03.15.06.1257
Behold! The sage has awakened! Long did I sleep in a self-exiled slumber, shielded from the eccentric mediocrities of sheepdom. Indeed, this is the return of the sage…
Think! To ask the question, one should first have some idea of the answer! This could be said true of the philosopher, who in his own mind, would already have the answer ready. Should we then say that all answers are already given for, and to merely realize there existence is to think not of the answer, but the question to which it is so very much associated with? Let us then go further upon this, that to discover the answers, which are all but waiting to be found, clearly exist for the purpose of our understanding of them.
Indeed! To have the answer, discovered by the question, one must ultimately come to understand that. This, my friends, is truly the challenge that lies at hand. This challenge beckons us forth not to find the answer, but to understand it.
To you my friends, I dare say, sapere aude! Exigua pars est vitae quam nos vivimus!
p.s. Does anyone know why sometimes it is written ‘Aude Sapere’, and sometimes ‘Sapere Aude’? “Aude” means to have courage or boldness, whereas “Sapere” means literally ‘to taste’, as far as I know. So the first formulation says ‘Have boldness to taste’, whereas the second says something like ‘taste boldly’. I guess. Any thoughts?
Greetings O verbopulacious one! Let us sally forth into yon wastes to vanquish all ye who stand in the way of our quest to realize… that the only reason why answers exist is so that we can find them…
03.16.06.1258 Latin can sometimes yeild itself to confusing ends.
Words combined in a phrase tend to have completely different translations or meanings than the words themselves alone.
My translation of sapere aude is concordant with Gobbo’s, however, it is striking to find the term in reverse - especially on the back of an iPod. Perhaps the folks at Apple meant for a vice versa effect of the old saying, and even using the individual word meanings, in an attempt to state that having an iPod is to have “bold taste” in the choice of portable media storage.
This conclusion, though subtle enough to be thought of as a guess, might be the answer to your question James, but then again, I’ll bet you already had some idea of this when you researched it yourself.
As far as the question pertains to the topic, I have not noticed the reversed wording on anything else except for your iPod, James. In fact, as Gobbo pointed out to “his preferable translation,” there are several meanings to this phrase. Wikipedia informs us that the phrase litereally meaning: “property courage to serve you of your own understanding!” Further information provided shows us how we can interpret the “dare to be wise” translation.
When it comes down to it, perhaps then it’s not what the words are, but how we say them, what they mean, and to what they are in reference to. Concordantly…
Exigua pars est vitae quam nos vivimus! The part of life we really live is short!
When you order them you can get an inscription. I would have preferred something cool like J2… but I got mine for christmas so my mom simply had… sighs my name put on it.
The second is a latin dictionary, which lists both ‘aude sapere’ and ‘sapere aude’, which leads me to believe they are both correct usages. The two meanings given here are as follows;
Aude Sapere: Dare to Know
Sapere Aude: Dare to be Wise
The latter is attributed to Horace. However ‘sapere’ definitely means ‘to taste’ or ‘to know’ or ‘to be wise’, so in order to keep the order literally correct in translation, I would think it has to come second, if you want to say ‘Dare to know’. Here it is on Wiktionary;
Under the entry for ‘Audere’ though, the latin antecedent to audacity, which is conjugated in the saying, the quote is given as ‘sapere aude’. So it seems both usages are correct.
03.16.06.1259
Okay, so my foray into Latin usage proves to be bitterly sour. Luckily, I am fortunate enough to get a dosage of sweet clarification from the ever impressive James, and secret under-the-table tips from a similarly sour-tongued user like myself. (You know who you are.) A little sugar never hurt a lemon.
Well then James, I suppose anyone can have knowledge. Clearly, it speaks as a message to ignorance: “dare not to be stupid, ye little people!” So, the second, which I have obviously used in the proper context originally to illustrate the challenge to understand the answers we find, it is a message to those who have knowledge.
I don’t believe anyone would be more delighted to see my return come full circle than you. (Of course, with my luck I could be wrong, but I’m not counting on luck right now; and while I’m on that subject, neither should you!)
Why, uhm… thank you. I’m afraid you have me at a disadvantage… do I know you? My last post before I faded away was on Sept. 30th, 2005: this time was long before you even joined ILP… So, I am to presume you know of me through my past writings? If so, it’s good to know my commentary is still read, and in all accordance, I look foward to your posts as well.
I once obtained a sabre sword from a man who claimed that it had been used for a beheading in Zimbabwe. It was disturbing, I admit, but holding the sword carried a certain feeling of power; almost as if I had assumed another man’s identity.
03.18.06.1261
I wished there were a forum specifically for philology, because that is what this topic has turned into.
It is said knowledge is power! (scientia est potentia) But what is power if one does not use it? Alas, my friends, this is what wisdom is—the art of using knowledge—the art of using power!
Forgive my previous inclination to your words, good sir! I now see my hasty retort lacked the proper vision to notice the certain poeticism—which is very much clear to me now—to which you had previously attributed yourself to.
So, as I understand it, you are anticipating to yield to a greater person—to this I can only extrapolate two possibilities: 1) That you are affirming that I am greater than ye, and therefore, although you did not previously meet with me during a prior moment in the great measurement—which we call time—you are now making it known for all future matters of recognized supremacy. (If I were not so inclined to study Nietzsche, I would take a more humbled approach—one more Christian in essence—that affirms an inner weakness on my part. It is good that is not the case, and rightly so, I have explained this so you do not take my words the wrong way.) 2) That you feel your response to my introduced topic does not meet up to your own standards—a more likely reason—which you realize you could better illustrate had you found the right words to use. Unto this, you are hoping another would have more clarity to speak the words you desired to use, and just as so, in the manner which you wished to use them.
I am amused by this! A compliment which in turns tallies an insult! I now am curious if I should proceed in knowing Dan better.
…and then feeling that you had stolen that man’s identity, he proceeds to hunt you down—with all good intention of retrieving something lost—and when he finds you, it is his neck which meets the blade—for you had become he, and he had become no one! Finally the man realized the error of his way, that to live by the sword, one must die by it, and rightly so, you—who did take his identity—will succumb to this karmic dynamic as well! Use your power well, for it will eventually use you!
Any thoughts?
