On the properties of truth from Badiou's article 'Bodies, Languages and Truths'

There are two properties here that I would like to focus on :- 

painting by Nitin Singh

The second trait: 'Though generally inscribed in a particular language, a truth is trans-linguistic. Inasmuch as the general form that gives access to it is separable from every particular language.' 

The fifth trait: 'A truth articulates and evaluates what it comprises on the basis of its consequences and not on the basis of a simple giveness.'

In the ontology of the subject that Badiou presents for us in his work, we notice that a subject appears as it were as a consequence of an event. Perhaps as a witness, but one who takes a definitive subjective position vis-a-vis that event. This position which some may call a conviction determines or rather suggests a course of action. This broadly speaking is the form of subjectivity in question. 

The form in which this subjectivity may represent their pre-dispositions is usually linguistic. The form in which it is expressed however is not reducible to the experience itself. Perhaps not unlike the subject whose own predispositions are not reducible to the event. 

What we find here, invisibilized amidst the arguments which the propositions are forming is a strong anti-determinism that realizes that an inference made from an event, is not delimitable by the Event itself. In other words we truly have a theory of the subject and not a theory of correspondence. This is what makes a subject autonomous of an event. Able to recast it as it were, identifying new or latent traces in the composition. 

Badiou puts it like this. Democratic materialism sees paramount the right to live his or her sexuality. In other words 'one is free if no language comes to prohibit individual bodies to deploy their own capacities.' Materialist dialectics however cannot rest with such a proposition. 'It is not a matter of... the bond, of prohibition, tolerance or validation that languages entertain with the virtuality of bodies. It is a matter of knowing if and how a body partakes, through languages, in the exception of a truth.' 

One can hear in his statement 'being free is not of the order of relations between bodies and languages, but directly of incorporation (to a truth) - the old Maoist maxim of the primacy of practice. Rather poetic stanzas and I would recommend you read the original, which seems to present its own take on the phenomenon of becoming.

The terrain between virtuality and method is alluded to, seemingly not unlike the plane of immanence that Badiou's contemporary Deleuze invokes.