Древнеегипетские и раннегреческие теокосмогонии: историко-философские аспекты сравнительного анализа
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article focuses on some philosophical aspects of comparative analysis of ancient Egyptian and early Greek thought, such as a question of the possibility of Egyptian influence in Hesiod’s “Theogony” (a question of philosophical and historical comparison of mythologems ‘Maat’ (Egyptian goddess of truth, justice and world order) and ‘Metis’ (a Zeus’s spouse, personifying some moral values, such as knowledge of virtue and evil) in ancient Egyptian and Greek mythology and religion using the material of Hesiod’s “Theogony” and some spells of ancient Egyptian Coffin Texts of Middle Kingdom and New Kingdom’s hymns to Amun-Re of Theban theology) and some attempts of the historical and philosophical analysis of categories ‘Maat’ and ‘Dike’ in modern Egyptology and Classical Studies, particularly in the papers of V.A. Tobin, J. Assmann, C.A. Faraone, E. Teeter, M. Bernal, W. Burkert. One of the mains my objectives is a complex analysis of the pre-philosophy as a first stage of the intellectual development of ancient man, directly predeceasing to genesis of philosophy as a special form of world-view and spiritual culture, especially in the question of the possible influences of ancient Egyptian thought on genesis of Greek philosophy, particularly in cosmogonic and ethical conceptions. I also attend to some radical ‘orientalist’ lines of modern Classical Studies, such as a conception of Martin Bernal’s “Black Athena”, and it’s rating in modern Egyptology, studies of religion and history of philosophy. pre-philosophy; cosmogony; Maat; Dike; Metis; Hesiod; theogony; mythology
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".