✔ 最佳答案
（我向來比較主張翻譯要白話，要讓人看得懂原文要表達的意思。 所以譯者必須每個字都先搞懂，才能用自己的話表達，而不受限於英漢字典的解釋。）
這段文章有錯誤，從表示相反的 Rather 看得出來 she and her linguistic community have seen 是錯的，必須是 have never seen 或 have not seen，後面才會說， Rather, she saw....。
So, if some person, Mary, were a "brain in a vat", whose every experience is received through wiring and other gadgetry created by the "mad scientist", then Mary's idea of a "brain" would not refer to a "real" brain, since she and her linguistic community have never seen such a thing. Rather, she saw something that looked like a brain, but was actually an image fed to her through the wiring. Similarly, her idea of a "vat" would not refer a "real" vat. So, if, as a "brain in a vat", she were to say "I'm a brain in a vat", she would actually be saying "I'm a brain-image in a vat-image", which is incoherent. On the other hand, if she is not a "brain in a vat", then saying that she is is still incoherent, but now because she actually means the opposite.
所以假設有這麼一個人，瑪麗，是個 「實驗槽裡的大腦」，她每一個感覺體會都是透過一個「瘋科學家」所創造的線路和其他元件接收而得來，那麼瑪麗對 「大腦」 的概念絕不會是在講一個真正的大腦，因為她與跟她講相同語言的夥伴根本從來沒有見過真正大腦。
相反的，她所看到的，只是一個形似大腦，經由線路灌輸給她的影像。 同樣，她對 「實驗槽」 的概念，也不是在講真正的實驗槽。
因而，假使這個 「實驗槽的大腦」 說：「我是實驗槽的大腦。」 實際上她的意思應該是 「我是實驗槽影像裡的大腦影像」，那她就矛盾了。 反過來說，假如她並非是「實驗槽裡的大腦」，而說 「我是實驗槽裡的大腦」，那她依然是矛盾！ 不過這樣一來，理由變成是因為她說了反話，把「不是」說成「是」。
vat 是裝液體的容器，但這裡不是指「桶子」，是科學家的實驗槽。
所謂 linguistic community 是指「用同樣一種語言的社群」，就是指跟瑪麗一樣是 「實驗槽裡的」 那些東西，所有經驗都是靠線路傳輸而來，根本沒見過真正的事物。
she would actually be saying 意思是 「她的真實意思會是....」。
then saying that 的 that 是指 I am a brain in a vat 這句話。
but now because....， now 意思是「如此一來」，指說了這句話之後，「那如此一來，理由則會是....」
incoherent 是不一致，就是有牴觸，有矛盾。 不要被字典 「不連貫」 的解釋綁死。
2012-11-13 22:57:14 補充：
這段是在講，不論正反的情況下，某個辯證或論述都不成立。
