我搜了一下这本书的中译本,没找到这段话。而且这本书是小说,感觉不太会发这种议论。
【 在 biyele 的大作中提到: 】
: 帮你找到了,你摘录的两段来自[美] 约翰·威廉斯《奥古斯都》John Buchan Augustus。你看的或许是上海人民出版社出版的译本。
:
: "The Roman was no theologian, nor, in a constructive sense, a philosopher. Nor was he a scientist. He was a great inventor and builder, but in the speculative and theoretic side of science he had little interest. Men like the elder Cato, Varro, and the elder Pliny liked to record the curiosities of nature, but they had not the systematizing impulse, the restless passion for order, of the Greeks. Pure science seemed to the Roman a waste of time, though he welcomed applied science. So he was a good field naturalist but no biologist; a good engineer but a poor mathematician; a successful calendar-maker but an indifferent astronomer. He was a mighty traveller, but his serious geographical work was done for him by foreigners. He was a soldier and a conqueror, but he made no contribution of value to military science. "
: ...................
--
FROM 101.224.167.*