Part 1***24 Mar 2014 8:00 am OPEN TO REVISION & COMMENT I will be starting a thread on Umberto Eco's new book FROM THE TREE TO THE LABYRINTH: HISTORICAL STUDIES ON THE SIGN AND INTERPRETATION, trans. Oldcorn, Harvard, 2014, referring to at least in passing to pages 1, 21, 90, 331, 355-7, 463, 469, 479-80, 486-7, 508-30, 577-585. I will concentrate on Eco’s “hard core of being” and “lines of resistance” (or “extralinguistic disciplines” or “extrasemiotic constrictions”) and “forbidden directions” as the “already given” as well as “strong” versus “weak thought” (especially on Vattimo’s interpretation of Nietzsche) VERSUS: 1] Peirce’s failure to state, in his “criticism of Kant’s-thing-in-itself”, “that something (hidden behind the appearances that aspire to mirror ‘it’ [referring to “The hypothesis of a law is only one of the ways in which we can react to the encounter with a resistance” [?], pg. 583]) has, like a mirror, a reverse side that eludes reflection . . .” (a problem taken from Jürgen Habermas, cf. p. 598), and: 2] “Stating that there are lines of resistance does NOT amount to saying, AS Peirce claims, that there are universal laws that operate in nature.” Most of these statements are concentrated in pp. 577-585.
----------------------------- 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 the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
