Gary, thanks for this quote, which i'm pretty sure i haven't seen
before -- i wouldn't have thought Peirce would talk about a
"Buddhisto-christian religion"!
> CP 1.673. . .. the supreme commandment of the Buddhisto-christian
> religion is, to generalize, to complete the whole system even until
> continuity results and the distinct individuals weld together. Thus it
> is, that while reasoning and the science of reasoning strenuously
> proclaim the subordination of reasoning to sentiment, the very supreme
> commandment of sentiment is that man should generalize, or what the
> logic of relatives shows to be the same thing, should become welded
> into the universal continuum, which is what true reasoning consists
> in. But this does not reinstate reasoning, for this generalization
> should come about, not merely in man's cognitions, which are but the
> superficial film of his being, but objectively in the deepest
> emotional springs of his life. In fulfilling this command, man
> prepares himself for transmutation into a new form of life, the joyful
> Nirvana in which the discontinuities of his will shall have all but
> disappeared.
It does accord pretty closely with what i was thinking; and so does
everything in your later post (below), including the other Peirce
passages you found:
----- Original Message -----
...
I would suggest that the ideal of the scientific method requires a
authentic scientific personality as Peirce conceived it, the kind of
person who, like Peirce, was willing to offer his life to the pursuit of
truth in those areas in which he was most likely to significantly
contribute. But this tendency ought to be alive not only in scientists
but in all of us to some extent--this desire to help make the world a
more reasonable place where "it is 'up to us' to do so".
> CP 1.615 The one thing whose admirableness is not due to an ulterior
> reason is Reason itself comprehended in all its fullness, so far as we
> can comprehend it. Under this conception, the ideal of conduct will be
> to execute our little function in the operation of the creation by
> giving a hand toward rendering the world more reasonable whenever, as
> the slang is, it is "up to us" to do so. In logic, it will be observed
> that knowledge is reasonableness; and the ideal of reasoning will be
> to follow such methods as must develope knowledge the most speedily. .
> . .
But Peirce suggests that in the true scientist that this represents a
kind of religious commitment involving a strong sense of duty,
sacrifice, faith in the reality of God (as this is presented in the N.A.
and elsewhere), and so forth. While you are no doubt correct that Peirce
emphasized the communal nature of science, there is yet an individual
contribution to be made beyond this veritable sacrifice of all other
concerns to this compelling scientific pursuit. Commenting on the extent
to which Peirce emphasized the communal you wrote:
>GF: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Peirce did not, to my knowledge,
>put as much emphasis on that last point as he did on the collective,
>public, social, communal nature of true science (as opposed to the more
>mundane enterprise which *he* sometimes called "art" or "practice" --
>obviously my sense of "practice" is different.) His emphasis was
>appropriate for the cultural milieu in which he wrote. For my own part,
>i'd say that the key principle here is the creative tension between
>individual and community: the individual who merely conforms to
>communal
>habits does not contribute to its development.
>
I would suggest that the "creative tension between individual and
community" was always there in Peirce, and even in the scientific method
as he conceived it. After all, abduction tends to be--if it is not
exclusively--a personal matter (even when several scientists abduce the
same hypothesis at more or less the same time).
-----------------------------------
Yes, exactly -- thank you!
gary F.
}No wise fish would go anywhere without a porpoise. [the Mock Turtle]{
gnoxic studies }{ http://users.vianet.ca/gnox/gnoxic.htm
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
