Gary R., List: I appreciate your excellent recap of Peirce's blackboard narrative. For anyone interested, my paper that you referenced ( https://tidsskrift.dk/signs/article/view/103187) includes my own explication of the same passage, emphasizing that he characterizes it as a *diagram* (CP 6.203-4, RLT 261-2, 1898). This entails that it is "an icon ... the relations of whose parts shall present a complete analogy with those of the parts of the object of reasoning" (CP 3.363, EP 1:227, 1885), such that "its principal purpose is to strip the significant relations of all disguise" (CP 3.559, 1898). Hence, properly interpreting it requires identifying not only what its *parts *represent, but also what their *relations *represent.
As Peirce himself summarizes in an earlier lecture of the same series, "The whole universe of true and real possibilities forms a continuum, upon which this Universe of Actual Existence is, by virtue of the essential Secondness of Existence, a discontinuous mark--like a line figure drawn on the area of the blackboard" (NEM 4:345, RLT 162, 1898). In my own words, the constitution of being is an inexhaustible continuum (3ns) of indefinite possibilities (1ns), some of which are actualized (2ns) by whoever is *drawing *the line figures on the blackboard--they do not just magically appear there. Peirce even connects all this with the first few verses of the Bible in a manuscript that he likely wrote while preparing for the RLT lectures. CSP: It is remarkable that though subconsciously yet he [the author of Genesis] has perceived the need of every element which was needed for the first day. His *tohu wabohu, terra inanis et vacua* [the earth was without form and void] is the indeterminate germinal Nothing. His *Spiritus Dei ferebatur super aquas* [the spirit of God moved over the waters] is consciousness. His *Lux *[light] is the world of quality. His *fiat lux* [let there be light] is an arbitrary reaction. His *divisit lucem a tenebris* [divided the light from the darkness] is the recognition of the necessary duality. His *vidit Deus lucem quod esset bona* [God saw the light, that it was good] is the waking consciousness. Finally, his *factumque est vespere et mane, dies unus* [the evening and the morning were the first day] is the emergence of Time. (NEM 4:138, 1897-8) After all, he states only a few paragraphs before presenting the blackboard narrative, "Those who express the idea to themselves by saying that the Divine Creator determined so and so may be incautiously clothing the idea in a *garb *that is open to criticism, but it is, after all, substantially the only philosophical answer to the problem" (CP 6.199, RLT 259, 1898). Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Structural Engineer, Synechist Philosopher, Lutheran Christian www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt / twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 10:38 PM Gary Richmond <[email protected]> wrote: > List, Gary F, Jon, > > A while back in a lengthy post discussing the Blackboard analogy that > Peirce offers in the penultimate lecture of the 1898 series, I attempted to > outline. that cosmological lecture. Indeed, in my view the blackboard > analogy is* profoundly* cosmological and, as such, helps illustrate > Peirce's vision of a realm of *potential dimensions and qualities* *not > yet manifest*, imagining the conditions for *a universe yet to come into > being*, to emerge as a cosmos, an *evolving semiosic continuum* > > I mentioned in my last post in the thread on Planck and Peirce on mind > that I thought that perhaps it would be helpful to review that analogy > since some here may not be familiar with it, while others might have some > fresh thoughts regarding it, especially in the context of the idea that > Peirce proposes: that mind is fundamental, matter being derivative. See: > CP 6.203 - 209, The Cambridge Conferences Lectures of 1898, published as > *Reasoning > and the Logic of Things.* > > In the penultimate lecture in the 1898 series we are asked to imagine a > clean blackboard representing 'the original vague potentiality': an > indeterminate, undifferentiated continuum of possibilities. That is, the > blackboard doesn't represent absolute nothingness, but rather *everything > possible in general*, a proto-field of generative possibilities which may > become an existent universe. > > Peirce starts with a clean blackboard (a kind of sheet of assertion), what > I've called an ur-continuity (thus, he presupposes 3ns as being 1st) upon > which anything might be drawn (by whom? Peirce seems to suggest, by divine > Mind). Earlier he had called this 'time before time', that is, before the > putative 'Big Bang' (which, of course, has become dogma among mainstream > physicists, although questioned by some physicists such as Roger > Penrose, Lee Smolin, Paul Steinhardt, and Neil Turok). Earlier in his > cosmological musings he had hypothesized this 'time before time was' as a > *tohu > bohu*, an absolute nothing. But later in his cosmological reflections he > reconceives what he originally thought to be pure nothing to be, rather, a > *swarming > of potential characters* (in the 1898 lectures he calls these "Platonic > ideas" of which there are an infinite number, only some of which will > appear in any given universe which might come into existence). These might > inform a universe depending on which characters might be drawn together on > the ur-continuity of the blackboard. > > As Peirce describes it, drawing a chalk mark on the chalkboard introduces > a discontinuity separating the surfaces of the blackboard and the chalk > mark. The boundary between blackboard and white chalk is neither of these > nor both together, but a 2ns: the reaction between the two. The chalk mark > is a 1ns, something wholly new springing into being, their interaction a > 2ns. The appearance of 'something' (the chalk line, the 1ns) isn't out of > an 'absolute void' but, rather, springs from the infinite possibilities > within the original continuity. As more characters start to 'stay' on the > blackboard and interact (2ns), what one might call 'proto-habits' are > formed. So 3ns is 1st (cf. the discussion of involution in 'The > Mathematics of Logic') before a universe comes into being; 3ns in two > senses: 1. the original continuity, the ur-continuity upon which 1nses play > and interact', and 2. the habits formed as some of these characters stay, > i.e., 'stick' to the blackboard. > > Thus a universe such as ours doesn't start in pure 1ns as Peirce first > imagined, but emerges with 2ns and incipient habits (3ns) within the > context of *the original continuity* (3ns) represented by the blackboard, > thus creating the conditions for a universe such as ours to come into > being: the emergence of energy, time, and space, as Gary Fuhrman wrote. > Once this happens a universe such as ours becomes ever more rational as > laws evolve. (As already hinted at, Peirce suggests that in this > time-before-time there is the possibility of any number of universes > emerging -- a kind of early 'many universes' theory). > > Sure, this is all conjectural -- there is certainly no scientific means to > explore it. But unless one is ready to believe that time, energy, and space > simply emerge from nothing (which is basically what the Big Bang theory > amounts to even given some 'quantum fluctuation', etc. alternatives), one > has to imagine a *time before time*, exactly what Peirce did in > conceiving the blackboard metaphor. Whether one finds his argumentative > persuasive or not is another matter. > > I would encourage anyone who hasn't yet read the penultimate chapter of > Peirce's *Reasoning and the Logic of Things* (or even CP 6.203 - 209) to > do so since what I've written above includes several of my own ideas and > terminology. > > For me, the blackboard analogy suggests an ur-continuity upon which divine > agency can ‘scribe’ characters, including the universal categories, as > proto-cosmic potential. Some selection of the infinite variety of these > were made manifest into our trichotomic semiosic universe: an analogy for > primordial indeterminacy *to become* structured cosmos. > > For an extended discussion of and an interesting expansion of the > blackboard analogy see: Jon Alan Schmidt's “A Neglected Additament: Peirce > on Logic, Cosmology, and the Reality of God.” Signs (vol. 9, 2018), esp. > section 5. Peirce’s Diagrammatic Discourse, pp. 11–14. > > Best, > > Gary R >
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► 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.
