评论
打印
For nearly a hundred years there had existed a quite different kind of official description, which concentrated not upon the act, but the state of mind.
在将近一百年来，还存在着另一种观点，即同性恋并不是一种行为，而是一种精神状态。
Considerable efforts had been made to elucidate a 'homosexual type', or a 'homosexual personality', rather as the nineteenth century psychologists had also devoted energy to defining criminal, or mentally deficient, or other 'degenerate types'.
19世纪的心理学家付出很大努力，解释"同性恋类型"或"同性恋人格"，以厘清犯罪、精神疾病和"堕落"。
The word 'homosexual' was itself a nineteenth century medical neologism.
“同性恋”一词本身就是19世纪医学新词。
Freud was often credited with making this mode of description available to people.
他们将"同性恋"这个词视为一个医学词汇，这种描述框架常常被归功于弗洛伊德。
Indeed, Alan and Robin would sometimes puzzle over the question of how people had been able to think about sexual desire before Freud's day.
图灵和罗宾有时会思考这个问题：在弗洛伊德之前的人们，如何描述性欲？
In his 1950 Mind article, Alan had referred to the 'skin of an onion' analogy as helpful:
图灵在他1950年发表于《心灵》杂志的论文中，举了一个"洋葱皮"的比喻：
In considering the functions of the mind or the brain we find certain operations which we can explain in purely mechanical terms.
当考虑思维或大脑的功能时，我们发现，某些操作可以完全从机械角度进行解释。
This we say does not correspond to the real mind: it is a sort of skin which we must strip off if we are to find the real mind.
这并不是真正的思维，而是一层表皮，要想找到真正的思维，就得去掉这层表皮。
But then in what remains we find a further skin to be stripped off, and so on.
但接下来，我们又看到了新的一层表皮，依此类推。
Proceeding in this way do we ever come to the 'real' mind, or do we eventually come to the skin which has nothing in it?
照此下去，最后我们会找到"真正的"思维呢，还是发现最后一层皮里空空如也？
