But scientific facts are not in opposition to triadic philosophy since its practice issues in measurable results in the form of expressions and actions.
*@stephencrose <https://twitter.com/stephencrose>* On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Jerry LR Chandler < [email protected]> wrote: > Matt: > > Scientific facts are in opposition to your conclusion. > > Cheers > > jerry > > > On Jun 14, 2014, at 5:11 PM, Matt Faunce wrote: > > Stephen, It appeared to me that you had hijacked the term "pragmaticism", > and I still think you might have. Peirce was an idealist, and the idea that > 'we are reality,' if "we" means those of us whose essence is our mind, is a > cornerstone of pragmaticism. In this sense there never was a reality before > we came into being and there would be no reality after us. > The Buddhist logicians Dignaga and Dharmakirti, who were objective > idealists, concluded that there could never have been a before "us" and > there will never be an after us. I came to see things their way. (Although > I was warned that my source, the translations and explanations by Th. > Stcherbatsky, circa 1932, are too "post-Kantian".) I'm not sure what Peirce > thought of the time before us but I suspect he agreed with the Buddhist > logicians. > > Matt > > On Jun 13, 2014, at 10:51 PM, "Stephen C. Rose" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > "All people" is my definition of "we" in the following statement: "We > are inevitably social. We are capable of achieving a sense of universality. > This universal sense distinguishes Triadic Philosophy." Triadic philosophy > regards most accepted divisions among human beings as secondary to a > fundamental unity which transcends them all. > > *@stephencrose <https://twitter.com/stephencrose>* > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Matt Faunce <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Stephen, please define "we" as you used the word below. >> >> Matt >> >> On Jun 12, 2014, at 5:10 PM, "Stephen C. Rose" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Triadic Philosophy honors Peirce by claiming that it is a tiny offshoot >> of what he came to mean by the term pragmaticism. This term was his >> evolution of pragmatism. Pragmaticism is a bastion against the dominant >> notion that we are all reality is. We are not all of reality. Our >> individual perceptions are not all reality. Before we are, reality is. >> After we are, reality remains. Pragmaticism opens the door to a metaphysics >> based precisely on the premise that by our fruits we shall be known. It is >> a now metaphysics. It proves out. It is not supposition. >> >> We are inevitably social. We are capable of achieving a sense of >> universality. This universal sense distinguishes Triadic Philosophy. >> >> >> >> >> ----------------------------- >> 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 . >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ----------------------------- > 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 > . > > > > > >
----------------------------- 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 .
