Edwina, List:
The "categorical modes" in which the different semiosic correlates
"operate" are a specific application of Peirce's phaneroscopic categories
of 1ns/2ns/3ns. There is a trichotomy of possible/existent/necessitant for
each correlate and external relation, and once these are arranged in the
proper order to *classify *an individual sign, the viable options are
logically constrained in accordance with Gary Richmond's vector of
*analysis/involution* (3ns→2ns→1ns). Hence, I agree that in Peirce's 1903
taxonomy, a qualisign obviously cannot be an argument. However, recognizing
that any one sign has two objects and three interpretants is a completely
different but equally valid application of Peirce's phaneroscopic
categories of 1ns/2ns/3ns. In his own words ...
CSP: Taking any class in whose essential idea the predominant element is
Thirdness, or Representation, the self-development of that essential idea
... results in a *trichotomy* giving rise to three subclasses, or genera,
involving respectively a relatively genuine thirdness, a relatively
reactional thirdness or thirdness of the lesser degree of degeneracy, and a
relatively qualitative thirdness or thirdness of the last degeneracy. (CP
5.72, EP 2:162, 1903)
For every sign, there is a trichotomy of interpretants--"relatively
genuine" (final), "relatively reactional" (dynamical), and "relatively
qualitative" (immediate). In my view, the proper order of these for
the *classification
of signs* is likewise in accordance with Gary's vector of
analysis/involution (3ns→2ns→1ns)--the final ("destinate") interpretant
logically constrains the dynamical ("effectual") interpretant, which
logically constrains the immediate ("explicit") interpretant; I am well
aware that you and Robert (among others) disagree. On the other hand, the
real and continuous *flow of semiosis* is always in accordance with Gary's
vector of *determination *(2ns→1ns→3ns)--from the object through the sign
toward the interpretant, isomorphic with the flow of time from the past
through the present toward the future.
Regards,
Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA
Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian
www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt
On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 12:23 PM Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I don’t think that Robert Marty’s post was referring to the* number of
> correlates* in the semiosic triad, which is one of two explanations
> offered by JAS for the terms of First, Second andThird, in Pierce’s
> quotation.
>
> Marty was referring to the functional *nature of the categories* within
> the six correlates [ DO,IO,R, II,DI, FI]. The categories refer to
> Firstness, Secondness [ both genuine and degenerate] and Thirdness [ both
> genuine and two degenerate].
>
> And this obviously differs from the claim by JAS that these terms of
> First, Second, Third, also refer to the categories - which would set up a
> semeiotic triad of O-R-I as operating in the categorical modes of…in the
> same linear path.. Secondness-> Firstness->Thirdness - a logical
> impossibility, since Firstness cannot produce a result operative within
> Thirdness!!! It simply doesn’thav thecogntiive capacity to produce such a
> result! How can data from the Represetnamen, operating, in the mode of
> Firstness or Quality, FEELiNG, EMOTioN..produce a resultant meaning in the
> Inerpretant within the mode of Thirdness or MIND,ANALYsis.THoUGHT!!
> Obviously - it can’t.
>
> Edwina
>
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
ARISBE: THE PEIRCE GATEWAY is now at
https://cspeirce.com and, just as well, at
https://www.cspeirce.com . It'll take a while to repair / update all the links!
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON
PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with
UNSUBSCRIBE PEIRCE-L in the SUBJECT LINE of the message and nothing in the
body. More at https://list.iu.edu/sympa/help/user-signoff.html .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and
co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
