MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056655210 · doi:10.7202/037699ar

Aristotle’s Theory of Causes and the Holy Trinity

2009· article· en· W2056655210 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Silvia Fazzo, Mauro Zonta

Bibliographic record

VenueLaval théologique et philosophique · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyEmperorDoctrineTheologyHebrewIdentification (biology)Identity (music)ClassicsHistoryAncient historyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The identity and chronology of Nicolaus Peripatheticus, the author of a summary of Aristotle’s philosophy, were recently discussed in a paper by Silvia Fazzo published in the Revue des Études Grecques . The usual dating, based upon the identification of Nicolaus with the famous historian Nicolaus Damascenus, places Nicolaus in the 1 st century bc , but Fazzo argues that it is likely that he lived in the period ranging from the 3 rd to the 5 th centuries ad , and more likely, during the age of the Roman Emperor Julian (361-363 ad ). This hypothesis is supported by a new fragment in Hebrew translation, discovered by Mauro Zonta, where Nicolaus gives an explanation of the Christian doctrine of God’s Trinity in terms of Aristotle’s doctrine of causes : God is one, being a single substance, but He is also three, insofar as He is the efficient, formal, and final causes of the world. As far as it is possible for such a short fragment, the authors contend that it is plausible to date it from the age of Julian.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.022
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaval théologique et philosophiqueSame topicClassical Philosophy and ThoughtFrench-language works237,207