Diotimos Reading Desk

Tap the page, move to the top or bottom edge, swipe down, or press Tab to reveal reading controls. Use the arrow keys or swipe sideways to turn pages.

← ExitThe Notebooks of Joseph Joubert, Volume II

Reading language

YEAR 1814

What ought to be done and what is in itself and through itself: that is truth. What has been done, or the kind and succession of movements that have occurred: that is history. The one serves goodness, virtue; the other, conversation.

“God forgives those who forgive; mortal, keep no immortal hatred”: these are truths. Alexander defeated Darius; Caesar abolished the republic at Rome: these are simple facts.

It matters to everyone to know Do not do to another what you do not wish done to you; it does not matter, or matters little, to know whether Pierre or Paul observe this rule.

“Everything that is a flowing away (as Plato would say) cannot be the object of knowledge,” nor, consequently, truth.

“Here is what is true” is an expression very different from this one: “here is the fact.”

The true. The true by chance, the true by essence, the contingent true, the eternal true, the divine true, the terrestrial or sublunary true, the immobile true and the mobile true, the local true, the universal true.

The truly true is always true, at all times, in all places and whatever happens. It is always in existence. The other true is only sometimes. The first is a rule, the second is only a fact. It is useful and necessary for everyone to know the first; useful and necessary in order to know the other. Knowledge of the first is useful and necessary for our conduct, for our morals; knowledge of the second is useful and necessary only for our affairs or our passing needs. The usefulness of this latter is like it, that is to say, local, accidental and mobile. The usefulness of the other is also like it, constant, immutable, independent of all suppositions. The truly true is the truth of what remains. The other true is the true of what flows away.

December 29.

Of the sincerity of things. To see it. It is in this that truth consists.

December 30.

The Jansenists make Grace a kind of fourth person of the holy Trinity. They are (without believing it and without wishing it) quaternitarians.

St. Paul and St. Augustine, studied too much or studied exclusively, have ruined everything, if one dares say so.

Grace: aid, help, or better, divine influence, heavenly dew. Then we understand one another. This word is like a talisman whose enchantment and evil spell one can break by translating it. One dissolves all its danger through analysis. Personifying words, a fatal evil in theology.

They have too great a horror of nature, which is nevertheless God’s work like grace and as much as grace, for it is itself a grace.

God had put more incorruptibility into nature than they suppose, so that the absolute infection of the mass was impossible. They take away from the father to give to the son.

The Jansenists have taken too much away from the benefit of creation, to give more to the benefit of redemption.

T132.The ought/is/has-been distinctions, in-itself/through-itself pair and kind/succession alternatives remain. Conversation renders causerie without imposing frivolity as its only sense. English colons articulate the two identifying clauses; the source metaphysical terms are not assigned to a named system.

T243.Five physical paragraphs remain: four on 809 and the indented final paragraph at the opening of 810, before its first star. The page boundary does not start a new entry or date. The first paragraph distinguishes doit se faire from s’est fait/ont été faits and retains the two masculine pronouns L’un/l’autre without normalizing agreement. The second retains the quoted divine/mortal maxim and the separate historical propositions, including the perfect a vaincu and simple form abolit. The third preserves le before the italic Latin words, the negative imperative within that wording and the French pas/ou/peu distinction. The Latin run Alteri ne facias quod tibi fieri non vis is italic; the following semicolon marks the return to roman French and is not silently turned into a Latin terminal period. The fourth retains conditional diroit in its parenthesis and the literal final wording ni par conséquent la vérité, without inserting de or an inferred predicate. In the French source, the final paragraph keeps its two quoted expressions, initial capital Voilà versus lowercase voilà, colon and external final period. All margin starts and the 810 opening are qualified identifiable in the color witness.

T133.The quoted moral sayings retain forgive/forgive and mortal/immortal repetition. Defeated and abolished are ordinary English narrative-past renderings of a vaincu and abolit. The written abolit also permits a historical present; the paired completed events support the past here. The English colon after the quotation articulates its relation to these are truths; the French has a comma. These are Joubert’s examples, not an independently verified historical account.

T134.The Latin maxim is freshly translated, with another and both negations intact. English omits the French article before the cited maxim. Only the full maxim and its full English counterpart are italic; the following semicolon remains roman. Everyone and does-not/or-little retain their scope. Pierre and Paul remain examples without an assigned identity or apostolic reference.

T135.The flowing-away image, conditional attribution, negative possibility and final inference remain. Knowledge takes science in its broad epistemic sense, without identifying a Platonic passage. The quotation closes before the final inference; the English comma inside the closing quotation follows American style.

T136.The two quoted demonstrations, very different and this one retain the comparison. Expression renders mot as a saying rather than a single lexical word. This separate paragraph starts on 810 but belongs to the same preceding unit, with no new date or separator. The final English period moves inside the closing quotation under American style; the source’s period follows the guillemet.

T137.The repeated substantive true preserves the recurring masculine vrai, distinct from vérité in the following paragraph. All ten kinds and the terrestrial/sublunary alternative remain. Immobile/mobile retain their physical and philosophical association without a named doctrine. French hazard retains its z; the English chance is a translation, not a source repair.

T244.Two separate paragraphs remain. The first preserves each repetition of vrai, literal hazard with z and both ou/et pairings in the nominal list; it is not converted into a table or supplied sentence. The second preserves all temporal, locative, restrictive and demonstrative contrasts. The original-size color/native comparison distinctly reads à fin de connoître l’autre, with separate fin, not à tous or an inferred many. The construction remains literally as printed without grammatical repair. The first noun is connoissance and the later noun connaissance; that spelling shift is preserved. Connoître retains its qualified circumflex, and spaced c’est à dire remains. The right-edge words and ordinary éter-/nel, néces-/saire and pas-/sagers wraps are identifiable in the color witness; no extra source gaps are introduced. The syntactic referents are not expanded in the French.

T138.The substantive true and final truth preserve vrai versus vérité, with truly true repeated. Always/only sometimes, rule/fact, the first clause’s everyone, all useful-and-necessary pairings and both sets of three qualities remain. The other true is only sometimes retains the absent exists. The final remains/flows-away contrast is not reduced to usefulness alone. The source distinctly prints à fin de connoître l’autre: in order to know the other renders its purpose relation. The compressed attachment is not completed with an invented clause. The French shift from connoissance to connaissance remains literal.

T139.The nominal opening, separate infinitive and final assertion remain. Sincerity preserves the unexpected attribution to things rather than substituting accuracy or human honesty; it refers back to that sincerity.

T245.The complete date 29 and three sentences/fragments remain. The initial nominal phrase and La voir infinitive are not supplied with finite verbs. All text is roman.

T140.A kind of and both parenthetic negatives remain. Quaternitarians preserves the technical coined contrast with Trinity rather than replacing it by a general accusation. Grace retains the opening capital; the judgment is attributed to Joubert’s text.

T246.Six separately indented paragraphs remain under the complete date 30 décembre. The first keeps Grâce/Trinité capitals, sainte lowercase, the fourth-person formulation and both parenthetic sans clauses. The printed quater-/nitaires is joined as quaternitaires without changing its letters. Paragraph 2 retains St twice at baseline, without an added period or raised t. The trop/ou/uniquement distinctions, perfect ont tout perdu and final si qualification remain. Paragraph 3 keeps its colon, reformulating ou mieux, repeated On clauses, analysis and the final infinitival/nominal phrase. Literal Personifier has one n. Paragraph 4 visibly has ceppendant with two p letters and spaced elle même without a hyphen. The repeated grâce and its lowercase forms remain distinct from initial Grâce in paragraphs 1 and 3. Paragraphs 5 and 6 keep the past-perfect avoit mis, comparative ne form, impossibility claim, lowercase père/fils and the final creation/redemption comparison; no doctrine or supplied referent is added. The whole color page and native spelling/edge comparisons preserve the ordinary wrapped endings and all printed letters at the qualified level, with no current reproduction gap.

T141.The two alternative study qualifications, perfect result and final hesitation remain. Exclusively describes studying these authors alone, not their own conduct. No doctrinal or historical verification is added. English St. uses ordinary abbreviated punctuation; the source’s two St forms remain at baseline without added periods.

T142.The successive glosses, self-revision and dew/talisman/dissolving images remain. Understand one another renders the ordinary reciprocal s’entend without naming interlocutors. Enchantment and evil spell keep prestige and maléfice distinct. The final nominal judgment is not given an added finite conclusion, and no technical definition replaces the author’s analysis. French Personifier is retained with one n; English Personifying does not emend its spelling.

T143.Too great, nevertheless, the repeated grace and both comparisons remain. Nature is the subject of the final it; the countable a grace is retained. No universal theological endorsement is implied by translating the claim. French ceppendant retains two p letters, and elle même remains unhyphenated; English nevertheless and itself do not repair these source forms.

T144.The past perfect, present supposition, comparative more and impossible consequence retain their scope. Infection and mass remain literal without an added doctrinal identification. The final taking/giving is separate; father and son keep the confirmed lower-case forms.

T145.The repeated benefit, creation/redemption distinction and too much/more comparison remain. The perfect taking-away is not recast as a general abstract opposition.