Mediaeval in somno videntur...

[Big Ups]

Thanks for any help. I particularly don't know how to render "in operando".

Non enim ideo in somno videntur aliqua vera quia anima recedit a corpore in operando
ut ab obiecto: tunc enim quanto somnus profundior, tanto magis talia viderentur; hoc autem
est falsum, quia somnia non accident in somno profundissimo, sed in somno tenui; tunc etiam
epileptici regulariter viderent vera a spiritibus illis

Indeed for that reason, in sleep things seem true in some way or another because the soul recedes from the body in working as by having been cast down: then, indeed, however much sleep is more deep, so much more such [things] seem; however, this is false, since dreams do not happen in the deepest sleep, but in slight sleep; indeed, then, epileptics would regularly see true [things] from those spirits.

 

[Godmy]

You have a problem there with the negatives (NŌN enim...). Then there are another minor problems...

I found the text phrased slightly differently:

non enim ideo e somno videntur vera, quia anima recedit a corpore in operando, ut ab obiecto; tunc enim quanto somnus profundior, tanto magis talia viderentur. Hoc autem falsum est, quia somnia non accidunt in somno profundissimo, sed in somno tenui: tunc enim epileptici, caduci, a spiritibusque illis obsessi, viderent vera;​

​

not a word by word translation:​

​

And therefore in (from) the sleep one does not see real things, because the soul steps away from the operation* of the body as if it stepped away from an object; then indeed deeper the sleep, more often can these things be seen. But this is untrue, because dreams do not occur in the deepest sleep, but in the light sleep: because then the epileptics / those who fall down, those possessed by 'these spirits', would be seeing real things. ​

​

​

​

*literally "steps away from the body in functioning/operating [the body] (in operando)

 

[Big Ups]

Thank you, Godmy. Care to weigh in on the meaning of these sentences? They still confuse me.

Scotus seems to describe a position he disagrees with viz. in sleep one does not see real things because the soul recedes from the body. Then, apparently continuing the line of thinking, he says (if this were the case) the deeper the sleep the more such things are seen.

Such things are apparently dreams because he then counters with the fact that dreams don't happen in deep sleep but light sleep. Next he uses epileptics to further illustrate his point, suggesting if the first line of thinking were true then epileptics would see real things, which, for him, is evidently false. Do they not see real things simply because they are epileptics or because they are in deep sleep when dreams are actually had in light sleep?

Okay, this likely requires more of your time than you would like to give. I'm just struggling to follow Scotus's logic.

 

[Godmy]

(having technical difficulties posting the answer, so I post it this way, click to zoom):