<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>In this study, we are discussing the terms ‘idea’, ‘eidos’, and ‘logos’ in George Pachymeres’ <italic>Paraphrase</italic> of Dionysius the Areopagite’s <italic>De divinis nominibus</italic>. This is a very important topic, at least from the ontological point of view. Many questions come to the fore, such as whether the three terms are as to their meaning the same, whether their non-autonomous character is mentioned, what their relation with the divine energies is and whether and how they are connected to the divine will. The structure of our study is based on the fact that the terms come from the Platonic, Aristotelian, and Patristic tradition respectively. Considering that both God and the created beings are objective realities, which the human consciousness is asked to investigate, we attempt to extrapolate ontology to the gnoseological level as well. I.e. we attempt to explain the matter of ‘universals’ relying on two questions. Specifically, from the ontological point of view: do they exist independently? And, from the gnoseological point of view: what is their relation to the human thinking?</p></abstract>

In this study, we are discussing the terms ‘idea’, ‘eidos’, and ‘logos’ in George Pachymeres’ Paraphrase of Dionysius the Areopagite’s De divinis nominibus. This is a very important topic, at least from the ontological point of view. Many questions come to the fore, such as whether the three terms are as to their meaning the same, whether their non-autonomous character is mentioned, what their relation with the divine energies is and whether and how they are connected to the divine will. The structure of our study is based on the fact that the terms come from the Platonic, Aristotelian, and Patristic tradition respectively. Considering that both God and the created beings are objective realities, which the human consciousness is asked to investigate, we attempt to extrapolate ontology to the gnoseological level as well. I.e. we attempt to explain the matter of ‘universals’ relying on two questions. Specifically, from the ontological point of view: do they exist independently? And, from the gnoseological point of view: what is their relation to the human thinking?

Aspects of the Theory on ‘Ideas’, ‘Eide’ and ‘Logoi’ of Beings in George Pachymeres

Perichoresis

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

In this study, we are discussing the terms ‘idea’, ‘eidos’, and ‘logos’ in George Pachymeres’ Paraphrase of Dionysius the Areopagite’s De divinis nominibus....

Aspects of the Theory on ‘Ideas’, ‘Eide’ and ‘Logoi’ of Beings in George Pachymeres

Publié en ligne: 31 déc. 2019

Pages: 23 - 40

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2019-0026

Mots clés
George Pachymeres, ideas, eide, logoi of beings, universals

© 2019 Lydia Petridou, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Aspects of the Theory on ‘Ideas’, ‘Eide’ and ‘Logoi’ of Beings in George Pachymeres

Publié en ligne: 31 déc. 2019

Pages: 23 - 40

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/perc-2019-0026

Mots clésGeorge Pachymeres, ideas, eide, logoi of beings, universals

© 2019 Lydia Petridou, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Mots clés
George Pachymeres, ideas, eide, logoi of beings, universals