Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 30 - Prolegomena to Philosophy and the Ascetic Ordering of Knowledge

  • Edited by Lewis Ayres, University of Durham and Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Michael W. Champion, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Matthew R. Crawford, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne
  • Book:
    The Intellectual World of Late Antique Christianity
    Published online:
    05 October 2023
    Print publication:
    26 October 2023, pp 569-589

  • Summary

    This chapter compares the epistemological assumptions of late-antique Prolegomena to Philosophy with those of the Didaskaliai of Dorotheus of Gaza, a sixth-century ascetic teacher. It focuses on the epistemic role of godlikeness, the claim that the goal of philosophy, understood in terms of either Neoplatonism or the monastic life, is to become like God. In both Neoplatonism and in Dorotheus’ teaching, the concept of godlikeness orders knowledge and promotes ways of knowing developed in order to bridge the gap between the politico-ethical and the spiritual, the practical and the theoretical. Comparing Dorotheus’ teachings with the Introductions to Philosophy identifies substantial shared epistemic assumptions. A key difference between the schemes is generated by the epistemic role of humility in Dorotheus’ account.