MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3113673903 · doi:10.1353/trd.2003.0007

Displeasure in Heaven, Pleasure in Hell: Four Franciscan Masters on the Relationship between Love and Pleasure, and Hatred and Displeasure

2003· article· en· W3113673903 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Severin V. Kitanov

Notice bibliographique

RevueTraditio · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueMedieval Literature and History
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHeavenPleasureHatredPhilosophyTheologyClassicsArtPsychologyLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

DISPLEASURE IN HEAVEN, PLEASURE IN HELL: FOUR FRANCISCAN MASTERS ON THE RELATIONSHIP RETWEEN LOVE AND PLEASURE, AND HATRED AND DISPLEASURE Bv SEVERIN VALENTINOV KITANOV My aim in this paper is to study the relationship between love and pleasure as understood by the Franciscan masters Peter Aureol, William of Ockham , Walter Chatton, and Adam Wodeham.1 These masters have treated 1 Peter Aureol, William of Ockham, Walter Chatton, and Adam Wodeham were contemporaries . Aureol was a French Franciscan born before 1280. He studied in Paris, taught at Bologna (1312) and Toulouse (1314), and lectured on the Sentences of Peter Lombard at Paris from 1316 to 1320. Aureol became magister regens on 13 November 1318. He died in January 1322. Aureol's major commentary on the Sentences is the Scriptum super primum Sententiarum, written before his arrival in Paris, first published in Rome in 1596 by Cardinal Torri, and reedited in part in 1953-56 by Eligius M. Buytaert. There is, however, a second commentary, which is probably a reportatio written in connection with Aureol's Parisian lectures in 1316. The project of critically editing Aureol's Reportatio Parisiensis is still ongoing. The leader of the project is Lauge Olaf Nielsen from the University of Copenhagen. For the life of Aureol as well as for a detailed examination of the redaction problem of his works, see Stephen F. Brown, "Petrus Aureoli: De unitate conceptus entis (Reportatio Parisiensis in I Sententiarum dist. 2, p. 1, qq. 1-3 et p. 2, qq. 1-2)," Traditio 50 (1995): 199-248, at 199-208. William of Ockham, Walter Chatton, and Adam Wodeham were English Franciscan friars. Ockham was born around 1287 near London. He lectured on the Sentences in the period between 1317 and 1319. The earliest version of his commentary, the reportatio, was probably not delivered at Oxford. His revised commentary on book 1, the Scriptum, was prepared at Oxford. Ockham probably left Oxford during 1321 and became a philosophy professor in London. His major philosophical works were written in London. His last theological work, the Quodlibets, was begun in 1322 in London and finished in 1325 at Avignon. Ockham's views were long examined by a commission at Avignon on suspicion of unorthodoxy, but there was no official papal condemnation of his works. After he left Avignon in 1328, Ockham joined the court of Emperor Louis of Bavaria in Munich. He spent the last years of his life writing treatises on the limits of ecclesiastical authority. He was excommunicated for his political views and died in 1347. See Rega Wood, Ockham on the Virtues (West Lafayette, Ind., 1997), 3-11. Chatton read the Sentences twice (once at Oxford) between 1318 and 1328 and became magister regens around 1330. He was one of Ockham's major opponents, and it seems that his criticism of Ockham's views was often motivated by political reasons. Chatton participated actively in the controversy over the beatific vision. He was invited by Pope John XXII to prepare a response to the position of Thomas of Waleys, O.P., at Avignon and to formulate a doctrinally accurate view of the beatific vision. Chatton composed two commentaries, a Reportatio (produced in London in 1321-23 and comprising all four books of the Sentences) and a Lectura (delivered at Oxford in 1328-30 and treating only book 1 of the Sentences up to dist. 17, q. 7). His Reportatio on book 1 appeared recently in a critical edition by Joseph C. 286traditio this relationship in their commentaries on Peter Lombard's Sentences, book 1, distinction 1. The standard subject matter of the first distinction of scholastic Sentences commentaries was the nature of beatific enjoyment (fruitio beatifica).2 The comparative study of these texts is important, because it Wey and Girard Etzkorn. The prologus part of Chatton's Reportatio and Lectura have already been edited and published. See Joseph C. Wey, ed., Walter Chatton: Reportatio et Lectura super Sententias: Collatio ad Librum Primum et Prologus (Toronto, 1989). For Chatton 's works and life, see William J. Courtenay, Schools and Scholars in Fourteenth-Century England (Princeton, N.J., 1987), 265-67; idem, Adam Wodeham: An Introduction to His Life and Writings (Leiden, 1978), 66...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,086
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,170

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0160,013
Communication savante0,0040,003
Science ouverte0,0010,004
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,103
Tête enseignante GPT0,220
Écart entre enseignants0,117 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2003
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueTraditioMême sujetMedieval Literature and HistoryTravaux en français237 207