Dear Gary and list

Your quote made me think of John of the Cross famous poem of the dark night 
describing the mystical union. http://www.ewtn.com/library/SOURCES/DARK-JC.TXT 
. I have italicized the places where the a-personal  in the union is described 
though the poem is within the frames of Christianity, which John managed to 
stay within but Eckhart was kicked out from after his death.

STANZAS OF THE SOUL

               1. One dark night,
               fired with love's urgent longings
                 -- ah, the sheer grace! --
               I went out unseen,
               my house being now all stilled.

               2. In darkness, and secure,
                by the secret ladder, disguised,
               -- ah, the sheer grace! --
               in darkness and concealment,
               my house being now all stilled.

               3. On that glad night,
                in secret, for no one saw me,
               nor did I look at anything,
               with no other light or guide
               than the one that burned in my heart.

               4. This guided me
                more surely than the light of noon
               to where he was awaiting me
               -- him I knew so well --
               there in a place where no one appeared.

               5. O guiding night!
                O night more lovely than the dawn!
               O night that has united
               the Lover with his beloved,
               transforming the beloved in her Lover.

               6. Upon my flowering breast
                which I kept wholly for him alone,
               there he lay sleeping,
               and I caressing him
                there in a breeze from the fanning cedars.

               7. When the breeze blew from the turret,
                as I parted his hair,
                it wounded my neck
               with its gentle hand,
               suspending all my senses.

               8. I abandoned and forgot myself,
                laying my face on my Beloved;
               all things ceased; I went out from myself,
               leaving my cares
               forgotten among the lilies.

Best

                   Søren

Fra: Benjamin Udell [mailto:bud...@nyc.rr.com]
Sendt: 21. maj 2014 20:18
Til: peirce-l@list.iupui.edu
Emne: Re: [PEIRCE-L] De Waal seminar chapter 9, section on God, science and 
religion: text 1

Quick followup on "L 482" or whatever it really is:

Douglas R. Anderson quotes Peirce's whole letter to John W. Brown on pages 
15-16 in Chapter 1 in _Strands of System_ and adds, "MS, Fisch Collection"

http://books.google.com/books?id=jc5r7WoNEE8C&pg=PA15&lpg=PA15&dq=%22Peirce%22+%22John+W.+Brown%22&source=bl&ots=1aP337-t1e&sig=9mtD-IDxK7zpfD9NvbojyNy4IZ0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=rt18U8_sGsXisATup4BI&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=%22Peirce%22%20%22John%20W.%20Brown%22&f=false

There's a chapter end note 11 indicated but I can't access the page with its 
text in Google Preview.

Best, Ben

On 5/21/2014 1:49 PM, Benjamin Udell wrote:

Gary F., Stephen, all,

The full text of Peirce's letter of April 24, 1892 to the Reverend John W. 
Brown is at

http://www.unav.es/gep/LetterJBrown.html

at the website of the Grupo de Estudios Peirceanos. G.E.P. also has images of 
the letter, beginning at:

http://www.unav.es/gep/1Brown.html

The quote about speculation and experience is in the 1898 lectures, CP 1.655

[CP 1.655, QUOTE] If, walking in a garden on a dark night, you were suddenly to 
hear the voice of your sister crying to you to rescue her from a villain, would 
you stop to reason out the metaphysical question of whether it were possible 
for one mind to cause material waves of sound and for another mind to perceive 
them? If you did, the problem might probably occupy the remainder of your days. 
In the same way, if a man undergoes any religious experience and hears the call 
of his Saviour, for him to halt till he has adjusted a philosophical difficulty 
would seem to be an analogous sort of thing, whether you call it stupid or 
whether you call it disgusting. If on the other hand, a man has had no 
religious experience, then any religion not an affectation is as yet impossible 
for him; and the only worthy course is to wait quietly till such experience 
comes. No amount of speculation can take the place of experience. [END QUOTE, 
FONT ENLARGEMENT ADDED]

Compare this passage from the 1892 letter:

[QUOTE] But this time - I was not thinking of St. Thomas and his doubts either 
- no sooner had I got into the church than I seemed to receive the direct 
permission of the Master to come. Still, I said to myself, I must not go to the 
communion without further reflection! I must go home & duly prepare myself 
before I venture. But, when the instant came, I found myself carried up to the 
altar rail, almost without my own volition. I am perfectly sure that it was 
right. Anyway, I could not help it. [END QUOTE]

The passage from the 1898 lecture seems connected with his 1903 remark that 
"experience is our only teacher," as you say, Gary F., but it also seems to 
harken back to the 1892 letter.  In the 1898 passage I've enlarged the line 
that seems to allude to the passage that I quoted from the 1892 letter. On the 
other hand, for my part, I'm unsure what broader conclusions about Peirce's 
thought's longer-term development can be drawn from all this. Brent does seem 
speculative about this.

Still, Peirce's _Monist_ Metaphysical series does take a more religiously 
suggestive turn after April 1892, as Brent pointed out. Of course, it could 
have been that Peirce was already planning that turn, and his mystical 
experience came timely with it, invited by that turn, and perhaps reinforcing 
or energizing it somehow.

(1891 January), "The Architecture of Theories", The Monist, v. I, n. 2.
(1892 April) "The Doctrine of Necessity Examined", The Monist, v. II, n. 3
(1892 July) "The Law of Mind", The Monist, v. II, n. 4
(1892 October), "Man's Glassy Essence", The Monist, v. III, n. 1
(1893 January), "Evolutionary Love", The Monist, v. III, n. 2
(1893 July), "Reply to the Necessitarians", The Monist, v. III, n. 4
and one should also mention
"Immortality in the Light of Synechism," submitted 1893 May 4, but unpublished 
in The Monist because of a misunderstanding.

Meanwhile, I don't see all this as having much to do with Peirce's 1905 
distinction of pragmaticism from pragmatism more generally. He wanted to 
distinguish pragmaticism from the magical pragmatist Papini's notion that 
pragmatism cannot be defined, and from the Schiller's and James's versions. 
Peirce believed that they held, among other things, that truth is not immutable 
and that infinity is not real. He also disagreed with James's ideas of the will 
to believe. While such unpragmaticistic ideas run contrary to Peirce's 
religious ideas, they also run contrary to his ideas in general.

Note, on the listing of the letter to Brown as "L 482". I don't have my copy of 
Brent's Peirce handy and the Google preview omits some pages that I needed to 
see. I had wanted to find out whether the letter to Brown was a draft.  
G.E.P.'s transcription calls the letter "L 482" but the Robin Catalogue 
http://www.iupui.edu/~peirce/robin/robin_fm/toc_frm.htm<http://www.iupui.edu/%7Epeirce/robin/robin_fm/toc_frm.htm>
 has something else as L 482. I did a browser search on instances of "Brown" 
but did not find the letter to John W. Brown in either of the two lists of 
letters at the Robin Catalogue.

Best, Ben

On 5/21/2014 12:00 PM, Gary Fuhrman wrote:

If the “unpublished fragment” you quote dates from 1890, how can it bear 
witness to the effect on Peirce of an experience he had in 1892?

Peirce’s account of that experience says that he was drawn into St. Thomas’s 
church, and up to the communion rail, “almost without my own volition.” He 
wrote about it to the rector of the church, offering his services in “some form 
of church work”. Then he says, “I have never before been mystical; but now I 
am.” But what does that mean, pragmaticistically? What church work did Peirce 
do as a result? As for his philosophical work, there is no evidence whatsoever 
that this “mystical” experience, or the memory of it, had anything to do with 
Peirce inventing “pragmaticism” as an alternative to “pragmatism” 12 years 
later. I think you’re ignoring everything Peirce wrote about the “natural 
light” during the years in between (see my post addressed to Søren). That 
certainly does have a lot to do with pragmaticism.

Brent on p.210 makes a totally specious connection between this incident and 
something Peirce wrote six years later, in which he says that “No amount of 
speculation can take the place of experience.” But that passage is much more 
genuinely connected to Peirce’s remark in his 1903 Harvard lectures that 
“experience is our only teacher.” Peirce makes no mention in either place of 
mystical experience, and elsewhere he makes it clear that the mystical is just 
about the most inconsequential kind of experience, contributing almost nothing 
to the growth of “concrete reasonableness”, which he virtually equates with the 
evolution of God.

gary f.

From: Stephen C. Rose
Sent: 21-May-14 11:04 AM
To: Gary Fuhrman
Cc: Peirce List
Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] De Waal seminar chapter 9, section on God, science and 
religion: text 1

For starters this unpublished fragment noted in Brent (2nd ed) as CSP to PC [20 
July 1890) (L 77) which reads in part:: "Since then God is using me ... should 
I not be content? ..." And then his explicit description of his experience in 
church which he describes in his own words as mystical on pp 209-10 of the same 
book. CSP's conclusion" "I have never before been mystical, but now I am." The 
practical effect was his effort to define pragmaticism as distinct from 
pragmatism and complete 70K or so mss pages, many following the experience of 
April 24, 1992. I would suggest the practical effect is manifest 100 years 
following his death. And that such testimony in itself should at least be 
accorded a place in scholarly awareness of his biography.
-----------------------------
PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L 
to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To 
UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the 
line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at 
http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .




Reply via email to