来自《耶鲁大学开放课程—哲学：死亡第7集第7集》

in the particular case of eternal objects,

尤其是永恒的物体
you do have to be eternal,

也许要研究这些物体
non-physical to study them.

你自己本身必须是永恒的非现实的
It could be that even though the general claim,

即使一般来说
"It takes one to know one" Is false, the particular claim,

同类互知这个观点是错的但它的特例
"Eternal, non-physical can only be grasped by the eternal,

也就是永恒的非现实的东西只能被永恒的
non-physical," Maybe that particular claim is true.

非现实的东西所理解这可能是对的
And it's only the particular claim that Plato needs.

而柏拉图只需要它的特例成立就够了
Still, all I can say is, why should we believe two?

然而我想问为什么我们要相信前提二
Why should we think there's some--Even though, normally,

为什么我们应该认为即使通常来说
the barrier can be crossed

那个界限是可以跨越的
and Xs can study the non-X,

即X可以研究非X