1

In Latin there's a phrase In vino veritas, which translated to "in wine, truth"

There is also a saying that truth is beauty and beauty is truth.

There's also real world observation that the more a person drinks, the prettier they see others they wouldn't normally be ordinarily attracted to (regardless of whether or not they look the same)

But at the same time, alcohol can bring out ugly truths, truths that we would rather not face, and the ability to say things we can't take back.

Does this mean that the most beauteous we can be is when we are filled with alcohol or see the world through the lens of alcohol?

Improve this question
4
  • truth is beauty, and beauty is truth is the last line from a poem by keats; its entered the language obviously.
    – Mozibur Ullah
    Aug 20, 2016 at 8:04
  • @MoziburUllah does the source's origins make the statement / phrase any less true?
    – Jesse Cohoon
    Aug 20, 2016 at 18:59
  • well, it does makes it easier to understand what Keats means by it, because we have a larger corpus of words to go by.
    – Mozibur Ullah
    Aug 20, 2016 at 23:42
  • I'm not sure how this question doesn't dive into pseudo-philosophical midnight musings? That is, there doesn't appear to be much philosophical background here.
    – commando
    Aug 22, 2016 at 15:40

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3

Does this mean that the most beauteous we can be when we are filled with alcohol or see the world through the lens of alcohol?

Funny. I would say your are accidentally falling into a trap by using today's modern terminology to try to understand a translation of an idiom from a long time ago.

Wikipedia does a good job describing the original intended meaning, saying:

In vino veritas is a Latin phrase that means "in wine, truth", suggesting a person under the influence of alcohol is more likely to speak their hidden thoughts and desires. Source

It is important to point this out because it is a VERY COMMON thing people do. For instance people do this with historical documents such as the constitution and accidentally (or purposely) twist the meaning and are misled. This underscore the criticality of reading something in context of the time it was written as intended by people of that time, with the context of what was known at that time, with any known biases the author may have had in the back of your head.

We have all made this mistake, so it's a good thing to have a chance to learn from it.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .