgment to condemn and execute the ten Athenian generals who had failed to collect the corpses, the bodies, of the men lost in a particular battle during the Peloponnesian War?
其中之一，记得，涉及他拒绝参与谴责和处决十名雅典将军的判决，这些将军未能收集在伯罗奔尼撒战争期间的一场特定战斗中阵亡的士兵的尸体？
This was a mark of great shame and disgrace.
这是极大的耻辱和耻辱的标志。
This was an actual event.
这是一个真实的事件。
There was a kind of judgment of collective guilt and they were all executed there, the leaders, the generals of this particular battle and Socrates tells how he refused to engage in that kind of--to join the court in the judgment of their collective guilt, a true incident.
有一种集体有罪的判决，他们都在那里被处决，这场特殊战斗的领导人、将军，苏格拉底讲述了他如何拒绝参与那种集体有罪的判决，这是一个真实的事件。
And the second story you remember from your reading of the book was his telling, reminding the jury how he refused to participate.
读这本书时你记得的第二个故事是他讲述的，提醒陪审团他如何拒绝参与。
He was ordered by the Thirty, the hated Tyranny of the Thirty, he was ordered to assist in the arrest of a man known as Leon of Salamis, an arrest that would have and did in fact lead to Leon's execution and Socrates tells how he at considerable risk to himself refused to participate in the arrest of this man.
他受到三十人的命令，令人憎恶的三十人暴政，他被命令协助逮捕一个名叫萨拉米斯的莱昂的人，这次逮捕实际上会导致莱昂被处决，苏格拉底讲述了他如何冒着相当大的风险拒绝参与逮捕这个人。
In both of these cases, I take it, Socrates's point is that his own individual moral integrity stands as a kind of litmus test, you might say, for whether to engage or disengage from political life.
我认为，在这两种情况下，苏格拉底的观点是，你可能会说，他自己的个人道德操守是一种试金石，决定他是否参与或脱离政治生活。
"I was the sort of man," he tells the jury, "I was the sort of man who never conceded anything to anyone contrary to what is just," no doubt also reminding them of his, again, his refusal to bow to the Thirty Tyrants in the case of Leon of Salamis.
“我是那种人，”他告诉陪审团，“我是那种从不向任何人承认任何违背正义的事情的人。”毫无疑问，这也让他们想起了他在萨拉米斯莱昂案中拒绝向三十暴君低头的行为。
But this raises, I think, the central or a central point about Socratic citizenship or Socrates's view of citizenship, this kind of principled disobedience to the law, something like Thoreau's model of civil disobedience.
但我认为，这提出了苏格拉底式公民权或苏格拉底公民权观的核心或中心点，这种原则上不服从法律，有点像梭罗的公民不服从模式。
Does this policy of principled disobedience, you might say vindicate or indict Socrates of the charge of corruption and impiety that has been brought against him?
你可能会说，这种原则上不服从的政策是否可以证明或指控苏格拉底腐败和不敬虔的指控？
Can a citizen he affirms, I will ask though, can a citizen put his own conscience above the law as Socrates seems to do?
但我会问，他所肯定的公民是否可以像苏格拉底那样将自己的良心置于法律之上？
This is a problem that we will see considerably later in the term that vexes a very important political thinker by the name of Hobbes about whether an individual can somehow put their own sense of conscience or moral integrity even above the law.
这是一个让一位非常重要的政治思想家霍布斯烦恼的问题，我们将在本学期的后面看到这个问题，即个人是否可以以某种方式将自己的良心或道德操守置于法律之上。
What would a community of Socratic citizens look like, each one picking and choosing, you might say, the laws or the rules to obey or to follow or not to follow.
你可能会说，一个由苏格拉底式公民组成的社区会是什么样子，每个人都在挑选和选择要遵守、要遵守或不要遵守的法律或规则。
Socrates is so concerned, it seems, with his individual, his private moral integrity that he says in a sense to the city of Athens, to the court, to the Athens, to the Assembly or the courts that he will not dirty his hands with public life and again this is a question that we will see later on that Machiavelli takes very seriously--the question of whether or not politics, political life requires one to dirty one's hands in the world.
苏格拉底似乎非常关心他的个人，他的私人道德诚信，他在某种意义上对雅典城，对宫廷，对雅典，对议会或法院说，他不会在公共生活中弄脏自己的手，这也是我们稍后会看到马基雅维利非常认真对待的一个问题——政治、政治生活是否需要一个人在世界上弄脏自己的手。
What kind of citizen is it, is he or she who abstains from, maybe even rejects, the harsh necessities, requirements of political life?
这是一个什么样的公民？他或她是否回避、甚至拒绝政治生活的严酷必需品和要求？
Socrates seems to be in some respects an example of what Hegel in the nineteenth century described as a beautiful soul, you know, someone who and he used that term ironically I should say, someone who puts their own private moral incorruptibility above all else and we all probably know or have read about people like this.
苏格拉底在某些方面似乎是黑格尔在十九世纪所描述的美丽灵魂的一个例子，你知道，他讽刺地使用了这个词，我应该说，他把自己的个人道德廉洁置于一切之上，我们可能都知道或读过这样的人。
How does Socrates answer these charges of, in a way being not just an abstainer but he kept putting his own private moral conscience or integrity over and above the law?
苏格拉底如何回答这些指控，在某种程度上，他不仅是一个禁欲者，而且还不断地将自己的私人道德良心或正直置于法律之上？
He tries to defend his point of view by arguing in a famous passage that his policy of abstinence actually carries important benefits to the city.
他试图通过在一段著名的段落中论证自己的观点来捍卫自己的观点，即他的禁欲政策实际上给这座城市带来了重要的好处。
He brings with it important benefits and in the passage that I'm referring to, he defines himself as a gadfly, everyone will remember that, the gadfly who improves the quality of life in the city.
他带来了重要的好处，在我提到的这段话中，他将自己定义为一只牛虻，每个人都会记住这一点，提高城市生活质量的牛虻。
In section 30d, Socrates writes, let me read the passage.
苏格拉底在第 30d 节中写道，让我读一下这段话。
"So I, men of Athens are now too far from making a defense speech on my own behalf, I do it rather," he says, " on your behalf.
“所以，我，雅典人，现在远远不能代表我自己发表辩护演讲，我宁愿代表你们，”他说。
What I say, I say for you," he appears to say, "so that you do not do something wrong concerning the gift of the god," referring to himself, "the gift of the god by voting to condemn me.
我所说的，都是为你说的，”他似乎在说，“这样你就不会在上帝的恩赐方面做错事，”他指的是他自己，“通过投票来谴责我，这是上帝的恩赐。
For if you kill me," he continues, "you will not easily discover another of my sort who even if it is rather ridiculous to say so, has simply been set upon the city by the god as though upon a great and well-born horse who is rather sluggish because of his great size and needs to be awakened by some gadfly.
因为如果你杀了我，”他继续说道，“你就不会轻易发现我这一类的人，即使这样说相当荒谬，他只是被神放在这座城市上，就像一匹出身高贵的大马，由于体型巨大而行动迟缓，需要一些牛虻来唤醒。
Just so in fact the god seems to me to have set me upon the city as someone of this sort.
事实上，在我看来，上帝似乎把我安置在这座城市里，就是这样的人。
I awaken and persuade and reproach each one of you and I do not stop settling down everywhere upon you the whole day." So here we have the example of Socrates telling us not only declaring himself to be the gift of the god who is brought but he is a great benefactor of the city, that his example of the man, of individual moral conscience, brings with it great, as it were, public benefits.
我唤醒、劝说、责备你们每一个人，并且一整天我都不停地在你们身上停留。”因此，这里有苏格拉底的例子，他告诉我们，他不仅宣称自己是上帝的恩赐，而且是城市的伟大恩人，他的个人道德良心榜样可以说带来了巨大的公共利益。
It is not on his behalf, he tells the audience, but yours, his fellow citizens' that he does what he does.
他告诉观众，他所做的并不是为了他自己，而是为了你们，他的同胞们。
"You may not like me," he says to the jury, "but I am good for you and furthermore he claims in this what can only be described as sort of quasi-religious language that he has no choice in the matter.
“你可能不喜欢我，”他对陪审团说，“但我对你有好处，而且他在这件事上声称只能被描述为某种准宗教语言，他在这件事上别无选择。
This is not something he has chosen to do.
这不是他选择做的事情。
He is, as he says a gift from the god, he has been commanded, he argues, to do this.
正如他所说，他是上帝赐予的礼物，他辩称，他是被命令这样做的。
"Men of Athens," he says, "I will obey the god rather than you and as long as I breathe and am able to do so, I will certainly not stop philosophizing." He seems to envelope himself and his way of life with a kind of religious imagery, the Delphic Oracle, the gift of the god image, he envelopes his conception of citizenship within this religious language and this will or should lead any reader of the Apology and any reader of Plato to ask an important question about Socrates's use of this language.
“雅典人，”他说，“我会服从上帝而不是你们，只要我还有呼吸，并且能够这样做，我就一定不会停止哲学思考。”他似乎将自己和他的生活方式包裹在一种宗教意象中，即德尔斐神谕，上帝形象的恩赐，他将自己的公民概念包裹在这种宗教语言中，这将或应该引导《申辩》的任何读者和柏拉图的任何读者对苏格拉底对这种语言的使用提出一个重要问题。
We will see it again in different ways in the Republic .
我们将在共和国以不同的方式再次看到它。
Is he sincere in saying this, in making this point or his he somehow being ironical in his use of the religious tone or the religious register?
他这样说、提出这一点是真诚的，还是他在使用宗教语气或宗教语气时有某种讽刺意味？
He is, after all, on trial for his life, for the charge of impiety.
毕竟，他正在因不敬虔的罪名而受到生命审判。
Would it not seem that in order to rebut the charge of impiety that he would use or adopt a kind of religious language that would resonate with the jury and rebut the accusation, perhaps even suggesting that he is the truly religious and pious one and not the ones like Anytus and Meletus who are bringing charges against him?
难道为了反驳不敬虔的指控，他会使用或采用一种能够引起陪审团共鸣并反驳指控的宗教语言，甚至可能表明他是真正的宗教和虔诚者，而不是像阿尼图斯和梅勒图斯那样对他提出指控的人？
Socrates seems, or could be seen, to be speaking not just ironically but provocatively in describing himself as a gift of the god.
苏格拉底将自己描述为上帝的礼物，这似乎或可以看出，不仅具有讽刺意味，而且具有挑衅性。
In a sense, you might ask what could be more ludicrous, Socrates declaring himself or anyone declaring themselves to be a gift of the divine.
从某种意义上说，你可能会问，苏格拉底宣称自己或任何人宣称自己是神圣的礼物，还有什么更可笑的呢？
But, right, who would make such a claim?
但是，谁会提出这样的主张呢？
But in another respect he seems to take the divine calling very seriously, right, I mean does he not?
但从另一个方面来说，他似乎非常认真地对待神圣的召唤，对吧，我的意思是他不是吗？
It was only when the Delphic Oracle replied to Charephon, he tells that story, that no one was wiser than Socrates, that Socrates undertook this second sailing as it were, his turn away from the investigation of purely natural phenomena to the study of the world of moral virtue and justice.
直到德尔斐神谕回复查勒丰时，他讲述了这个故事，没有人比苏格拉底更聪明，苏格拉底才进行了第二次航行，他从对纯粹自然现象的调查转向对道德美德和正义的世界的研究。
He repeatedly maintains that the path he has taken is not of his own choosing but the result of a divine command.
他一再强调，他所走的道路不是他自己选择的，而是神的命令的结果。
He is under some kind of divine edict and it is precisely his devotion to this divine command, to this particular kind of calling that has led him to neglect his worldly affairs.
他受到某种神圣的法令的约束，正是他对这种神圣命令、这种特殊召唤的忠诚导致他忽视了世俗事务。
He reminds, at various points, the audience of his extreme poverty, his neglect of his family and his obligations to his wife and children as well as to suffer the disgrace and the abuse that is directed against him by various public figures, he tells us.
他告诉我们，他在不同的地方提醒观众他的极度贫困，他对家庭的忽视以及他对妻子和孩子的义务，以及遭受各种公众人物针对他的耻辱和虐待。
All of this is the result of his devotion to the divine command.
这一切都是他恪守神圣命令的结果。
He presents himself, in other words, as a human being of unparalleled piety and devotion who will risk life itself rather than quit the post that has been given to him.
换句话说，他将自己描绘成一个具有无与伦比的虔诚和奉献精神的人，他愿意冒着生命危险，也不愿辞去赋予他的职位。
It's a very tall order that he claims for himself.
他对自己提出的要求是非常高的。
Do we believe him in this respect, I mean an important question, do we believe him again, is he being sincere in this or is he using this as it were a kind of rhetoric with which to envelope himself?
在这方面我们是否相信他，我的意思是一个重要的问题，我们是否再次相信他，他在这方面是真诚的还是他用这作为一种修辞来包裹自己？
What is this peculiar kind of piety that he claims to practice?
他声称实行的这种特殊的虔诚是什么？
In many ways, in replying to the jury's verdict in the request that he cease philosophizing, Socrates explains himself in the following terms.
在回答陪审团要求他停止哲学思考的裁决时，苏格拉底在很多方面用以下术语解释了自己。
Let me just quote one other passage briefly from the second speech that he gives to the jury after his conviction.
让我简要引用他在定罪后向陪审团发表的第二次演讲中的另一段话。
"It is hardest of all to persuade you, to persuade some of you about this," he says, about his way of life.
“最难的是说服你们，说服你们中的一些人相信这一点，”他在谈到自己的生活方式时说道。
"For if I say that this is to disobey the god and because of this it is impossible to keep quiet, you will not be persuaded by me on the grounds that I am being ironic.
“如果我说这是违背神明，因此无法保持沉默，你不会因为我在讽刺而被我说服。
And on the other hand," he says, "if I say that this even happens to be a very great good for a human being that is to make speeches every day about virtue and that the unexamined life is not worth living for a human being, you will still less be persuaded by me." In other words, what he seems to be saying in that passage at around 37c and d is that he realizes he is on the horns of a dilemma.
另一方面，”他说，“如果我说，每天发表有关美德的演讲，并且未经审视的生活不值得一个人过，这对人类来说是一件非常大的好事，那么你更不会被我说服。”换句话说，他在 37c 和 d 左右的那段话中似乎想说的是，他意识到自己正处于两难的境地。
On the one hand, he says, his reference to a divine mission, he explicitly says there, will be taken by his audience as being just another instance of Socratic irony and insincerity.
他说，一方面，他在那里明确表示，他提到的神圣使命将被他的听众视为苏格拉底式讽刺和不真诚的又一个例子。
But, he says, if he tries to persuade people of the goodness and the justice of his way of life on simply rational grounds alone, to persuade them that the examined life alone is worth living, he says he will not be believed.
但是，他说，如果他试图仅凭理性理由说服人们相信他的生活方式是善良和正义的，说服他们相信经过审视的生活是值得过的，他说他不会被相信。
So, what you might say is a Socratic citizen to do, he will either be accused of being ironic and not be believed or he will simply be disbelieved if he attempts to defend himself on rational or philosophical grounds.
所以，你可能会说，苏格拉底式的公民要做的事，如果他试图以理性或哲学的理由为自己辩护，他要么会被指责具有讽刺意味而不会被相信，要么他只会被不相信。
That raises the question, I think, that I began the class with today.
我认为这提出了我今天开始上课时提出的问题。
Should Socrates be tolerated, would a good society tolerate Socrates?
如果容忍苏格拉底，一个好的社会会容忍苏格拉底吗？
This is the question raised by this dialogue in the Crito as well.
这也是《克里托》中这段对话所提出的问题。
How far should freedom of speech and that is to say speech that borders on, even verges into, civic impiety, how far should such speech be tolerated?
言论自由，即近乎甚至接近公民不敬的言论，应该在多大程度上被容忍？
It's been an assumption of readers of Plato over the years that the trial of Socrates, that the execution of Socrates, presents the case for the fullest liberty or freedom of thought in discussion in the evils or the dangers to a society of trying to persecute or suppress freedom of speech.
多年来，柏拉图的读者一直认为，对苏格拉底的审判，对苏格拉底的处决，为讨论试图迫害或压制言论自由的社会带来的罪恶或危险提供了最充分的自由或思想自由。
But is this right, in other words, is that really Plato's teaching?
但这真的是柏拉图的教导吗？
Among the things Socrates says he cares deeply about is his calling, as he puts it, to do nothing but persuade you both younger and older not to care for your bodies and money but how your soul will be in the best possible condition.
苏格拉底说，他非常关心的事情之一是他的使命，正如他所说，除了说服你无论年轻还是年长，不要关心你的身体和金钱，而要关心你的灵魂如何处于最佳状态。
How are we to understand this case about toleration and freedom of speech?
我们如何理解这个关于宽容和言论自由的案例？
The Apology presents Socrates right as presenting the most intransigent case for the philosopher as a radical critic or questioner of society.
《申辩书》正确地呈现了苏格拉底作为社会激进批评家或质疑者的哲学家最顽固的情况。
Socrates demands that the Athenians change not simply this or that aspect of their policy but he demands nothing less than a drastic, I would even say revolutionary, change in Athenian civic life, in Athenian civic culture.
苏格拉底要求雅典人不仅要改变他们政策的这个或那个方面，而且他要求雅典公民生活和雅典公民文化进行彻底的、我什至可以说是革命性的改变。
He tells his fellows citizens, right, that their lives are not worth living, only the examined life is worth living and you are not living examined lives therefore your life cannot possibly have any value to it.
他告诉他的同胞们，是的，他们的生活不值得过，只有经过审视的生活才值得过，而你没有过经过审视的生活，因此你的生活不可能有任何价值。
Even when presented with the option to cease philosophizing, he refuses to do so on the ground that, again, he is acting under a command, divine command and cannot do otherwise.
即使当他可以选择停止哲学思考时，他也拒绝这样做，因为他是在命令、神圣的命令下行事，不能做其他事情。
Is Plato asking us to regard Socrates as a man of high principle, standing up for what he believes in the face of death or as a kind of revolutionary agitator who cannot and should not be tolerated by a society whose basic laws and values he will not accept?
柏拉图是否要求我们将苏格拉底视为一个有崇高原则的人，在面对死亡时坚持自己的信仰，或者作为一种革命煽动者，他不能也不应该被一个他不接受其基本法律和价值观的社会所容忍？
To some degree, I am inclined to answer that both of those questions have something to them.
在某种程度上，我倾向于回答这两个问题都有其意义。
Maybe the answer, or an answer, to this question is revealed in the Crito , the companion dialogue, the companion speech that goes along with the Apology , although it typically gets much less attention than the Apology .
也许这个问题的答案或答案可以在《克里托》、伴随着《道歉》的同伴对话、伴随的演讲中得到揭示，尽管它通常比《道歉》受到的关注要少得多。
In part, because I think the dialogue presents, as it were, the city's case, the case of the city against Socrates, I mean to consider some of the following.
在某种程度上，因为我认为对话呈现了城市的情况，城市反对苏格拉底的情况，我打算考虑以下一些问题。
If the Apology presents the philosopher's case against the city, Socrates's case against the city, the Crito presents the city's case against the philosopher.
如果说《申辩》提出了哲学家反对城市的理由，苏格拉底提出了反对城市的理由，那么克里托则提出了城市反对哲学家的理由。
Here, Socrates makes the case against himself, you might say he makes the case against himself better than his accusers in the courtroom did.
在这里，苏格拉底对自己进行了指控，你可能会说他比法庭上的原告更好地对自己进行了指控。
So in the Apology , the speech between Socrates and the laws that form, as it were the kind of central action of the dialogue, presents the case that Meletus and Anytus should have made against him.
因此，在《申辩》中，苏格拉底之间的演讲和形成的法律，可以说是对话的中心行动，提出了梅勒图斯和安尼图斯应该对他提出的论点。
While the Apology seems to denigrate the political life as requiring complicity in injustice and Socrates says he will have no part of laws or policies that entail injustice, the Crito makes the case for the dignity of the laws, the dignity or majesty of the city and its laws.
虽然《申辩》似乎贬低政治生活需要共谋不公正，苏格拉底也表示他不会参与导致不公正的法律或政策，但克里托却为法律的尊严、城市及其法律的尊严或威严辩护。
While the Apology defends, again, a politics of principled abstinence or disobedience to the political life, the Crito makes the most complete and far-reaching case for obligation and obedience to the law that has perhaps ever been made.
虽然《道歉》再次捍卫了原则上禁欲或不服从政治生活的政治，但《克里托》却为义务和遵守法律提出了可能是有史以来最完整、影响最深远的理由。
So how do we reconcile, if we can, these two apparently contradictory points of view in these two dialogues?
那么，如果可以的话，我们如何调和这两个对话中这两种明显矛盾的观点呢？
These two dialogues, it should be evident, I mean, differ not only in content but in their dramatic context.
我的意思是，这两段对话应该很明显，不仅在内容上不同，而且在戏剧背景上也不同。
Just consider, again, some of the following.
请再次考虑以下一些内容。
The Apology is a speech given before a large and largely anonymous audience of over 500 persons, the Assembly, the Court.
道歉是在 500 多人、议会和法院面前发表的演讲，听众大多是匿名的。
We see Socrates addressing, the only time in any platonic dialogue, an audience of this size.
我们看到苏格拉底向如此规模的听众发表讲话，这是柏拉图式对话中唯一的一次。
The Crito , on the other hand, is a conversation between Socrates and a single individual, only one person.
另一方面，《克里托》是苏格拉底和一个人、只有一个人之间的对话。
The Apology takes place in the Court of Athens, the most public of settings, while the Crito occurs within the darkness and confinement of a prison cell.
《道歉》发生在最公开的雅典法院，而《克里托》则发生在黑暗、封闭的牢房内。
The Apology shows Socrates defending himself and his life as a gift of the god that most truly benefits the city but in the Crito , we see him bow down to the authority of the laws that he seems to have previously rejected and finally if the Apology presents Socrates as the first martyr for philosophy, the first person to die for the cause of philosophy, the Crito shows Socrates's trial and sentence as a case of justice delivered.
《申辩》显示苏格拉底为自己和他的生命辩护，将其视为最真正造福城市的上帝的礼物，但在《克里托》中，我们看到他屈服于他之前似乎拒绝接受的法律权威。最后，如果《申辩》将苏格拉底描述为第一个哲学殉道者，第一个为哲学事业而死的人，《克里托》则将苏格拉底的审判和判决显示为正义的伸张。
These huge contrasts, again, they force us to ask a question, what is Plato doing in presenting these two very different points of view, what is his point in presenting these two works with two such sharply contrasting perspectives on the relation of Socrates to the city?
这些巨大的反差再次迫使我们提出一个问题，柏拉图在提出这两种截然不同的观点时在做什么，他在这两部著作中以两种截然不同的视角来呈现苏格拉底与城邦的关系有何意义？
Was Plato confused, was he contradicting himself, was he--what was he doing?
柏拉图是不是很困惑，他是不是自相矛盾，他是……他在做什么？
Big question.
大问题。
I hope I have time to answer it.
我希望我有时间回答一下。
So let's look into the Crito just a little bit.
让我们稍微了解一下 Crito。
Crito is named for a friend and disciple of Socrates who at the outset of the dialogue is sitting as a watchful guardian over his mentor.
克里托以苏格拉底的一位朋友和弟子的名字命名，在对话一开始，他就作为他的导师的警惕守护者坐着。
He urges Socrates to allow him to help him escape.
他恳求苏格拉底允许他帮助自己逃脱。
The jailers have been bribed and escape would be made easy but rather than trying to convince Crito directly, Socrates creates a dialogue; actually, you might say a dialogue within the larger dialogue, a dialogue between himself and the laws of Athens where he puts forward the case against escape, that is to say the case against disobedience to the law and the argument could be summarized as follows.
狱卒们被贿赂了，逃跑会很容易，但苏格拉底并没有试图直接说服克里托，而是创造了一段对话；实际上，你可以说是更大对话中的对话，他自己和雅典法律之间的对话，他提出了反对逃跑的理由，即反对不遵守法律的理由，其论点可以概括如下。
No state can exist without rules.
没有规则，任何国家都无法存在。
The first rule of any state is the rule that citizens are not free to set aside the rules, to choose among them which ones to obey and to disobey.
任何国家的第一条规则都是公民不能自由地搁置规则、选择遵守和不遵守规则。
To engage in civil disobedience of any kind is not only to call this or that rule into question but it is to call into question the very nature of law, the very question of the rules.
进行任何形式的公民不服从不仅是对这条或那条规则提出质疑，而且是对法律的本质、规则的问题提出质疑。
To question or disobey the law is tantamount to destroying the authority of the law.
质疑或违反法律就等于破坏法律的权威。
The breaking of so much as a single law constitutes the essence of anarchy, constitutes the essence of lawlessness, it is a far-reaching argument for obedience to the law.
违反一条法律就构成了无政府状态的本质，构成了无法无天的本质，这是对遵守法律的一个影响深远的论据。
The breaking of even a single law calls into question the authority of law as such.
即使违反一条法律也会使法律本身的权威受到质疑。
It's a very powerful argument that, in a way, Socrates makes against himself, putting that speech in the mouth of the laws.
从某种意义上说，这是一个非常有力的论点，苏格拉底将其言论置于法律之口，以此来反对自己。
But he goes even further than this.
但他比这更进一步。
The citizen, he says, owes his very existence to the laws.
他说，公民的存在归功于法律。
We are what we are because of the power and authority of the laws, the customs, the traditions, the culture that has shaped us.
我们之所以成为现在的样子，是因为法律、习俗、传统和文化的力量和权威塑造了我们。
The laws, he says, have begat us and the use of the term "begat" in our translation is clearly intended to resonate with something you might say we might think of as something biblical about it.
他说，法律创造了我们，在我们的翻译中使用“begat”一词显然是为了与你可能会说我们可能认为符合圣经的东西产生共鸣。
The citizen is, in a word, created, begat by the laws themselves, they exercise a kind of paternal authority over us such that disobedience to any law constitutes an act of impiety or disrespect of the oldest things around us.
简而言之，公民是由法律本身创造和孕育的，它们对我们行使一种父权权威，以至于不服从任何法律都构成对我们周围最古老事物的不虔诚或不尊重。
The laws are not only like our parents, they are like our ancestors, the founding fathers, as we might say, who are owed respect and piety.
法律不仅像我们的父母，而且像我们的祖先，我们可以说，我们的开国元勋们应该受到尊重和虔诚。
In many ways, the Crito , in some respect, is the platonic dialogue about piety.
在很多方面，《克里托》在某些方面是关于虔诚的柏拉图式对话。
Socrates seems to accept here entirely the authority of the law; he does not offer arguments for non compliance as he does in the Apology , so what happened all of a sudden to Socrates, the apostle of civil disobedience, Socrates the apostle of principled abstention?
苏格拉底在这里似乎完全接受法律的权威。他没有像《申辩》中那样提出不服从的论据，那么，公民不服从的倡导者苏格拉底、原则性弃权的倡导者苏格拉底突然发生了什么？
He accepts entirely, or the laws force him to accept entirely, the covenant that every citizen has with the laws that binds them to absolute obedience.
他完全接受，或者法律强迫他完全接受每个公民与法律签订的契约，使他们绝对服从。
The question is, why does Socrates exhibit such proud defiance and independence of the laws in the Apology , and such total, even kind of mouse-like, acquiescence to the laws in the Crito ?
问题是，为什么苏格拉底在《申辩书》中表现出对法律如此自豪的蔑视和独立性，而在《克里托》中却表现出对法律如此完全的、甚至是老鼠般的默许？
What happened to him, I mean why does he all of a sudden become so humble and acquiescent?
他到底怎么了，为什么突然变得如此谦虚和默许？
What happened to his language about being the gift of the god?
他关于成为神的礼物的语言发生了什么变化？
Well, that's something I want you to think about and maybe I'm sure you'll want to talk about in your sections, but let me propose something like the following to answer or at least to respond to this paradox, this question.
好吧，这是我希望您考虑的事情，也许我确定您会想在您的部分中讨论，但让我提出类似以下的内容来回答或至少回应这个悖论，这个问题。
The Apology and the Crito represent a tension, they represent even a conflict between two more or less permanent and irreconcilable moral codes.
《申辩》和《克里托》代表了一种张力，它们甚至代表了两种或多或少永久且不可调和的道德准则之间的冲突。
The one represented by Socrates regards reason, that is to say, the sovereign reason of the individual as the highest possible authority.
以苏格拉底为代表的人将理性，即个人的至高无上的理性视为最高的权威。
It is the philosopher's reliance on his own reason that frees him from the dangerous authority of the state and safeguards the individual from complicity in the injustice and evils that seem to be a necessary part of political life.
哲学家对自己理性的依赖使他摆脱了国家危险的权威，并保护个人免受不公正和邪恶的共谋，而这似乎是政治生活的必要组成部分。
Here is Socrates, the principled abstainer, but the other moral code is represented by the speech of the laws where it is the laws of the community, its oldest and deepest beliefs and institutions, its constitution, its regime as we would say, its politea , that are fundamentally obligatory on the individual and even take priority over the individual.
这是苏格拉底，有原则的禁欲者，但另一种道德准则则由法律的表述所代表，其中它是社会的法律，它最古老和最深刻的信仰和制度，它的宪法，它的政权，我们会说，它的礼貌，从根本上说，对个人来说是义务的，甚至优先于个人。
The one point of view takes the philosophic life, the examined life, to be the one most worth living; the other takes the political life, the life of the citizen engaged in the business of deliberating, legislating, making war and peace as the highest calling for a human being.
一种观点认为哲学生活、审视的生活是最值得过的生活；另一种则把政治生活，即从事审议、立法、战争与和平事务的公民的生活视为人类的最高使命。
These constitute two irreconcilable alternatives, two different callings, so to speak, and any attempt, I think, to reconcile or to synthesize these two can only lead to a deep injustice to each.
这构成了两种不可调和的选择，可以说是两种不同的使命，我认为，任何调和或综合这两种选择的尝试只会导致对彼此的深深不公正。
Plato seems to believe that each of us must choose somehow, must choose between one or the other of these two contenders for the most serious and worthwhile way of life.
柏拉图似乎相信，我们每个人都必须以某种方式做出选择，必须在这两个竞争者中选择一个，以获得最严肃和最有价值的生活方式。
Which do we take, which is the matter of ultimate concern or care for us?
我们拿哪一个，哪一个是我们最终关心或关心的事情？
Which?
哪个？
But we cannot have both and I think that distinction to some degree captures the differences set out when I asked at the beginning of the class about who believes Socrates is innocent and should be acquitted and who believes he is guilty and should be condemned between a philosophical and a political point of view.
但我们不能两者兼而有之，我认为这种区别在某种程度上体现了当我在课堂开始时问谁认为苏格拉底是无辜的并且应该被无罪释放，谁认为他有罪并且应该被谴责在哲学和政治观点之间的差异。
And, in a sense, one could say maybe this is not Plato's last word, I mean why does Socrates choose to stay and drink the hemlock?
而且，从某种意义上说，也许这不是柏拉图的遗言，我的意思是为什么苏格拉底选择留下来喝铁杉？
After all, if he is committed fundamentally to the principles of his own reason, still why should he care that much about the laws of the city, why not let Crito help him escape and go to Crete where he can drink the good wine of Crete and enjoy his old age?
毕竟，如果他从根本上致力于自己的理性原则，那么他为什么要那么关心城市的法律，为什么不让克里托帮助他逃离并前往克里特岛，在那里他可以喝克里特岛的好酒，享受晚年呢？
And in fact, Plato wrote another dialogue, his largest dialogue, a book called The Laws , where you see a man simply designated as the Athenian stranger living in Crete and carrying on a conversation with representatives of that society and that might be, although he is not identified as Socrates, it is sometimes thought here is the kind of speech or discussion Socrates would be having, had he escaped.
事实上，柏拉图写了另一部对话，他最大的对话，一本叫《法律》的书，其中你看到一个人被简单地称为居住在克里特岛的雅典陌生人，并与该社会的代表进行对话，尽管他没有被确定为苏格拉底，但有时人们认为，如果他逃脱了，苏格拉底将会进行这种演讲或讨论。
But it gets back to the question, are the reasons Socrates gives Crito for refusing to escape, the reasons he puts in the mouth of the laws of the city of Athens, are those Socrates's true reasons?
但这又回到了问题，苏格拉底给克里托提供的拒绝逃跑的理由，他在雅典城法律中提出的理由，是苏格拉底的真实理由吗？
Does Socrates believe that speech that he constructs between himself and the laws or is it simply a fiction that he creates for the sake of relieving his friend of the guilt he evidently feels for being unable to help Socrates?
苏格拉底是否相信他在自己和法律之间构建的言论，或者这只是他为了减轻他的朋友因无法帮助苏格拉底而明显感到的内疚而创造的虚构？
Crito is, of course, very concerned with what people will think of him if it becomes known that he has somehow not helped Socrates to escape.
当然，克里托非常关心如果人们知道他没有帮助苏格拉底逃脱，人们会怎么看他。
Is that speech for the law, with the laws, really intended for the benefit of Crito, rather than an expression of Socrates's deepest opinions about the questions of obligation and obedience?
这段关于法律的演讲，连同法律，真的是为了克里托的利益，而不是表达苏格拉底关于义务和服从问题的最深刻的观点吗？
Is he, in that speech, bestowing as it were a kind of justice to Crito to reconcile him to the laws of the city and to give him reasons, you might say rational considerations, for continued obedience to the law?
在那次演讲中，他是否赋予克里托一种正义，让他遵守城市的法律，并给他理由，你可以说是理性的考虑，继续遵守法律？
In many ways that would seem to make a certain sense of the apparent discrepancy between these two dialogues.
从很多方面来说，这似乎可以解释这两次对话之间的明显差异。
It demonstrates not only Socrates's sense of his superiority to the laws of Athens.
它不仅表明了苏格拉底对自己优于雅典法律的认识。
In the first speech of the Apology , he defies the city to put him to death by expressing indifference to death and then in the Crito , he very much expresses that indifference to death by refusing to allow Crito to let him escape.
在《道歉》的第一篇演讲中，他通过表达对死亡的冷漠来反抗市政府处死他，然后在《克里托》中，他通过拒绝让克里托让他逃跑来表达对死亡的冷漠。
Socrates seems to remain, even until the end, very much a kind of law unto himself while at the same time, again, providing Crito and others like him an example of rational and dignified obedience to the law.
即使到最后，苏格拉底似乎仍然是自己的一种法律，同时再次为克里托和其他像他一样的人提供了理性和有尊严地服从法律的榜样。
When we look at the death of Socrates, do we think of it as a tragedy, as a moral tragedy, a just man sentenced to death by an unjust law?
当我们看待苏格拉底之死时，我们是否认为这是一场悲剧，一场道德悲剧，一个正义的人被不公正的法律判处死刑？
I don't think so.
我不这么认为。
Far from it.
远非如此。
Socrates's death at the age of 70 was intended by him as an act of philosophical martyrdom that would allow future philosophy to be favorably recognized as a source of courage and justice.
苏格拉底在 70 岁时去世，他本意是作为一种哲学殉道行为，让未来的哲学被认为是勇气和正义的源泉。
In one of his later letters, Plato refers to his depiction of Socrates, as he says his attempt to render Socrates young and beautiful, that is he consciously set out to beautify Socrates, presenting a man, fearless before death, refusing to participate in any active injustice while dispensing wisdom and justice to those who will listen.
在他后来的一封信中，柏拉图提到了他对苏格拉底的描述，他说他试图让苏格拉底年轻美丽，也就是说，他有意识地美化苏格拉底，呈现出一个在死前无所畏惧、拒绝参与任何不公正行为的人，同时向那些愿意倾听的人传递智慧和正义。
We don't know the real Socrates, all we know of Socrates is what we read in Plato and Aristophanes and a small number of others who have sketched various different pictures of him.
我们不知道真正的苏格拉底，我们对苏格拉底的了解只是我们在柏拉图和阿里斯托芬以及少数其他人的著作中读到的，他们为苏格拉底描绘了各种不同的形象。
But Plato's Socrates is necessarily poles apart from Aristophanes' Socrates depiction of him as a sort of sophist who makes the weaker argument the stronger.
但柏拉图笔下的苏格拉底必然与阿里斯托芬笔下的苏格拉底截然不同，阿里斯托芬将苏格拉底描述为一种以弱论据为强的诡辩家。
Plato's dialogues, the Apology as well as the Republic and the Crito are in the broadest sense of the term, an attempt not only to answer the charge against Aristophanes but also defend the cause of philosophy as something of value and merit.
柏拉图的对话录、《申辩》以及《理想国》和《克里托》都是最广泛意义上的，不仅试图回答对阿里斯托芬的指控，而且还试图捍卫哲学事业的价值和优点。
Where does that leave us today?
今天我们会怎样呢？
What are we to make of all this?
我们该如何看待这一切呢？
We, who live in a very different kind of world from that of, you know, fourth-century Athens, what can we learn from the example of Socrates?
我们生活在一个与四世纪雅典截然不同的世界，我们可以从苏格拉底的例子中学到什么？
Most of us like most of you earlier, find ourselves instinctively taking the side of Socrates against the city of Athens.
我们大多数人像你们大多数人一样，发现自己本能地站在苏格拉底一边反对雅典城。
Those who might defend the city of Athens against Socrates, those who believe in the value of civic piety are very few among us.
那些可能保卫雅典城对抗苏格拉底的人，那些相信公民虔诚价值的人在我们中间很少。
Perhaps only those of you who might come from a small town in the south or from certain areas of Brooklyn would understand something about the supreme value of piety as a way of life.
也许只有来自南方小镇或布鲁克林某些地区的人才能理解虔诚作为一种生活方式的最高价值。
We, by and large, tend to accept the picture of Socrates as a victim of injustice.
总的来说，我们倾向于接受苏格拉底作为不公正受害者的形象。
We overlook, we conveniently overlook a number of facts about him, his hostility to democracy, we'll see that in the Republic but we've seen it already to some degree in the Apology .
我们忽视了，我们很容易忽视了关于他的一些事实，他对民主的敌意，我们会在《共和国》中看到这一点，但我们已经在某种程度上在《道歉》中看到了这一点。
His claim that the lives of his fellow citizens are not worth living and his claim that his way of life has been commanded by a god that no one else has ever heard or seen.
他声称他的同胞的生活不值得过，他声称他的生活方式是由一位其他人从未听说过或见过的神所命令的。
None of these seem to make any difference to us and yet I think they should.
这些似乎对我们来说都没有任何影响，但我认为它们应该如此。
Given Socrates's claims, ask yourself what would a responsible body of citizens have done, how should they have acted?
鉴于苏格拉底的主张，问问自己，一个负责任的公民团体会做什么，他们应该如何行动？
One answer might be to extend greater toleration to civil dissidents like Socrates.
一种答案可能是对像苏格拉底这样的公民持不同政见者给予更大的宽容。
Individuals of heterodox belief but whose own views may stimulate others to question and think for themselves, all to the good, Milton, John Locke, people like Voltaire argued something like this.
具有非正统信仰的个人，但他们自己的观点可能会激发他人质疑和思考，这一切都是为了好处，弥尔顿、约翰·洛克、伏尔泰等人都曾这样争论过。
But is that to do justice to Socrates?
但这是对苏格拉底的公正对待吗？
The one thing that Plato does not argue is that Socrates should simply be tolerated.
柏拉图没有争论的一件事是苏格拉底应该被容忍。
To tolerate his teaching would seem to trivialize it in some sense, to render it harmless.
从某种意义上说，容忍他的教导似乎会轻视它，使其变得无害。
The Athenians at least pay Socrates the tribute of taking him seriously, which is exactly why he is on trial.
雅典人至少向苏格拉底表示敬意，认真对待他，这正是他受到审判的原因。
The Athenians refuse to tolerate Socrates because they know he is not harmless, that he poses a challenge, a fundamental challenge to their way of life and all that they hold to be noble and worthwhile.
雅典人拒绝容忍苏格拉底，因为他们知道他并非无害，他对他们的生活方式以及他们所认为的高尚和有价值的一切提出了挑战，一个根本性的挑战。
Socrates is not harmless because of his own professed ability to attract followers, a few today, a few more tomorrow.
苏格拉底并不是无害的，因为他自称有能力吸引追随者，今天有几个，明天有更多。
Who knows?
谁知道？
To tolerate Socrates would be to say to him that we care little for our way of life and that we are willing to let you challenge it and impugn it every day.
容忍苏格拉底就是对他说，我们不关心我们的生活方式，我们愿意让你每天挑战它、指责它。
Is that good, is that right?
这样好吗？
The trial of Socrates asks us to think about the limits of toleration, what views, if any, do we find simply intolerable?
对苏格拉底的审判要求我们思考宽容的限度，哪些观点（如果有的话）是我们认为根本无法容忍的？
Is a healthy society one that is literally open to every point of view, freedom of speech is naturally a cherished good, is it the supreme good?
一个健康的社会真的是一个对各种观点都开放的社会吗？言论自由自然是一种值得珍惜的美好，是至高无上的美好吗？
Should it trump all other goods or does toleration reach a point when it ceases to be toleration and becomes in fact a kind of soft nihilism that can extend liberty to everything precisely because it takes nothing very seriously.
如果它胜过所有其他善，或者宽容达到了一个地步，它就不再是宽容，而实际上变成一种软虚无主义，它可以将自由扩展到一切，正是因为它不认真对待任何事情。
And by nihilism, I mean the view that every preference, however squalid, base or sordid, must be regarded as the legitimate equal of every other.
我所说的虚无主义是指这样一种观点，即每一种偏好，无论多么卑鄙、卑鄙或肮脏，都必须被视为与其他偏好同等合法。
Is this really tolerance or is it rather a form of moral decay that has simply decided to abandon the search for truth and standards of judgment?
这真的是宽容，还是一种道德败坏，只是决定放弃对真理和判断标准的追求？
There's a danger, I think, that endless tolerance leads to intellectual passivity and the kind of uncritical acceptance of all points of view.
我认为，存在一种危险，即无休止的宽容会导致智力上的被动以及对所有观点的不加批判的接受。
Well so much for that.
好了就说这么多了。
What I want to do, I see we're running out of time, is if you could think about it, maybe hold that thought in your mind once in a while between now and Wednesday and on Wednesday, we will begin reading what is arguably, some people believe, the most important book ever written, Plato's Republic .
我想做的，我看到我们已经没有时间了，如果你能想一想，也许从现在到周三之间偶尔在你的脑海中牢记这个想法，周三，我们将开始阅读可以说是有史以来最重要的书，一些人认为，柏拉图的《理想国》。
See you on Wednesday.
周三见。