Bernard says::, Joe and list, I agree with the idea of being very cautious with the 10 trichotomies classification. You are right I think in recalling that it was work in progress for Peirce.
I would be very interested too in reading the material you are refering to below if you can make it available to the list in one way or the other. However, I think that your concluding sentence is excessively narrow when you write that 1) the theory did not reach any stable state and 2) it can't be reasonably represented as being Peirce's view. REPLY: I'll reply more extensively later in the day, Bernard, but the basis for my saying this is as follows, from MS 339D.662 (1909 Nov 1) =========quote Peirce================ During the past 3 years I have been resting from my work on the Division of Signs and have only lately -- in the last week or two -- been turning back to it; and I find my work of 1905 better than any since that time, though the latter doubtless has value and must not be passed by without consideration. Looking over the book labelled in red "The Prescott Book," and also this one [the "Logic Notebook", MS 339], I find the entries in this book of "Provisional Classification of 1906 March 31st" and of 1905 Oct 13 particularly in imporant from my present (accidentally limited, no doubt) point of view; particularly in regard to the point made in the Prescott Book, 1909 Oct 21, and what immediately precedes that in that book but is not dated. Namely, a good deal of my early attempts to define this difference besween Icon, Index, & Symbol, were adulterated with confusion with the distinction as to the Reference of the Dynamic Interpretant to the Sign. ============end quote====================== Joe Ransdell -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.2/357 - Release Date: 6/6/2006 --- Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
