List,
I posted a comment to a forum recently, in which I introduced the following conjecture: “I conjecture that the tension between the known & the unknown is foundational to the semiotics of CS Peirce, and that these tensions are integral to the phenomenology of ‘mind stuff’”. My question for our scholars… how justified is this conjecture, in the context of Peirce? I’ve been lurking in this forum for years, and there was one time, years ago, when some excellent definitions of the categories were posted and discussed. Sadly, I neglected to record them, thinking that I’ll easily find them when I’m ready. Lol - yeah, fat chance, serves me right. Among those definitions I recall some mention of “tension” with the known/unknown relating to the categories. This tension between the known and the unknown is very easily demonstrated in culture, and I do precisely that in my article (relates to “knowing how to be”): https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/imp/chk/2020/00000027/00000003/art00003 [It is also likewise almost trivial to establish this known/unknown tension in all living entities, not just humans in culture. In QM, it becomes more interesting] Would appreciate some pointers, thanks. 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]";>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.
