For a long time, we have been always debating about whether we can prove that we are who we are. It is an extremely weird question since you are certainly what you are ( or who else you could be)? Nevertheless, how can you prove that “truth”? I will give a quick version that we are what we are because of our thought.

It brings to the second questions: how can we affirm the existence of one item?

【段落大意：那么，它带来了第二个问题：我们如何确认一个项目的存在？】 

Interestingly, the only English novel that I read in the latter half of 2019 brought me some inspirations. It is called “Ship of Thesus” ( or “S.”) , written by JJ Abrams and Doug Dorst. It is a fancy mystery novel and I highly recommend it. However, I will not discuss the novel now, but the literal meaning of“ The Ship of Thesus”.

【段落大意：有趣的是，我在2019年下半年读到的唯一一本英文小说给我带来了一些启示。它被称为“忒修斯之船”（或“S”），由 JJ Abrams和Doug Dorst撰写。这是一本奇特的神秘小说，我极力为大家推荐它。不过，我现在不讨论这部小说，而是讨论“忒修斯之船”的字面意义。】

The Ship of Theseus, one of the oldest thought experiments. It describes a ship that can stay at sea for hundreds of years. As soon as a board rots, it is replaced by a new one, and so on, until all the features are not the original ones. The question is, will this ship eventually be the same ship of Theseus, or a different ship altogether? If it is not the original ship, then at what was the exactly time that it has no longer been the original ship?

【段落大意：“忒修斯之船”，最古老的思想实验之一。它描述了一艘可以在海上呆上几百年的船。一旦一块板腐烂，它就会被一块新的替换掉，以此类推，直到所有的功能都不是原来的。但问题是，这艘船最终会是忒修斯的同一艘船，还是完全不同的一艘船？如果它不是原来的船，那么在什么时候它已经不再是原来的船了？】

This paradox, in fact, argues about the "identity" of things. In other words, the question of the ship of Theseus is whether changes destroy the existence and sustained nature of items.

【段落大意：事实上，这种悖论争论的是事物的“同一性”。换言之，“忒修斯之船”的问题是，变化是否会破坏物品的存在和持续性。】

From my perspective, I believe that the reason why the paradox is highly controversial is that we defines identity and existence of one item differently. For me, I don’t have the only answer either and sometimes I will convince myself from disparate positions. 

【段落大意：从我的角度来看，我个人认为悖论之所以备受争议，是因为我们每个人对同一事物的同一性和存在性的定义不同。对我来说，我也没有唯一的答案，但有时候我会从不同的立场说服自己。】

Just right now, when I am writing the article, a new thought bursts into bloom in my brain: The intention of the paradoxes are not debating and finding the answers of it but is standing on different sides, interpreting the questions differently, imagining other related examples and finally, understanding individual principles. That’s the meaning of critical thinking.

【段落大意：就在此刻，当我写这篇文章的时候，一个新的想法在我的脑海里产生：悖论的目的不是辩论和寻找它的答案，而是站在不同的角度，以不同的方式来看待问题，想象其它相关的例子，最后再作个人原则的理解。这就是批判性思维的意义。】