List, While comparisons between Peirce’s semiosis and complex adaptive systems might prove illuminating, it seems to me crucial not to frame semiosis as a bottom-up process. Peirce’s 3ns introduces top-down guidance through law and habit just as fundamentally as 1ns introduces spontaneity and 2ns enforces brute action-reaction. Removing that balance collapses semiosis into a dyadic-materialist mechanism.
Similarly, presenting the telos of semiosis as energy preservation leans toward thermodynamic determinism, whereas Peirce saw the universe evolving toward the growth of concrete reasonableness, that is, increasing embodiment of habit and intelligibility. Terminologically, describing the sign relation (O-S-I) as an “information unit” borrows from Shannon and implies an input-output model foreign to Peirce’s irreducible triadic mediation. Finally, the categories are not “components” of a process but modes of being that structure *all* process and relation. On Sat, Oct 25, 2025 at 5:21 PM Jeffrey Brian Downard <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Edwina, List, > > I don't see the whole conversation as a coherent thread, so I've missed > the back and forth. > > In short, I support the general claim that we can view the evolution of > the cosmos as manifesting, at both local and global levels, the dynamics of > complex adaptive systems. The hypothesis I see Peirce trying out in, for > instance, A Guess at the Riddle, is that the evolution of the cosmos has a > character analogous to the dynamics of the cycle of inquiry: manifesting > patterns akin to hypothesis, deduction, and induction, as the drive or > growth, and patterns akin to demonstration on the basis of systems of > principles (i.e., theories) where established habits and natural laws > govern. This, I think, is a hypothesis that has proven to be fruitful in > many domains, and I suspect its fruitfulness will continue to growth in > this century. > > Having said that, I not prepared to go so far as to say: "There is no > goal, no final agenda, other than to prevent entropic dissipation of > energy, and thus, maintain the energy content of the universe as ‘matter’ > moulded within the self-organized rules of Mind." On my view, potential is > a pretty rich sort of thing. As such, it isn't clear to me how much or how > little of the evolution of ordered habits and growth of systems of laws > manifests something more than a constraint that prevents the "prevent > entropic dissipation of energy,." > > For my part, I see these sorts of questions as an invitation to engage in > inquiry. The proof of the pudding will be in the tasting the results of > those inquiries. For those taking up this sort of project, including the > many at SFI, we have our work cut out for us. > > Yours, > > Jeff > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> on > behalf of Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Saturday, October 25, 2025 1:34 PM > *To:* [email protected] <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [PEIRCE-L] The Universe as a CAS > > I am still stunned by the recent rejection of my claim that the Universe > is a CAS [ complex adaptive system] by three scholars on this list - none > of whom had the faintest idea what a CAS actually is. > > Here’s a brief outline: > > Complex adaptive systems (CAS) represent a framework for understanding how > intricate, dynamic networks of interacting agents give rise to emergent > behaviors that are greater than the sum of their parts. These systems are > characterized by decentralized control, adaptation through learning or > evolution, nonlinear interactions, and the ability to self-organize in > response to environmental changes. In essence, CAS thrive on feedback > loops, diversity, and resilience, often exhibiting unpredictable yet > patterned outcomes. This concept, popularized by thinkers like John Holland > and Murray Gell-Mann through the Santa Fe Institute, transcends > disciplines, offering insights into everything from ant colonies to stock > markets. > > My point of course, is that Peirce’s semiosic framework, made up of the > basic triad of an ‘information unit’, [O-S-I] … comparable to those > ‘interacting agents in the CAS - operating within the three categories of > Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness function within a decentralized and > non-determined process ,[bottom up] adaptation through ‘learning and > evolution’ , non-linear interactions..and self-organization..to develop and > maintain our universe. > > There is no goal, no final agenda, other than to prevent entropic > dissipation of energy, and thus, maintain the energy content of the > universe as ‘matter’ moulded within the self-organized rules of Mind. I > therefore think that it would be interesting if not productive to explore > this dynamic, using the Peircean basic framework, within not only the > biological realm - but- even the societal, economic and political realms. > > Edwina > > > _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ > ► 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]";>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]";>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.
