Talk:Alexandrian school

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bible: Criticism Low‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is within the scope of the biblical criticism work group, a work group which is currently considered to be inactive.

Philosophy: Ancient Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ancient philosophy

Article Discussion

It would make a lot more sense to create two separate articles on the Alexandrian School. The early Christians in Alexandria could not be more different than the great scholastic center of antiquity, representing a branch of Plato's Academy and a hotbed of Neoplatonism. I find it confusing. And there's so little information. Furthermore, it is categorized with "Christianity" which is a bit misleading.

A great deal more too can be said about the political conflicts at the end of the Roman Empire and how they affected the school and library. For example, the political machinations of Julian and how the Alexandrian School weathered the repercussions of Justinian's Decree of 529.

I'm not qualified to attempt these, but if no one else wants to, I will start it. Would there be any objection to proceeding this way? --NaySay N. Harris

Certainly no objections from me, and I believe I started this article. If you feel you can improve it that way, please do. Split it if you feel that's the better way to handle it. Any improvements are welcome. --DanielCD 18:27, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very kindly, Daniel. I meant no disrespect for the article, you understand; I am just a newbie trying to surround several late-Empire articles with more information. Many thanks, Nadine Harris NaySay 1/5/05 20:36 UTC.

You're quite welcome. I'm glad to see people coming in that care about this kind of material. I really had a hard time finding sources, but perhaps you'll fare better. Feel free to message me about anything. Good luck! --DanielCD 21:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Specific mention of the catechetical school established by Pantaenus is needed. Early representatives of this school were also influenced by Stoicism. The statement that pagan beliefs were imported from neoplatonism is tendentious. Reference at some point to the work of John Philopon is required.----Clive Sweeting

Does not the article on the Catechetical School of Alexandria state that it was Pantaenus who was the school's founder and first historically recorded teacher? Isn't this article contradicatory?67.142.130.21 (talk) 00:45, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree that the Article Page is very unclear as regards to the origins.  Some here suggesting two separate Article Pages be made.  However, the most reliable historians of this period are clear how the School came about and the two differing disciplines; 1./ Greek Scholastic thought and 2./ Christian though were together under one school.  The School began to spread out.  This whole origin and development is missing in the Article Page..... MacOfJesus (talk) 17:56, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see from my work on the Article Page:  Athanasius of Alexandria, I am not new to this period of history and the accounts are before me.... MacOfJesus (talk) 18:00, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It would appear that the two Article Pages have been made:  Catechetical School of Alexandria and this one.  Again the origins are incorrect and in many cases points are missing..... MacOfJesus (talk) 20:02, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I propose then that the Article Pages in question be re-written ..... I have reliable Historical Accounts with me...... What makes this period difficult is there are accounts from the different sections making claims but do not fit with the historicity, the eventual growth of the School.... MacOfJesus (talk) 15:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Catechetical School

FYI, I started stub on the Catechetical School of Alexandria. Pastordavid 15:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

The "Alexandrian school" can refer to at least four topics:

The school of Philosophy, primarily influenced by Stoicism
The Christian catechetical school (has an entry at Catechetical School of Alexandria)
The allegorical "school" or movement of Biblical interpretation that followed the lead of Origen
The Christological school of thought (Alexandrian Christology), that was usually placed over against Antiochene Christology.

Any thoughts on how to either better disambiguate them on this page, or on which on this article should focus on? -- Pastordavid 18:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple Issues Here

There are multiple issues with this article that may be discussed here. -- Sleyece (talk) 01:59, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not an independent text. (Plagiarism, most likely in good faith)

As has previously been pointed out, this article relies (except for the intro) on only one source — an article in the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica. Now I have checked the article's text against the original, and it seems that it is simply a cut-down version with hardly any original text. I have only performed this check with one paragraph, but it is probable that the same pattern repeats itself throughout. To my mind, the article text is so close to the original that it may (must?) be considered plagiarism. In academic writing this is definitely how it would be treated.

I don't know what Wikipedia's policy is in such cases, but it would seem to me that the entire text should be reworked with additional sources added. Perhaps, as a temporary solution, the present text could be left as it is, but with a note stating that it is an edited version of the Britannica text, which will be replaced in the near future? Also, if possible, the author (who no doubt has acted in good will) should be warned that what he/she has done is not considered kosher, in order to avoid similar incidents in the future.

The table below compares the original text with the text in the Wikipedia article. (Sorry about the unprofessional layout, but I need a course in how to mark underline and strikeout + how to equalize columns in tables.)

Deletions from the original are marked in bold. Additions to the original are marked with >opposed angle brackets and false links<.

Original with edits marked	Text in Wikipedia article
There appear, therefore, to be at least two definite significations of the title Alexandrian School; or rather, there are two Alexandrian schools, distinct both chronologically and in substance >from each other<. The one is the Alexandrian school of poetry and science, the other the Alexandrian school of philosophy. The term “school,” however, has not the same meaning as when applied to the Academics or Peripatetics, the Stoics or Epicureans. These consisted of a >does not mean that there was< company >of people< united by holding in common certain speculative principles, by having the same theory of things. There was nothing at all corresponding to this among the Alexandrians. In literature their activities were highly varied directed to the most diverse objects; they have only in common a certain spirit or form. There was among them no definite system of philosophy. Even in the later schools of philosophy proper there is found a community rather of tendency >rather< than of definite result or of fixed principles.	There appear, therefore, to be two Alexandrian schools distinct from each other. The one is the Alexandrian school of poetry and science, the other the Alexandrian school of philosophy. The term "school," however, does not mean that there was (!) company of people united by common principles or by having the same theory of things. In literature their activities were highly varied; they have only in common a certain spirit or form. There was no definite system of philosophy. Even in the later schools of philosophy there is a community of tendency rather than of fixed principles.

Filursiax (talk) 21:28, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Coptic philosophy" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Coptic philosophy. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:39, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

need a new title

a bunch of the incoming links here are from people who think this is Library of Alexandria. the title is from a public domain source from 100 years ago and not a WP:COMMONNAME now, it's clear people are confused.

In addition to the library, Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism both have multiple separate traditions associated with Alexandria, that our 1911 EB author seems to have smooshed all into one. I think next steps to fix this are to repoint any links that have better targets, see what's left, and redirect merge as appropriate. Remember this is mostly a public domain source we copied, it's not a huge loss. - car chasm (talk) 09:15, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]