At 06:09 PM 2011/03/17, Pedro C. Marijuan wrote:
Dear FISers,

Thanks to Loet for his modest proposal "Foundations of the Science of (DIS) Order"... (when managing the list I really agree!).

The comments by Jerry are much appreciated, indeed: I am eagerly waiting for opinions and criticisms on the "knowledge recombination" theme. However, criticisms obliged, his whole approach to science and knowledge looks to me very interesting though rather biased.  Rhetorically, for our foundations of info & knowledge we cannot rely on particular philosophical positions (Peircean philosophy---sorry to disagree with John too) but on scientific-disciplinary "facts" or theories. When Jerry talks about "new interpretations of signs from nature" he is cavalierly forgetting the action side, the practice: "In the beginning was the deed!" (Faustian motto emphasized by neuroscientist Alain Berthoz in his "The Brain's Sense of Movement", 2000---- the "fact" and not the "concept"). In neuroscience, in ecological psychology & the motor approach to consciousness, the perceptual cycle of action-perception cannot be reduced to any of the two branches alone. In cognitive terms, theory has always to accompany practice, and viceversa. Methologies, measurements, etc., are a crucial ingredient of knowledge, that refer to our own actions ---not just to "signs" of nature.

Sorry, Pedro, but I fail to understand your distinction between a Peircean view and the one you are advocating. Peirce based his views on pragmatics, which means action. There is something severely wrong here.


Professor John Collier, Acting HoS  and Acting Deputy HoS
Philosophy and Ethics, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4041 South Africa
T: +27 (31) 260 3248 / 260 2292       F: +27 (31) 260 3031
fis mailing list

Reply via email to