MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1563293258

The philosophical contribution of a homo byzantinus: The De omnifaria doctrina of Michael Psellus (1017/1018-1078 AD)

2014· article· en· W1563293258 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDe Medio Aevo · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Michael Psellus was one of the most erudite and prolific thinkers of the Byzantine Middle Ages. His  oeuvre includes historical writings, philosophical treatises and commentaries, theological writings, poems, speeches, legal, geographical, military, and medical works as well as works on music. Psellus taught all branches of philosophy, by closely reading and commenting on the works of ancient philosophers, and especially on Aristotle's logical treatises. At the same time he had a strong preference for Plato and the Neoplatonists, and especially for  Proclus , whom he considered an authority among ancient authors. In this paper I will present the  De omnifaria doctrina , a treatise which deals with various issues, such as Philosophy, Theology, Psychology, Ethics, Metaphysic, Biology, Cosmology, etc. The author attempts to present a worldview through the prism of Christian Theology and Ethics. Although Psellus depends on the scientific tradition, i.e. philosophy and theology, of both Classical and Late Antiquity, the  De omnifaria doctrina constitutes an original work. A second feature by which one can speak of originality in De omnifaria doctrina is how to address the content: the Byzantine polygraph scientifically demonstrates a solvent and precise knowledge in his understanding of that. Lastly, the paper will attempt to present a synthesis of both science and philosophy in 11 th century Byzantium. Sources and Bibliography Sources MICHAEL PSELLUS, Historia syntomos, ed. W. J., AERTS, Michaelis Pselli Historia Syntomos. Editio Princeps. Recensuit, anglice vertit et commentario instruxit W. J. Aerts (Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae, 30). Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 1990 MICHAEL PSELLUS, GAUTIER, Theologica I. Edidit Paul Gautier, (Bibliotheca Scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana) , Teubner, Leipzig, 1989 MICHAEL PSELLUS, De omnifaria doctrina, ed. L. G. WESTERINK, Michael Psellus. De omnifaria doctrina. Critical Text and Introduction by Dr. L. G. Westerink. Centrale Drukkerij, Nijmegen, 1948 MICHAEL PSELLUS, Opuscula psychologica, theologica, daemonologica , ed., J. M. DUFFY, D. J. O’MEARA, Michaelis Pselli philosophica minora. Ediderunt J. M. Duffy et D. J. O’Meara. Vol. II. Opuscula psychologica, theologica, daemonologica. Edidit D. J. O’Meara , (Bibliotheca Scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Teubneriana). Teubner Verlagsgesellschaft, Leipzig, 1989 Bibliography ATHANASSIADI, P., “Byzantine Commentators on the Chaldean Oracles: Psellos and Plethon “, in K. IERODIAKONOU(ed.), Byzantine Philosophy and its Ancient Sources , Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002, pp. 237-252 BARBER, C., D. JENKINS (eds.), Reading Michael Psellos. Brill, Leiden-Boston, 2006 BENAKIS, L., “Μιχαὴλ Ψeλλοῦ, Πeρὶ τῶν ἰδeῶν , ἃς ὁ Πλάτων λέγeι . Eἰσαγωγή, κριτική ἔκδοση, καὶ νeοeλληνικὴ μeτάφραση “, Φιλοσοφία 5-6(1975-1976), pp. 393-423 BENAKIS, L., “Michael Psellos’ Kritik an Aristoteles und seine Eigene Lehre zur “Physis “- und “Materie-Form “ Problematik “, Byzantinische Zeitischrift 56 (1963), pp. 213-22 BENAKIS, L., “Studien zu den Aristoteles-Kommentaren des Michael Psellos. I “, Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophie 43 (1961), pp. 215-238 BENAKIS, L., “Studien zu den Aristoteles-Kommentaren des Michael Psellos. II “, Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophie 44 (1962), pp. 33-61 CAMPO ECHEVARRIA, Alberto del, La teoria platonica de la ideas en Bizancio (ss. V-XI): Principios, desarrollos e inversion final de la ontologia clasica. PhD thesis submitted at the Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid, 2010 COLLATZ, C.-F., J. DUMMER, J. KOLLESCH, M.-L. WERLITZ (Hrsg.), Dissertatiunculae criticae. Festschrift fur Gunther Christian Hansen. Konigshausen & Neumann, Wurzburg, 1998 CRISCUOLO, U., Michele Psello. Epistola a Giovanni Xifilino. Seconda edizione riveduta e ampliata a cura di Ugo Criscuolo (Hellenica et Byzantina Napolitana, 14). Bibliopolis, Napoli, 1990 DUFFY, J., “The Lonely Mission of Michael Psellus “, in K. IERODIAKONOU, (ed.), Byzantine Philosophy and its Ancient Sources , Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002, pp. 139-156 IERODIAKONOU, K., (ed.), Byzantine Philosophy and its Ancient Sources. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002 IERODIAKONOU, K., “Psellos’ Paraphrasis on Aristotle’s De interpretatione “, in IERODIAKONOU, K., Byzantine Philosophy and its Ancient Sources , Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002, pp. 157-182 KALDELLIS, A., The Argument of Psello’s ‘Chronographia’ , Brill, Leiden, 1999 KALDELLIS, A., “Michael Psellos and the Instauration of Philosophy “, KALDELLIS, A., Hellenism in Byzantium. The Transformations of Greek Identity and the Reception of the Classical Tradition , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007, pp. 191-224 KAPRIEV, G., Philosophie in Byzanz , Konigshausen & Neumann, 2005 LAURITZEN, F., “Psello discepolo di Stetato “, Byzantinische Zeitschrift 101(2008), 715-725 LIBERA, A., La philosophie medievale. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris 1993 MOORE, Paul (ed.), Iter Psellianum. A Detailed Listing of Manuscript Sources for All Works Attributed to Michael Psellos, Including a Comprehensive Bibliography , Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, Toronto, 2005 PAPADOYANNAKIS, Y., “Instruction by Question and Answer: The Case of Late Antique and Byzantine Erotapokriseis “ in: S. Fritzgerald (ed.), Greek Literature in Late Antiquity. Dynamism, Didacticism, Classicism. Ashgate, Aldershot – Burlington, 2006, pp. 91-105 PEREZ MARTIN, I., “Miguel Pselo y el neoplatonismo en el s. XI “, Debats 90 (2005), pp. 94-101 PODSKALSKY, G., Theologie und Philosophie in Byzanz. Der Streit um die theologische Methodik in der spatbyzantinischen Geistesgeschichte (14/15 Jh.), seine systematischen Grundlagen und seine historische Entwicklung (Byzantinisches Archiv, 15). C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, Munchen,1977 PODSKALSKY, G., Von Photios zu Bessarion. Der Vorrang humanistisch gepragter Theologie in Byzanz und deren bleibende Bedeutung , Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden, 2003 Libera, A., La philosophie medievale , Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1993 TATAKIS, B., La philosophie byzantine. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1949 WESTERINK L. G., Michael Psellus.De omnifaria doctrina.Critical Text and Introduction by L.G.Westerink. Centrale Drukkerij. Nijmegen, 1948 ZERVOS, C., Un philosophe neoplatonicien du XIe siecle. Michel Psellos, sa vie, son oeuvre, ses luttes philosophiques, son influence. Preface de M. Francois Picavet. Editions Ernest Leroux, Paris, 1920

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it