comments.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
. And I'd be interested too!
Thanks for the further comments. I am looking
forward to the Kaina discussion.
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From:
Gary
Richmond
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2006 1:58
PM
Subject: [peirce-l] Re: NEW ELEMENTS
(KAINA
Strauss passage later. Just musing as usual. I'm greatly enjoying this New
Elements and related discussion.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
mistakenly observed or reasoned.
Maybe--
Cheers,
Jim Piat
And Ben -- I would still want to argue that all of these errors are at root
instances of the general rule that all error is a matter of mistaking the
whole for the part. Error lies not in misperception but in drawing a false
conclusion
to what you are saying as part of what seems to me a list wide
attempt to sort it all out. A common interest.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
to the doctors I don't think they ought to be held
repsonsible for what others might make of a mere procedural note -- really
I don't.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
ntinually shifting.
Adjusting our habits to this shifting context is what we call learning.
Just some thoughts, Ben. Enjoying your
discussion with Gary Joe and others.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
are an individual matter
while discipline (in the best dialogical sense) and truth are a communal
matter.
Thanks again,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
egard.A tree growing
in the forest is as much an iconic symbolof the word tree as vice
versa. Though one is better for building houses and the other for
communicating -- due not to what they have in common, but to what other
properties they don't share(mass for example).
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message
rapher,
etc and may have spoken elsewhere aboutPeirce
andelectric switching computers.
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From:
Steven
Ericsson Zenith
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 3:30
PM
Subject: [peirce-l] Peirce invented the
"el
, is what societies do. Strickly a group activity not to
be confused with the private individual stirrings we mistake for it.Or
so it all seems to me just now ...
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Hi, Jim,
I don't know which blog you visited! If the scrollbar doesn't show up, I've
got a problem. Is your computer a Mac?
This link shoud take you directly to the blog post with the quotes.
http://peircematters.blogspot.com/2005/02/collateral-observation-quotes.html
There, you should be
,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
are symbols not indexes. As for what
specificically is meant by subindex I'm not sure. Just couldn't resist
jumping in -- as I am trying to follow this interesting discussion through
its backs and forths.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
evolutionary advantage over those who do not.
Jim Piat
Gray Richmond wrote:
Auke,Thank you for your interesting comments and for the
quite pertinent Peirce quotation reminding us "that the essential function of
a sign is to render inefficient relations efficient."
-
if others are
interested. I tried to follow it on my own a few years ago but was unable
to make much progress andneed help.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
There has been the beginning of some discussion of category theory in
relation to knowledge representation at ICCS
and
fury signifying nothing. Again, myself a good example.
But most of all -- Thanks for all the interesting observations and
references. Much food for thought in what you've provided.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
interest.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
as always, .
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
the fixation of belief in terms of removing doubt or reducing
uncertainty.I look forward to your further exchanges.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
not.
}The meaning of a word is its use in the language. [Wittgenstein]{
gnusystems }{ Pam Jackson Gary Fuhrman }{ Manitoulin University
}{ [EMAIL PROTECTED] }{ http://users.vianet.ca/gnox/ }{
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
ultimately in a 'supra personal whole'.
END QUOTE
the artical ends with a cross reference to vitalism which reminds me that
Peirce was himself an investigator of spritualism.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
in other senses in which this last
proposition is not true.
END QUOTE:
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
. Not that it necessarily requires the notion of
supernatural being but that it does require something beyond mere
materialism. But just now I'd better get my material ass to work and make
some money!
Best wishes as always,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail
previously posted material.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
relatively to a third".
With this I agree. I'm just not convinced
that the C-H bond in Methane is an example of an inherently triadic relation --
unless one is taking the radical position that all relations are triadic and
that both monads and dyads are mere abstractions. Which, come to think o
Dear Joe,
In my Websters the meaning of D.C.L. is given as doctor of civil law, but
I don't find it in Black's Law dictionary.
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From: Joseph Ransdell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Peirce Discussion Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 9:33 AM
that stands for a quality that stands for something to
something.
And since this is more or less open forum I'd like to comment on a special
interest of mine and that is the logic of disagreements but I will do that
in a separate post.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum
inconsistancy.
Which is finally to say that I admire both Ben and Jean-Marc and the
discussion they are having (as well as Joe's attempts to keep it from
getting overheated and de-railed).
Best to all,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Writings of Peirce_
Best,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
that there are two classes of mental representation,
Immediate Representations or Sensations and Mediate Representations or
Conceptions.
CLOSE QUOTE
The caps are not mine.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
Where does Peirce talk about an immediate representamen (or an
immediate
sign)? I can't think
al.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
that, first of all, it all depends on what you mean by First. The sign
it seems is the universal conceptual tool -- if it can be thought, the
sign can accommodate it.
Ah, yes ---and that too!
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
more so it has also beenextremely helpful.For the record, I
conclude thatI was wrong or at best had a very limited understanding
of the issues. Stilllimited, but better than before.
Thanks to all,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Dear Gary.
Thanks foryourgenerous and kind
words.You inspire me to try to follow your example of courage
and good will.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
PS -- it's a third you damn
blockhead!
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
osity needs no
encouragment from me. Nor criticism either. I'm just hoping
good will trumps distrust, fearand animosity.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From:
Gary
Richmond
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 10:05
PM
Subject: [peirce-
ause it has led to
so much error; quite in teh same philistine line of thought would that e and so
well in accord with the spriit of nominalism that I wonder some one does not put
it forward. The true precept is not to abstain from hypostatisation, but
to do it intelligently".
Cheers,
Jim P
are
related.
Best wishes
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
of consciousness. I doubt we will find the neurological basis of something
we can't identify in the first place. The effort begs the question.
Moreover neurons may be a necessary without being a sufficient condition for
consciousness.
Just one layman's opinion.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message
, and mere potential states of affairs. I think the
above does it but would welcome errors being pointed out.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Right
A--B--D
DB-A
l
l
I
I
C
C
I don't mean to bepresent the above as
authoritative -- this is merely my understanding of the issue.
Best wishes and good luck witht he
conference,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Dear Folks,
I've long been sceptical about the notion of good
and evil. So as an exercise of self discipline I thought I'd give a go at
trying to develop a general idea of the notion of good and ask for others to
share some of their views as well.
Seem to me that good is an evaluation we
of his book!
So that's my conclusion -- or good enough and
the moral thing is for me to shut up and ask for the opinions of others.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
nd ethical and some logicians suppose? I'm not convinced. And not
just because folks get upset over such disputes but rather because such attempts
to separate fact and value are inherently false and
upsetting!
Cheers,
Jim
Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
. We humans are
tellers of tales -- it may be our crowning glory.
OK, its a holiday here in the states (and from what some of my British
friends tell me for them as well ;) so I'll sign off for the day and give
all my list friends a break.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum
en variety lame excuse.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
about comprehensive societies (such as tribes or nations) thataddress
the overall needs of their members --not such limited social
groups or institutions that address only one aspect of life.
Just Wondering,
RESPONSE: Me too, and thanks for the doing so.
Jim Piat
plete description, can certainly prove us
wrong".
Sounds about right to me but I've not read the
book. From an earlier book I'd say Soros was left of center politically
and by his own account heavily influenced by Popper philosophically.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peir
Jim,
I said,
The only time that one properly splits them without an intervening
word is when one indicates vocal stress of "other" by itself apart from "an"
along with the syllabification "an-other" -- as in "an other
thing."
I guess that that does approximate
no quarrel withyour choice of
"another" over "an other" for Claudio's graph. I was just going off
on a tangent sparked by Wilfred's comments.
Sorry for the the resending your lastpost
whichI sent by mistake. But yes, the example you provided in
that post, illustrate
so
often and patiently indugled my own explorations.
Thanks again and Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Charles Rudder
wrote:
That is, there is an immediate--non-mediated and, hence,
cognitively autonomous relation between cognizing subjects and objects
consisting of phenomena and/or things in themselves who are in some sense able
to "see" or "recognize"objects and relations between and
form or another I gain a
better understandingof what is a stake-- and also of
someerroneous assumptions or conclusions that I have
beenmaking.Thanks to all
--
Jim Piat
Original Message -
From:
Benjamin Udell
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Friday, September 01
am going astray in my present
analysis of the role of the collateral object in the verification of the
sign.
In anycase I continue to find this discussion helpful. Best wishes to all--
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
. Still I could not
resist a comment or two of my own.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From: Bill Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Peirce Discussion Forum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 2:40 PM
Subject: [peirce-l] Re: The composite photograph metaphor
Jim
tical anacoluthon we call 'our' mind".. .
. "The remark that reasoning consists in the observation of an icon will
be found equally important in th theory and the practice of
reasoning".
None of the above intended as proof of
anything -- just an interesting line of inquiry.
are taking on The New List
paragraph by paragraph and are interested in discussing each paragraph as you go
I'd like to join you and hope others will as well --- I've been
hoping for a systematic review of this work on the list for some time. It
would be very helpful to me.
Best wishes,
Jim
irce -- that heidentified both what is
best and what is worst in behaviorism.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
one can neither teach nor learn without love and it'skissin-cousin
enthusiasm.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
and sometimes annoying, role in the grand
scheme --I hope. But four posts is enuff of me fornow so, with
thanks and best wishes to all, I'll shut up forawhile.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
I do not believe that comparing theories by abstracting their general
statements about reality is sufficient
gain -- I look forward to any
comments, adviceand suggestions you or others might have. I am very
eager to get clear on this point. So drop whatever you are doing ...
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From:
Joseph Ransdell
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent:
focused primarily
on the triadic (standing for to) aspect of the sign and not the dyadic
indexical (referential) aspect. But I'm glad you found my question worth
addressing and I'm looking forward to your comments.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail
rcles. On a good day.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
Jim,
At first glance, your comment gives me the impression that you are
"psychologizing" semiosis by introducing the sign user (and his consciousness)
into the equation. (Something Charles Morris will do). I don't have ready
acc
Title: [peirce-l] Re: "reduction of the manifold to unity"
Dear Folks --I apologizefor
mistakenly including all those prior posts in my last post!
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
on both sides of the political
spectrum.
More later after I've had more time to digest your
post and the comments for Martin and Arnold.
Thanks again,
Jim
Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
a philosopher. Inquiry
maybe.
Best wishes and thanks for keeping us Peirce listers
posted,
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
into important (short) and bullshit (long).
Try this:
I b_ty_u c_n r_
_ d e_ _n t_ _s s_ _ _ _ _ _ e.
OK -- maybe not LOL. Right now
I'm writing a rather too longish response to Joe!
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
two cents in the
discussion.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
Dear Folks,
Part of what I'm trying to say is that its not as
though the scientific method were an entirely independent alternative to the
other three methods. On the contrary the scientific method is built upon
and incorporates the other three methods. The lst threeare not
discredited
--I can't help but feel that in the case of Peirce his categories
areproperly and consistently the foundation of allhe
says.
Jim Piat
---
Joe wrote:
"But I would disagree with this part of what you say, Jim. Considered
simply as methods in their own rights, I don't think one wants t
--- unaccustomed as I am to public digressions
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
From:
Bill Bailey
To: Peirce Discussion Forum
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 2:42
PM
Subject: [peirce-l] Re: What "fundamental
psychological laws" is Peirce referring to?
ommonality in my last post. And that your comments here are awelcome
corrective (intended as such or not).
Thanks Bill for another interesting informative and
fun post.
Jim Piat
As for your post, it wasn't my intention to provide
any form of corrective; I'
as in analyzing the
problems of our individual lives. And not just interpersonal problems, the
problems weface with our enviroment as well.
Best wishes,
Jim Piat
- Original Message -
I think
we may be getting close to the rationale of the four methods with what you say
below, Jim. I've
Arnold was always so kind, encouraging and
enthusiastic in his post. And always bubbling with interesting ideas. Like
so many others I will miss him. And remember him as an ideal to
follow. Thanks for informing us John. My sympathies to you and
Arnold's family and friends. A sad day.
Jim
Hi, Jim,
I read at gmane about Arnold Shepperson's death. Would you do me a favor and
tell peirce-l that I too am shocked and saddened by this. I've just re-read
some off-list correspondence that I had with him back in February, and I'm
not quite sure at the moment what either one of us was
nk of these borrowed (and probably misapplied) ideas.
Jim Piat
---
Message from peirce-l forum to subscriber archive@mail-archive.com
-- yes, I agree with your
comments and those of Joe. Just trying to process them a bit.
Thanks again,
Jim Piat
Jim P,
Thanks for the response.I think that if you allow for the evolution
of the mean and stick to the scientific method, then there are strong
parallels toPeirce's
Dear Joe and Jeff,
I looked at some of the drafts in the Chronological
edition Vol III page 33-34 --.Could it be thatthe laws he may
be referring to are the law of association andsomething like a law of
sensory impressions? Also I got the impression he may have intended these
two laws to
cience
Monthly.
Cheers,
Jim Piat
The question then becomes how inquiry relates to these ideas. I'd
suggest, as you do, that it would cut off inquiry, but not because of
knowledge. Rather, as Joe said earlier, it is the individual doing what
they can to stave off the
79 matches
Mail list logo
