Triple signification des noms universels, intellection et abstraction dans la Logica « Ingredientibus » : Super Porphyrium d’Abélard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Étude préliminaire à la nouvelle édition critique et à la traduction inédite offertes, dans ce numéro thématique, du début de la Logica « Ingredientibus » : Super Porphyrium d’Abélard, cet article opère d’abord un survol d’ensemble du texte, avec insistance sur l’exposé relatif aux universaux, et approfondit ensuite trois points de doctrine difficiles, sur lesquels l’historiographie récente a parfois hésité ou buté : la troisième signification des noms universels ; la conception prisciano-platonicienne de la pensée divine ; l’univocité de la notion de status. Ce faisant, quant aux thèmes de l’intellection et de l’abstraction en particulier, une attention constante est portée au lien, parfois critique mais toujours fécond, existant entre cette portion de la Logica « Ingredientibus » et sa source principale, l’In « Isagogen » Porphyrii Commentorum Editio secunda de Boèce, dont l’article précédent fournit une présentation, le texte latin révisé et la première traduction française.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".