Subjective Potency, Objective Potency, and the Semantic Distinction between essentia and esse in Hervaeus Natalis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the texts in which he discusses the relationship between essence ( essentia ) and existing ( esse ), Hervaeus Natalis rejects Henry of Ghent’s intentional distinction and Giles of Rome’s real distinction. The Dominican instead adopts Godfrey of Fontaines’s distinction according to modes of signifying. This article argues that the distinction between objective potency and subjective potency is a key element in Hervaeus’s rejection of opposing views on the distinction between the creature’s essence and esse . It also proposes that paying attention to the subjective/objective potency distinction highlights philosophical commitments of the three takes in discussion. Finally, the article argues that the highlighting of those ontological principles sheds new light on various questions regarding Thomas Aquinas’s view on the esse / essentia distinction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it