Talk:Sapere aude

2004 deletion debate

No consensus to delete. Removed VfD notice. Seems to be consensus for redirect, but since there is a little content, it is more like a disambiguation. Delete debate archived below. -- Cecropia | Talk 14:21, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

---

Another dictionary (Latin) definition. No information on the origin, and it's not even a well-known saying. Deb 17:06, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

• I deleted this once. It's not even a dicdef, just a translation with no explanation or any indicatino as to why it should be here. Should be quick deleted. RickK 20:04, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
• You will find the phrase in the first paragraph of Kant's essay "What is Enlightenment?". I would expand rather than delete it: A whole world view is hidden behind these two words. <KF> 20:45, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
• Now that I've realized there is a "What Is Enlightenment?" page I'd suggest a simple redirect (as otherwise it would grow into a duplicate article). <KF> 20:56, 2 May 2004 (UTC)
• I Agree with KF . . . this is Kant, and is important to the Enlightenment period. Redirect might be good. I could see justic in expansion too. --Phil Larin 04:14, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
• Agree with the preceeding comment. Redirect, hope for an expansion. There are several societies that have adopted the name. Alcarillo 15:57, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
• And why is it that when I "add to this deletion debate" my addition is not shown here on VfD until I post it directly here, too (so that then it's here twice)?
  • Your comments in the msg:VfD page only show up when you reload the VfD page. RickK 03:28, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
• This phrase is also the motto for the University of Otago, should be added if we keep this as a stub. Lisiate 04:40, 4 May 2004 (UTC)
• Well, I added in the facts people mentioned in this debate. I'd say marginally keep with the new info, but it's no big deal either way. Isomorphic 16:39, 5 May 2004 (UTC)
  • On second consideration, not marginal keep, just keep. Wiki isn't paper, and we've now got three distinct facts in the article (translation, usage by Kant, and the school motto.) Internet search showed lots of websites using the phrase, so an article giving it a little context has use. Isomorphic 05:19, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Cribcage 02:44, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

---

List recatigorization and copyedit into paragraphs

Wow, that's quite list this article has! I'd like to create a section called "Use as a Motto" and recategorize the list by type of institution -- government, higher education (colleges), primary and secondary education (grade schools), organizations (clubs, associations), and other (family crest, etc). Rather than simply create a new list, I will write the list into paragraph form. Before I start, your thoughts? --Martinship 19:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Pronounciation

I googled "sapere aude" pronounced (and various similar permutations) and couldn't find a pronunciation guide for this phrase. Anyone know? If so, should one go parenthetically in the lead? — Demong _talk 08:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Sap-er-ay Ow-day —Preceding unsigned comment added by StephenSmith (talk • contribs) 20:51, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Move to Wiktionary

This article was recently transwiki'd to Wiktionary. It was subsequently turned into a soft-redirect to the Wiktionary page. That soft redirect was reverted. I've read the article yet again. I find only meaning, origins and examples of usage (and a navbox of questionable utility). Please show me the non-lexical content. Rossami (talk) 16:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Without wanting to provoke anything here, two different people have now disagreed with you about this. Every single article we have on Latin phrases features their meaning, origin, and usage, and nothing else. What else do you suggest the article could actually contain? See, for examples, E pluribus unum, Per capita or Carpe diem, or indeed anything in Category:Latin mottos, Category:Latin logical phrases, Category:Latin legal phrases, Category:Latin words and phrases and subcats, etc. Are you suggesting they are all unencyclopaedic? Every single article has meaning, origin, usage. That's pretty much all you could ever have on a phrase, Latin or otherwise. Neıl ☎ 15:18, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I can not agree with your starting premise that all our existing articles on Latin phrases are so limited. At articles like Prima facie and Res ipsa loquitur, I see a detailed discussion of the legal concept (which happens to be synopsized by the Latin phrase). Those article include a direct translation but the translation is only a minor part of the article. (The same holds true for most of the logic articles.) At E pluribus unum and carpe diem, I see a great deal of discussion about the social and historical significance of the motto. Those articles go far beyond meaning, origins and usage examples.
I don't see that here, despite a more than reasonable amount of time for that content to have been added and despite a fair amount of my own research. This page at its most expansive contained only a direct translation of the phrase (plus an alternate translation), a probable origin for the phrase and a listing of some colleges and other institutions that use it as a motto. No underlying legal or philosophical concept, no extensive social or historical significance, nothing that seems to cross the boundary from lexical to encyclopedic.
I'm willing to learn. If you see a way this page can be expanded into a proper encyclopedia article, please describe it. I can't see it. Rossami (talk) 02:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Update: On 11 May 2008, anonymous user:71.63.245.222 successfully rewrote the page with content that goes beyond the merely lexical. Rossami (talk)

Missing content?

Under the "Foucault" header there seems to be a missing word: "Instead of a [blank], it becomes..." I have no clue what word is intended. If the original author could add it, I could perhaps avoid a fate in the insane asylum, tearing out my hair trying to figure out what it is. Thank you! Danopticon (talk) 02:45, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning this, Danopticon. It was driving me nuts as well! Maybe the author (or person who edited it out, as the case may be) can return and save us all, or leave us to guess onward into madness? Ronocdh (talk) 14:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Having read through the source cited for this passage, it appears the best text to serve as clarification would be "mere theory or doctrine". Are there any objections to this substitution? Ronocdh (talk) 01:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

The phrase is used as a school motto for Wesley College, Melbourne, Australia (and no doubt other institutions). The article doesn't mention the context of the phrase, which in the writings of Horace, is the moral for a story about a "fool" (a naive person) who waits for the stream to stop before crossing, whereas the wise man "makes a beginning". This fable or parable is intended to typify the personal qualities of being daring, or adopting risk, or mere determination in reaching a goal. It promotes the value of personal endeavour, against obstacles. The idea of enthusiasm and will or spirit being valuable personal qualities may bear some relevance in understanding the context of the phrase, which is devalued without the context. StephenSmith (talk) 21:35, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

use as a motto

While I agree that any list of institutions using the phrase as a motto is unnecessary, I feel it is definitely worth mentioning that it is widely used as such. I've added a short sentence to that effect to the lede. Note: this is NOT a licence to start listing institutions! Grutness...wha? 11:00, 18 December 2016 (UTC) (NO! not even my alma mater!)

Problematic

Why is the enlightenment deemed problematic in the second paragraph? Stiginz (talk) 21:26, 23 March 2021 (UTC)