Hermeneutical Cosmotheoria & the Experience of God in Origen of Alexandria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impetus of this study is grounded in the fundamental question: What is it that Origen is doing in his works? Knowledge of the Trinity and knowledge of creation are ranked first and second by Origen as “supreme functions of knowledge,” while “knowledge and understanding of oneself” is set beside this as the “height of spiritual knowledge and blessedness.” Any attempt to get to the heart of Origen’s thought must bear these foundational premises in mind. Knowledge stands between the Trinity and creation – a centre of consciousness in human being. A narrative of meaning is expressed from out of this centre, as Origen looks to either side and reveals himself to be a profoundly hermeneutical thinker. Stating explicitly that Scripture serves as “elementary rudiments of and very brief introductions to all knowledge,” Origen begins with these rudiments, and applies them to history in the experience of divinity in divine-human relations encountered in matrices of being, reason, and grace. The relation between God and the subject, operative in the threefold dynamic of being, reason, and grace, constitutes the foundational strata and conceptual nexus through which Origen’s thought is best explored. Approaching his thought in this light enables the reader to grasp the conceptual wholism, the parsing of the disparity of the world into a unified vision, which is so unique and so characteristic of Origen’s thought. The experience of being, reason, and grace points beyond to the Persons who are those qualities in essence, and who express the possibility of being, knowing, and grace. A hermeneutical circle is set in motion as one garners knowledge of the Trinity, creation, and self. Divine-human relations and all experience of the world are parsed by means of a Trinitarian hermeneutic – a cosmotheoria – through which the world is revealed to be a dynamic and cosmos of possibility in which one experiences a reification of divine will.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".