The classic example 

3p= thirdness= is when I react to the pain 

2p = secondness = is when I feel the pain 

1p = firstness = is when somebody stick me with a pin (Quale) 


Also

3p is when I know and/or say that the coffee tastes bad (mind or reason) 

2p is when I am tasting something funny about the coffee. (feeling or sensing) 

1p is when I take a sip of coffee.(body-QUALE- input to sensing nerves) 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A Few Definitions of the categories

http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/newlist/nl-frame.htm


The Categories as used in perception:

I 1p--Quality (Reference to a Ground), 
II 2p-- Relation (Reference to a Correlate), 
II 3p--Representation (Reference to an Interpretant), 

I 1p-- Quale (that which refers to a ground), 
II 2p--Relate (that which refers to a ground and correlate, )
III 3p--Representamen (that which refers to ground, correlate, and 
interpretant. )


http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/secondness.html

"Careful analysis shows that to the three grades of valency of indecomposable 
concepts correspond 
three classes of characters or predicates. 

Firstly come " firstnesses," or positive internal characters of the subject in 
itself; 

secondly come "secondnesses," or brute actions of one subject or substance on 
another, 
regardless of law or of any third subject; 

thirdly comes "thirdnesses," or the mental or quasi-mental influence of one 
subject on 
another relatively to a third." ('Pragmatism', CP 5.469, 1907) 



Firstness is the mode of being of that which is such as it is, positively and 
without reference to anything else. 
Secondness is the mode of being of that which is such as it is, with respect to 
a second but regardless of any third. 
Thirdness is the mode of being of that which is such as it is, in bringing a 
second and third into relation to each other." 



>> 
>> The following equivalences should hold >> 

>> 3p = Thirdness or III 
>> 2p = Secondness or II 
>> 1p = Firstness or I. 
>> 
>> Comp seems to only use analytic or deductive logic, 
>> while Peirce's categories are epistemological (synthetic 
>> logic) categories, in which secondness is an integral part. 
>> So . 
>> 
>> Here's what Peirce has to say about his categorioes: 
>> 
>> http://www.helsinki.fi/science/commens/terms/secondness.html 
>> 
>> 
>> "Firstness is the mode of being of that which is such as it is, 
>> positively and without reference to anything else. 
>> 
>> Secondness is the mode of being of that which is such as it is, 
>> with respect to a second but regardless of any third. 
>> 
>> Thirdness is the mode of being of that which is such as it is, 
>> in bringing a second and third into relation to each other." 
>> (A Letter to Lady Welby, CP 8.328, 1904)" 
>> 







 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to