List - I’m not going to get into the debate between myself and Gary R/JAS about the interpretation of Peirce’s cosmology - where they interpret Peirce’s objective idealism, to mean that Mind is primary and matter secondary, while I interpret Peirce’s outlines [including the blackboard] to mean that both are correlates of each other and neither are primary. I think these are two different interpretations of Peirce - and at the moment - we, as a very small community-of-scholars, can’t come to a ‘final interpretant’. [Can three people decide?]
So- I’ll just instead focus on a different area... the expansion of the use of Peircean semiotics can easily be seen in other disciplines. The reference to Michael Levin’s work in biological information processes - and his analysis of ‘bioelectrical interactions’ can readily be analyzed within Dicisigns [ see F. Stjfernfellt’s ’Natural Propositions, and see p 159. One of the best journals for examining information dynamics in both physicochemical and biological as well as human systems is BioSystems. And there’s an interesting article [9August 2025] ‘An Information Framework of Intelligence’ by Michal Hochberg. Another on ‘Modularity in biological systems [ with ‘modularity understood as systemic habits]….in April 2025, by Luca Rivelli. And June 2025..’Quantum Information as the scientific basis for the explanation of human consciousness and its evolution’. Thomas Gornitz. March 2025; ’Thermodynamics for Biological Development… Qinyi Zhao. And how about April 2025. Synergism 2.0. Contours of a new theory of continuity in bioengineering. A-V. Pietarinen and V. Shumilina. This article has heavy references to both Peirce AND Michael Levin!! It attempts to use both in bioelectrical information interactions in evolution. I’m not saying that all these research avenues are rooted in Peircean framework. I’m saying that the Peircean framework can be observed in many areas of modern research - even without the use of Peirce or his specific terms. And I think we should expand our discussions to include these areas. Just see how, using different terms, the same analytic framework is functioning in other areas. Edwina > On Aug 16, 2025, at 11:06 AM, Jon Alan Schmidt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Stephen, List: > > You mentioned Michael Levin early last month in the thread on "Relational > Quantum Mechanics, Peirce and Feynman diagrams" > (https://list.iu.edu/sympa/arc/peirce-l/2025-07/msg00006.html). As far as I > can tell, he has not otherwise come up previously on the List. > > My class on modern physics as part of my undergraduate engineering degree > program was way back before Rovelli even introduced RQM, but after reading up > on it a bit, some additional thoughts come to mind. The basic idea that a > measurement event is necessary to actualize a state as the relation between > an observer and the system of interest strikes me as analogous to how I > typically describe the nature of a continuum in accordance with Peirce's late > topical conception--the undivided whole is ontologically prior to the parts, > which are indefinite material parts until they are deliberately marked off as > distinct actual parts. I apply this to my hypothesis that the entire universe > is a semiosic continuum by saying that we prescind any "discrete" sign with > its object and interpretant from the real and continuous process of semiosis. > > Similarly, I suggest that a "state" in RQM roughly corresponds to a "fact" in > accordance with Peirce's definitions of the latter that I have recently > quoted in the "Semiosic Ontology" thread--"something having the structure of > a proposition, but supposed to be an element of the very universe itself" (EP > 2:304, NEM 4:239, 1901); and "so highly a prescissively abstract state of > things, that it can be wholly represented in a simple proposition" (CP 5.549, > EP 2:378, 1906). In other words, the universe is not an assemblage of > states/facts as its ontologically basic components, it is a continuous whole > from which observers prescind states/facts by formulating propositions to > signify them--perceptual judgments and subsequent inferences. When those > propositions are true, the individuals denoted by their subjects become more > definite and the concepts denoted by their predicates become more > determinate, i.e., information increases. > > Nevertheless, it still seems to me that Schrödinger's cat is really either > alive or dead--regardless of what anyone thinks about it--at any arbitrarily > designated instant in time after being placed in the box, unless it happens > to fall within the indefinite moment during which the cat is dying such that > excluded middle does not apply. How could it be otherwise? > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt> / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > <http://twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt> > On Wed, Aug 13, 2025 at 5:48 AM Stephen Jarosek <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Jon, List, >> >> >> >> Have we discussed, in this forum, the work of Michael Levin at all? I’ve not >> been participating consistently and might have missed any reference to him >> that might have cropped up. Levin factors in conditioning (association, >> Pavlov’s dog, etc) and speaks of cognitive processes at the >> cellular/neuronal levels, extending “all the way down” (his terminology). >> Much great material on Levin’s work available online, and it’s difficult to >> select a “favourite”, as we all have different priorities of emphasis. But >> here’s a recent one that relates, at least loosely, to our current thread: >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTBZRVKUwyM >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> sj >> > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > ► 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] . > ► <a href="mailto:[email protected]?subject=SIG%20peirce-l";>UNSUBSCRIBE FROM > PEIRCE-L</a> . But, if your subscribed email account is not your default > email account, then go to > https://list.iu.edu/sympa/signoff/peirce-l . > ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and > co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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] . ► <a href="mailto:[email protected]?subject=SIG%20peirce-l";>UNSUBSCRIBE FROM PEIRCE-L</a> . But, if your subscribed email account is not your default email account, then go to https://list.iu.edu/sympa/signoff/peirce-l . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
