回复 2楼盛世美颜的帖子

2小時以上的、、、、

讓 我分段 慢慢看 再回來分享

觀後感

謝謝樓主分享

看到time mark @00:05:54

------------------ begin ---------------

Russell says:

What is the difference between "knowledge" and "opinion"?

The man who has knowledge has knowledge of something,

that is to say,

of something that is exists,

for what does not exists is nothing.

(This is reminiscent of Parmenides . 我搜索 關於 Parmenides 有關此topic的資料：https://hume.ucdavis.edu/phi143/epiphys.htm )

Thus knowledge is infallible,

since it is logically impossible for it to be mistaken.

But opinion can be mistaken.

How can this be?

Opinion cannot be of what is not, for that is impossible;

non of what is, for that it would be knowledge.

Therefore opinion must be of what both is and is not.

But how is this possible?

-------------- end -----------------------

@time mark 7:28

談過戀愛的第一個問題是“Am I in love?”

可能我 Asperger 思維 的關係, 對哲學對愛的定義缺乏能力去理解

所以 對不上號入座

我有點兒像 本沒倒置

我第一個 （關心的）問題是“對方是不是在愛我？”

而不是 「我是否墮入愛河？」

很有可能我誤解了 苑舉正老師的意思

繼續做我的筆記：

@time mark 00:16:23

------------------------ begin ------------------------

Diotima

• May I ask you further, Whether love is the love of something or of nothing?
• Yet let me ask you one more question in order to illustrate my meaning: Is not a brother to be regarded essentially as a brother of something?
• And now, said Socrates, I will ask about Love: -------- Is Love of something or of nothing?
• Of something, surely, he replied.
• Keep in mind what this is, and tell me what I want to know -------- whether Love desires that of which love is.
• And does he possess, or does he not possess, that which he loves and desires?
• Probably not, I should say.
• Very good. Would he who is great, desire to be great, or he who is strong, desires to be strong?
• No.

------------------------ end ---------------------------

繼續做我的筆記：

@time mark 00:24:29

--------------------------- begin -------------------------

• True. For he who is anything cannot want to be that which he is?
• Very true.
• Then, said Socrates, he desires that what he has at present may be preserved to him in the future, which is equivalent to saying that he desires something which is not-existent to him, and which as yet he has not got:
• Very true, he said.
• Then he and everyone who desires, desires that which he has not already, and which is future and not present, and which he has not, and is not, and of which he is in want; ----- these are the sort of things which love and desire seek
• Very true, he said.

---------------------------- end ----------------------------

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 00:25:23

---------------------- begin ----------------------

• Then now, said Socrates, let us recapitulate the argument. First, is not love of something, and of something too which is wanting to a man?
• Yes, he replied.
• And if this is true, Love is the love of beauty and not of deformity?
• He assented.
• And the admission has been already made that Love is of something which a man wants and has not?
• True, he said.
• Then Love wants and has not beauty?
• Certainly, he replied.
• And would you call that beautiful which wants and does not possess beauty?
• Certainly not.

---------------------- end -------------------------

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 26:46

-------------------- begin ----------------

• Then would you still say that love is beautiful?
• Is not the good also the beautiful?
• Yes.
• Then in wanting the beautiful, love want also the good?
• I cannot refute you, Socrates
• And now, taking my leave of you, I would rehearse a tale of love which I heard from Diotima of Mantineia.
• I must speak first of the being and nature of Love, and then of his works.
• 1. First I said to her in nearly the same words which he used to me, that Love was a mighty god,
• 2. Love was neither fair nor good.
• "What do you mean, Diotima," I said, "is love then evil and foul?"

-------------------- end ----------------

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 30:22

--------------------------- begin -------------------

• Hush," she cried; "must that be foul which is not fair?"
• "Certainly," I said. "And is that which is not wise, ignorant?"
• Do you not see that there is a mean between wisdom and ignorance?"
• "And what may that be?" I said.
• "Right opinion," she replied; "which, as you know, being incapable of giving a reason, is not knowledge (for how can knowledge be devoid of reason? nor again, ignorance, for neither can ignorance attain the truth), but is clearly something which is a mean between ignorance and wisdom."
• "Quite true," I replied.
• "Do not then insist," she said, "that what is not fair is of necessity foul, or what is not good evil; or infer that because love is not fair and good he is therefore foul and evil; for he is in a mean between them."
• "well," I said, "Love is surely admitted by all to be a great god." "By those who know or by those who do not know?"

----------------------- end -----------------------

回复 13楼cqcq的帖子

這樣的 描述，

我可以把我先生 所說的 「他和他前妻的第一段婚姻裏，they have many happy years together.」

對號入座

來理解了

因為 他們年輕時候喜歡的 和需要的 what is good for him 與 人在中年的時候

兩者有差異

我先生拿 買賣股票 的策略 給我解明

十幾年前 投資某長線股 盈利了十年

後來越來越虧 而且 getting bad for him to keep it.

It is estimated not become better, might become worse.

是到了要清倉展覽的時間

趁還能換出錢來 投資 另一個

當機 市面上也有 更 盈利的 長線股

巧合 我在 「騎牛遇馬」而且這馬可被我「騎」

做筆記 以備 重溫 反思 之用

自己抄寫一次 也會把內容進入我的腦多些

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 40:47

-------------------------- begin --------------------

• "By all." "And how, Socrates," she said with a smile, "can Love be acknowledged to be a great god by those who say that he is not a god at all?"
• "And who are they?" I said. "You and I are two of them," she replied.
• "How can that be?" I said.
• "It is quite intelligible," she replied; "for you yourself would acknowledge that the gods are happy and fair --- of course you would --- would you dare to say that any god was not? "
• "Certainly not," I replied.
• "And you mean by the happy, those who are the possessors of things good or fair?"
• "Yes." "And you admitted that Love, because he was in want, desires those good and fair things of which he is in want?"
• "Yes, I did."

--------------------------- end --------------------

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 41:45

-------------------- begin ----------------

• "But how can he (Love) be a god who has no portion in what is either good or fair?" "Impossible." "Then you see that you also deny the divinity of Love."
• "What then is Love?" I asked; "Is he mortal?"
• "No." "What then?" "As in the former instance, he is neither mortal or immortal, but in the mean between the two." "What is he, Diotima?"
• "He is a great spirit (daimom) , and like all spirits he is intermediate between the divine and the mortal."
• "And what," I said, "is his power?"

-------- end --------------

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 42:54

-------------------- begin ----------------

• "He interprets," she replied, "between god and men, conveying and taking across to the gods the prayers and sacrifices of men, and to men the commands and replies of gods; he is the mediator who spans the chasm which divides them, and therefore in him all is bound together, and through him the arts of the prophet and the priest, their sacrifices and mysteries and charms, and all prophecy and incantation, find their way."

-------------------- end ----------------

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 45:33

-------------------- begin ----------------

• "For God mingles not with man; but through Love all the intercourse and converse of God with man, whether awake or asleep, is carried on.
• The wisdom which understands this is spiritual all other wisdom, such as that of arts and handicrafts, is mean and vulgar. Now these spirits or intermediate powers are many and diverse, and one of them is Love."

-------------------- end ----------------

繼續做我的筆記:

中間說 Love 的父母，我不做筆記了，因為比較容易記得與理解 by the first time reading it.

@time mark 51:00

-------------------- begin ----------------

(Love) "He is by nature neither mortal nor immortal, but alive and flourishing at one moment when he is in plenty, and dead at another moment, and agin alive by reason of his farther's nature. But that which is alway flowing in is always flowing out, and so he is never in want and never in wealth; and, further, he is in a mean between ignorance and knowledge. The truth of the matter is this: no god is a philosopher or seeker after wisdom, for he is wise already; nor does any man who is wise seek after wisdom. Neither do the ignorance seek after wisdom. For herein is the evil of ignorance, that he who is neither good nor wise is nevertheless satisfied with himself: he has no desire for that of which he feels no want. " "But who then, Diotima," I said, "are the lovers of wisdom, if they are neither the wise nor the foolish?"

-------------------- end ----------------

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 54:03

-------------------- begin ----------------

she replied; "they are those who are in a mean between the two; Love is one of them. For wisdom is a most beautiful thing, and love is of the beautiful; and therefore Love is also a philosopher or lover of wisdom, and being a lover of wisdom is in a mean between the wise and the ignorant. And of this too his birth is the cause; for his farther is wealthy and wise, and his mother poor and foolish. Such, my dear Socrates, is the nature of the spirit Love."

-------------------- end ----------------

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 54:16

-------------------- begin ----------------

• "The error in your conception of him was very natural, and as I imagine from what you say, has arisen out of a confusion of love and the beloved, which made you think that love was all beautiful. For the beloved is truly beautiful, and delicate, and perfect, and blessed; but the principle of love is of another nature, and is such as I have described."
• "When a man loves the beautiful, what does he desire?" I answered her, "That the beautiful may be his." "Still," she said, "the answer suggests a further question: What is given by the possession of beauty?" "To what you have asked," I replied, "I have no answer ready."

-------------------- end ----------------

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 55:40

-------------------- begin ----------------

"Then," she said, "let me put the word 「good」in the place of the beautiful, and repeat the question once more: If he who loves loves the good, what is it then that he loves?"

"The possession of the good," I said.

"And what does he gain who possesses the good?"

"Happiness," I replied; "there is less difficulty in answering that question."

"Yes," she said, "the happy are made happy by the acquisition good things. Nor is there any need to ask why a man desires happiness; the answer is already final."

"You are right." I said. "And is this wish and this desire common to all? and do all men always desire their own good, or only some men? --- what say you?"

-------------------- end ----------------

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 1:14:46

帕拉圖 哲學中的四個主要部份

• The world of ideas
• The immortality of the soul
• The application of reminiscence
• The illumination of the knowledge

回复 25楼MeekSarah的帖子

繼續做我的筆記:

@time mark 1:22::21

1. 感官知識分成兩項：appearance and objects
2. reason 理智 高於 理解 understanding
3. reason 追求 pure 理念，可以透過辯證法達到，一旦達到，結果是 categorical 「定言式的」

@time mark 1:26:47

@time mark 1:54:40 - 1:55:01

觀後感：一個 "Dominate" 需要知道什麼是ta 的利益

回應樓主的 主題：

我感謝神！祂 安排

我現任先生

在我兩建立的夫妻關係中

當我的 Dominate 這角色。

他是

在我遇到過的所有說愛我的人當中

最知道甚麼是 他的利益

而且 我的 利益 也在他的心思以內。

不過，若是神的緣故，我也會拋開他。

就是說 假如 他要我的 與 神要我的 有抵觸

我決定選擇放棄他 繼續跟從我的神。

“God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. By this is love perfected with us, so that we may have confidence for the day of judgment, because as he is so also are we in this world. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love. We love because he first loved us. ” ～ 1 John 4:16b - 19 ( Bible: English Standard Version)