verum et fieri convertunter.

[j***@gmail.com]

Is this a correct Latin saying, or
is the grammar wrong?

If it is correct, what does it mean?

[j***@gmail.com]

Post by j***@gmail.com
Is this a correct Latin saying, or
is the grammar wrong?
If it is correct, what does it mean?

oops! My source had "...ter" in lieu of "....tur"

[Johannes Patruus]

Post by j***@gmail.com
Is this a correct Latin saying, or
is the grammar wrong?
If it is correct, what does it mean?

"The truth and the act are interchangeable" - https://goo.gl/Mn1Mhh

What that means, I have not a clue.

Patruus

[Evertjan.]

Post by Johannes Patruus

Post by j***@gmail.com
Is this a correct Latin saying, or
is the grammar wrong?
If it is correct, what does it mean?

"The truth and the act are interchangeable" - https://goo.gl/Mn1Mhh

errors here.

Post by Johannes Patruus
What that means, I have not a clue.

<https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zN5XBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA103
&dq="verum+et+fieri+convertuntur">

[Johannes Patruus]

Post by Evertjan.

Post by Johannes Patruus

Post by j***@gmail.com
Is this a correct Latin saying, or
is the grammar wrong?
If it is correct, what does it mean?

"The truth and the act are interchangeable" - https://goo.gl/Mn1Mhh

errors here.

Originally -

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_vU_CgAAQBAJ&pg=PT94&lpg=PT94&dq=%22verum+et+fieri%22+%22truth+and%22&source=bl&ots=7AbJ7ns40D&sig=aviFCYL1VSmLBo8TG5KuLjE8VOw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJkuW76M_LAhWGThQKHdqHCGEQ6AEIFDAA#v=onepage&q=%22verum%20et%20fieri%22%20%22truth%20and%22&f=false

Links work for me in Firefox & Chrome.

Patruus

Post by Evertjan.

Post by Johannes Patruus
What that means, I have not a clue.

<https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zN5XBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA103
&dq="verum+et+fieri+convertuntur">

[B. T. Raven]

That link leads to _Thought Thinking_ and this:

https://books.google.com/books?id=FzxRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=verum+et+fieri+convertuntur&source=bl&ots=FT_KqLB_Pf&sig=JWMt9OASr39iMCFE7oXmkfOxlng&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjLoYa49dDLAhUW8mMKHVSqBGgQ6AEIHzAA#v=onepage&q=verum%20et%20fieri%20convertuntur&f=false

to _The Theory of Mind as pure Act_, straight from the horse's
(Gentile's) mouth, on p. 17 where "verum et fieri convertuntur" is shown
as a refinement of "verum et factum convertuntur."
So the Op's original quote seems to mean "truth and its own enactment
are equivalent" or something close to that.
The Gentile work is downloadable in it's entirety but the Haddock and
Wakefield critical appreciation of Gentile was fresh off the press last
year.

Eduardus

Post by Johannes Patruus

Post by Evertjan.

Post by Johannes Patruus

Is this a correct Latin saying, or is the grammar wrong?
If it is correct, what does it mean?

"The truth and the act are interchangeable" -
https://goo.gl/Mn1Mhh

errors here.

Originally -
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_vU_CgAAQBAJ&pg=PT94&lpg=PT94&dq=%22verum+et+fieri%22+%22truth+and%22&source=bl&ots=7AbJ7ns40D&sig=aviFCYL1VSmLBo8TG5KuLjE8VOw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJkuW76M_LAhWGThQKHdqHCGEQ6AEIFDAA#v=onepage&q=%22verum%20et%20fieri%22%20%22truth%20and%22&f=false
Links work for me in Firefox & Chrome.
Patruus

Post by Evertjan.

Post by Johannes Patruus
What that means, I have not a clue.

<https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zN5XBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA103
&dq="verum+et+fieri+convertuntur">

[Ed Cryer]

Post by B. T. Raven
https://books.google.com/books?id=FzxRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=verum+et+fieri+convertuntur&source=bl&ots=FT_KqLB_Pf&sig=JWMt9OASr39iMCFE7oXmkfOxlng&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjLoYa49dDLAhUW8mMKHVSqBGgQ6AEIHzAA#v=onepage&q=verum%20et%20fieri%20convertuntur&f=false
to _The Theory of Mind as pure Act_, straight from the horse's
(Gentile's) mouth, on p. 17 where "verum et fieri convertuntur" is shown
as a refinement of "verum et factum convertuntur."
So the Op's original quote seems to mean "truth and its own enactment
are equivalent" or something close to that.
The Gentile work is downloadable in it's entirety but the Haddock and
Wakefield critical appreciation of Gentile was fresh off the press last
year.
Eduardus

I think I can see why it changed from "factum" to "fieri".
Not only past happenings are true; "it happened" and "true" only cover a
part; "true" and "is happening" cover another part.
Can those two be conveyed in one word?

Ed

[B. T. Raven]

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by B. T. Raven
https://books.google.com/books?id=FzxRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=verum+et+fieri+convertuntur&source=bl&ots=FT_KqLB_Pf&sig=JWMt9OASr39iMCFE7oXmkfOxlng&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjLoYa49dDLAhUW8mMKHVSqBGgQ6AEIHzAA#v=onepage&q=verum%20et%20fieri%20convertuntur&f=false
to _The Theory of Mind as pure Act_, straight from the horse's
(Gentile's) mouth, on p. 17 where "verum et fieri convertuntur" is shown
as a refinement of "verum et factum convertuntur."
So the Op's original quote seems to mean "truth and its own enactment
are equivalent" or something close to that.
The Gentile work is downloadable in it's entirety but the Haddock and
Wakefield critical appreciation of Gentile was fresh off the press last
year.
Eduardus

I think I can see why it changed from "factum" to "fieri".
Not only past happenings are true; "it happened" and "true" only cover a
part; "true" and "is happening" cover another part.
Can those two be conveyed in one word?
Ed

I don't know, probably not in Ciceronian Latin. Here 'fieri' seems to be
a specialized philosophical term (a substantive) 'a becoming.' Another
way of contrasting factum and fieri is between 'a thing done' and 'a
doing, being done' i. e. a process or progress.
Anyway, since Gentile is an idealist, I can't bring myself to agree with
the overall thesis of his book. His teacher and friend Benedetto Croce
thought that his 'actual idealism' really boiled down to mysticism. Like
Ezra Pound he landed on the wrong side of history after being a
ghostwriter for Mussolini. However, _The theory of Mind..._ is a fairly
clear and accurate summary of Western philosophy from Descartes to Hegel.

Eduardus

[Evertjan.]

Post by B. T. Raven

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by B. T. Raven
https://books.google.com/books?id=FzxRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA17&lpg=PA17&dq=veru
m+et+fieri+convertuntur&source=bl&ots=FT_KqLB_Pf&sig=JWMt9OASr39iMCFE7o
XmkfOxlng&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjLoYa49dDLAhUW8mMKHVSqBGgQ6AEIHzAA#v=on
epage&q=verum%20et%20fieri%20convertuntur&f=false
to _The Theory of Mind as pure Act_, straight from the horse's
(Gentile's) mouth, on p. 17 where "verum et fieri convertuntur" is
shown as a refinement of "verum et factum convertuntur."
So the Op's original quote seems to mean "truth and its own enactment
are equivalent" or something close to that.
The Gentile work is downloadable in it's entirety but the Haddock and
Wakefield critical appreciation of Gentile was fresh off the press
last year.

I think I can see why it changed from "factum" to "fieri".
Not only past happenings are true; "it happened" and "true" only cover
a part; "true" and "is happening" cover another part.
Can those two be conveyed in one word?

I don't know, probably not in Ciceronian Latin. Here 'fieri' seems to be
a specialized philosophical term (a substantive) 'a becoming.' Another
way of contrasting factum and fieri is between 'a thing done' and 'a
doing, being done' i. e. a process or progress.
Anyway, since Gentile is an idealist, I can't bring myself to agree with
the overall thesis of his book. His teacher and friend Benedetto Croce
thought that his 'actual idealism' really boiled down to mysticism. Like
Ezra Pound he landed on the wrong side of history after being a
ghostwriter for Mussolini. However, _The theory of Mind..._ is a fairly
clear and accurate summary of Western philosophy from Descartes to Hegel.

"Factum" is not "a fact" in the modern sense like "now it is night",
but something that is "made" or "done", so "fieri" is just a "future fact".

This seems not so easy in his Latin, it feels like the OS [original speaker]
had to struggle for the right word, as the idea of a "future fact" was a
phylosophical [indeed] novelty.

Nowadays we are used to the idea, that the stock-prices of tomorrow are
everyone's guess today, but a never-changing fact after tomorrow.

cf the "iacta" at the Rubicon, also a fact cast from a certain moment.

[Evertjan.]

Post by Evertjan.
cf the "iacta" at the Rubicon, also a fact cast from a certain moment.

btw:

<http://artefacts.mom.fr/en/result.php?id=DEJ-4002&find=DEJ&pagenum=1
&affmode=vign>

[j***@gmail.com]

Post by j***@gmail.com
Is this a correct Latin saying, or
is the grammar wrong?
If it is correct, what does it mean?

Yes, I agree, altho my Latin is far
inferior to yours. That is to say,
I incline to:

1. "fieri" is a specialized philosophical
term as used in the quote.

2. In the quote, and in the context of
the quote being presumed to come
from Giambattista Vico, "becoming"
is a good translation of "fieri"

thanks all, for some wonderfully thoughtful
and elucidating REPLYs; my feet point in
some new directions.

[Ed Cryer]

Post by j***@gmail.com

Post by j***@gmail.com
Is this a correct Latin saying, or
is the grammar wrong?
If it is correct, what does it mean?

Yes, I agree, altho my Latin is far
inferior to yours. That is to say,
1. "fieri" is a specialized philosophical
term as used in the quote.
2. In the quote, and in the context of
the quote being presumed to come
from Giambattista Vico, "becoming"
is a good translation of "fieri"
thanks all, for some wonderfully thoughtful
and elucidating REPLYs; my feet point in
some new directions.

"Becoming" sounds very Nietzschian to me; very Zarathustrian.
It's the bridge between worm and angel, ape and superman.
γένοι' οἷος ἐσσ (become what you are)
as Pindar wrote.

Ed

[Ed Cryer]

Post by Ed Cryer

Post by j***@gmail.com

Post by j***@gmail.com
Is this a correct Latin saying, or
is the grammar wrong?
If it is correct, what does it mean?

Yes, I agree, altho my Latin is far
inferior to yours. That is to say,
1. "fieri" is a specialized philosophical
term as used in the quote.
2. In the quote, and in the context of
the quote being presumed to come
from Giambattista Vico, "becoming"
is a good translation of "fieri"
thanks all, for some wonderfully thoughtful
and elucidating REPLYs; my feet point in
some new directions.

"Becoming" sounds very Nietzschian to me; very Zarathustrian.
It's the bridge between worm and angel, ape and superman.
γένοι' οἷος ἐσσ (become what you are)
as Pindar wrote.
Ed

What is Truth?
1. It's the mathematical set of all true propositions.
2. It's the transcendental reality behind the veil of perception.
3. It's a formal world that we've come from and will return to.
4. It's a God's-eye view from outside our space-time.
5. It's something that we're completely ill-equipped to inquire into,
and should leave to faith in divine messengers.
6. It's a negotiating strategy that men use.
7. It's dialectical and relative; class-based; different from different
perspectives.
..........
..........
10. It's my will; the whole world centred on me.

Thus Spake Ed.

Ed the humble. I somehow wish I was that strong, but I'm not. I
recognize my mum and dad's genes in me, and I respect humanity's highest
achievements.

[j***@gmail.com]

Post by j***@gmail.com
Is this a correct Latin saying, or
is the grammar wrong?
If it is correct, what does it mean?

Yes, it does sound Nietzchian(sic).
It also calls to my mind NagArjuna,
the great Indian thinker.

[j***@gmail.com]

Post by j***@gmail.com
Is this a correct Latin saying, or
is the grammar wrong?
If it is correct, what does it mean?

What is truth?

Your answer is excellent.
I also like Horwich's

< P > iff P

Because, either by accident,
or by intent, it uses the Dirac
notation system. That system
is, in my opinion, one of the
great advances in physics
since Planck. It has helped
me in struggling to get free
of what is outdated in "classical"
thinking.