Thursday: Session C: I decided on presentations by several Brazilian
scholars on Epistemology & Ontology: Abduction, Reality, God. They were all
very good, and in particular the paper by Rodrigo Vieira de Almeida, which
both Soren Brier and I found compelling. Title: "Some Reflections on the
Ontological Aspects of the Symbol and its Relationship to the
Cognoscibility of God, within the Religious Mettphysics of Peirce." Soren
asked some good questions in the Q & A. I very much like him and his work,
and have since we met at the biosemiotics conference a few years ago.
Session D: Really tough choices again. I very much wanted to attend
Terrence Deacon's and Jesper Hofmyer's session as I am increasingly
interested in biosemiotics. Bob Innis's and Ahti Pietarinen's sessions also
seemed intriguing, but I decided to attend Nathan Houser, Jaime Nubiola,
and Sara Barrena on "The Cosmopolitan Peirce: The Impact of his European
Experience." They all delved into aesthetics (*with* the 'a'); quite
interesting including great ppts by Jaime. I had an excellent talk with
Nathan afterwards on this somewhat neglected facet of Peirce, and met
Nathan's wife, Alita, who is a very interesting person in her own right (we
had a number of good exchanges during the conference and in Milford). Jaime
introduced me to Sara who is also coming on the Arisbe trip. She and her
husband, Jose, are taking on some of Rosa's tasks.
I had the box lunch supplied by the conference today with Gary, Soren, and
Eliseo--quite a good discussion. Gary had gone to Terrence Deacon's and
Jesper Hoffmeyer's session Soren had been at the Brazilians' session with
me, but I'm not sure where Eliseo had gone. In any event, biosemiotic and
cosmological discussions were had over sandwiches, potato chips, and
cookies.
The final plenary of the day was a Memorial Meeting at St. Anne's Episcopal
Church about 15 minutes from the conference hotel. It's a lovely little old
Episcopal church with beautiful stained glass windows. A string quartet
played classical music at the beginning and the end of the program. I sat
in a pew with Gary, his wife Pam (very charming woman), and Mary. Nathan's
address was quite moving: "Peirce's Tragic Struggle with Destiny". He (and
Peirce, I'd say) got a standing ovation. I clapped so hard I lost my
wedding ring and it took 15 minutes to find it. Leaving we saw that John
Sowa, a bit behind schedule and rushing, had unfortunately walked into a
glass door--big, ugly bump on his forehead, and bandages on his nose; but
he said he wasn't in pain. Gary and Pam directed Mary and me to a
vegetarian restaurant they had just eaten at and liked very much, and so we
had dinner outside, in sight of St. Anne's and next to a very lovely
garden. Two of the musicians from the quartet joined us, so that was a
pleasant surprise.
Friday:Session F: More tough choices since I wanted to attend Andre de
Tienne's, Richard Atkins', and Kelly Parker's sessions. I did chat with
Kelly just before his presentation, and with him and Gary F. just
afterwards. This was the first time I'd seen him since ICCS when it was
held at U. of Alabama, Huntsville. Since then he has seemingly taken the
lead in Royce scholarship. Kelly is truly one of the nicest, most decent,
most socially and ecologically aware persons I know. I decided to go to the
Existential Graphs session chaired by Mark Migotti. John Sowa gave a good
overview on how "Peirce Improved on His Successors;" Frederik Stjernfelt
spoke on the "Iconicity of Logic," a talk Cathy has already noted she found
quite interesting. I had asked Gary if he'd be willing to take the lead in
the proposed e-seminar on "Natural Propositions" and he not only agreed to
that, he'd already approached Frederik who said he was "keen" on the idea
(something he confirmed to me just preceding the Congress banquet on
Saturday). Ahti-Veikko Pietarienen spoke on "The Future of Logic"--this is
an extraordinarily intelligent, very articulate scholar who, in my opinion,
has very much to offer EG inquiry and logic generally. He answered many
questions addressed to the panel extremely well and in terms suitable to
logicians and non-logicians alike. Fernando Zalamea gave an interesting
enough talk on Peirce's "Geometry and Plasticity," the latter suggesting
how we migh move "far beyond Peirce" in 21st century logical inquiry.
I spoke briefly with Cathy and Soren before lunch, but ran into Uta Priss
and had lunch with her. We talked about pragmatism and education, the theme
of her paper tomorrow as well as Phyllis's, [Awhich I'll be delivering (I
can't help keep worrying about Phyllis health) [happily Phyllis is
progressing well as she noted in a recent list message].
Session G: Endless tough choices. Raposa, or Paavola, or Parker, or Hare?
Again, out of loyalty I went to hear Michael Shapiro on "Reconceiving
Linguistics in the LIght of Pragmaticism: Language Analysis as
Hermeutic"--a really good talk, preceded by an interesting talk by a young
graduate student, Jamin Pelkey on "Peircean Evolutionary LInguistics: A
Prospectus"--a very thoughtful young man, deep, perhaps--his hypothesis on
the evolution of languages--needs testing, but he may be on to something,
but even now might server as a heuristic in this field. It's been
encouraging to see so many young scholars at the Congress, and doing some
very impressive Peirce inspired work.
I ran into Ken Kettner later, and told him--quite honestly--that the
secondary literature which has perhaps had the most influence on me are his
appendices in "A Thief of Peirce" on Peirce's valency theory. He wants me
to "bug" him on the source of that valental theory as well as a book on
topology which he thinks I "must" read. Of course I fully intend to "bug"
him.
When I walked over to the memorial with Cheryl Misak the evening before,
she suggested that her plenary address was very close to the talk Ben and I
heard her give at the Pragmatists group in NYC a few months ago (another
version of it was taped at Cambridge a few months earlier than that and is
available on YouTube). So, I decided to tour Lowell with Gary and Pam, but
Pam's bus from the over-flow hotel never arrived, so I ended up exploring
the town on my own: the canals, the river front, all the old factories, the
imposing library and city hall, the warehouses put to new use as
restaurants and condominiums, etc. Walking home I passed some
conferees--Terry Moore, Mary, Uta and John-- and stopped to have a bit to
eat and a couple of Margaritas with them. Terry will send me a version of
"Reading Peirce Reading" which the author's widow is permitting to be
circulated as a possible slow-read at peirce-l in 2015.
I worked on Phyllis' paper presentation into the wee hours and until I was
exhausted! Time to go to bed!
* * *
Saturday. My biggest regret: I wish I could have attended many of the
sessions rather than just a few. Session H: Interesting presentations which
I wish I could have attended but couldn't included those by Terry Moore and
Charles F. Murray, Jeff Downard, Jeff Kasser, Uta Priss, and Randall
Dipert. I attended the session on "The Impact of Peircean Ideas on
Biosemiotics" chaired by Eliso Fernandez. Victoria (Tori) Alexander spoke
first on "A Biosemiotic Definition of an Object"--her theory is quite
intriguing. Tori ran the biosemiotics conference at Roosevelt U. a few
years ago (and very well, I must say), and is not only a scholar but a
novelist (I read and very much like the novel of hers I read a couple of
years ago). Eliseo's talk was, not unexpectedly, excellent (I've already
had it and his just previous paper put on Arisbe, and will have Ben
eventually put all his papers there, especially as the Linda Hall Library
in Kansas City, where he is science adviser, will soon be closing,
including its website where he now has his papers ). Vinicius' also gave a
fine talk, concluding with a brief discussion of his 'Solenoid of
Semeiosis'.
I had a most interesting lunch with Eliseo Fernandez and his friend Hussain
(on aesthetics ) Eliseo is the most authentic person I think I've ever met,
and that he seems to genuinely enjoy discussing Peirce and semiotics with
me is a good thing. I'm going to put the rest of his papers on Arisbe as
the science library, Linda Hall, for which he is science adviser, is
shutting down soon, and that includes its website where his papers
currently are (I've already put a number on Arisbe, and all are very
valuable, very accessible contributions to biosemiotic theory).
Had I not been presenting your paper, Phyllis, I might have attended one of
these: Session H: Included papers by James Liszka, Tony Jappy, Mats Berman,
John Kaag, Joseph Brent (just to see what he looks like), and Iris Smith
Fischer. But delivering yours was a joy. Here are my immodest
post-presentation notes as I later revised them:
My presentation of Phyllis Chiasson's paper went very well indeed, with
some good questions afterwards including questions by Peter Skagestad, Uta,
and others. I was at the top of my game in presenting and taking questions,
I must say. There seemed to be considerable interest in Phyllis' ideas, for
example, by Tori, whom I sat next to during the next presentation since
there wasn't much space in front because of the interpreter. I'm glad I was
able to present Phyllis' ideas well (enough), since I think Tori attended
this session with great expectations.
Fernando Zalamea's plenary talk on "Peirce's Continuity: Mathematical and
Logical, Then and Now" was very good, very interesting, if a little over
the top ("the most important. . ., ," "the best x of the decade," etc.)
Matthew Moore chaired and Giovanni Maddalena responded very well--what a
charming Italian fellow. The Q&A concluded with an excellent question by
Cathy Legg on Peirce's metaphor of the mathematician and the logician
looking in opposite directions on the same road, etc.
Skipped the next session to take a much needed nap.
The Banquet was swell--before entering the banquet hall, I hung out with
John Deely (who approached unexpectedly and asked about, guess who--Ben!)
and Kees, then Vinicius and Cathy and a few others. John told some bad
jokes that Vinicius didn't get, and gave Cathy a copy of his new book.
Apparently she doesn't much like him and suggested that we lose him asap. I
sat at a table with Mary K. and some of the Nordics. Cathy and I later
"worked the room."
Vincent Colapietro's plenary pre-dinner speech was disappointing:
"Experimental Intelligence, Dramatic Narrative, and Philosophical
Self-Understanding." Cathy found it embarrassing. Robert Lane was not here
because of a back injury, but was given a well-deserved rousing tribute for
all the work he'd put into the Congress (video recorded to send to him).
After dinner I greeted Vincent, introduced Cathy to Eliseo, Jeff Kasser
approached me to congratulate me on the seminar & the Transactions edition,
and I saw Mats and his pal again, said farewell to Iris, Kees, Andre, Terry
Moore (who had sent me the pdf of "Reading Peirce Reading" for future
referecne), Nathan and his wife, Ken Ketner and his wife (I said that it
was great meeting him, but even better meeting his wife!), and several
other conferees approached me to say they appreciated Ben and my work.
As I was leaving the banquet hall I was approached by William James
McCurdy, whom Zalemea had singled out as the best mathematician of our era.
When he mentioned Ketner, I said how much I'd learned from his valency
appendices in A Thief of Peirce--that was it: he was pulling out papers,
talking a mile a minute about his work--45 minutes later he, Andre and I
finally got to the bar to say good night to Cathy, Josh, Jeff D., and
others.
I have to prepare remarks on Arisbe (home) & Arisbe (site). We leave for
Milford at 10 AM.
Here's the final installment of my tale of the Peirce Congress and trip to
Milford.
We traveled to Milford on Sunday in a luxurious bus-van which looks like it
would work for rock bands "on the road." I sat with Cathy, Ivo and Josh sat
across from each other at a table, Demetra in front of Cathy and me, and
Jaime, Jose, Sara, and the children in front. Nathan and Alita, Andre and
Giovanni, Miguel and others took their own cars.
As it turns out, Milford is a very small town with, it seems to me,
friendly people, including the staff at the restaurant--inn we stayed at,
Dimmich's, a very informal place where, for example, we got our room keys
from the bartender. Cathy, James, Josh and I enjoyed the relaxed
atmosphere, especially when sitting on the second floor balcony reserved
for guess, sipping wine or drinking beer. It was also a value at $119 the
night as opposed to the $278 a night being charged at the luxurious
Fauchere Hotel a couple of blocks down. We did have our final dinner at the
Fauchere, and I must admit it was quite extraordinary, the place, the food,
the company.
That afternoon we visited Peirce's grave. It's in a beautiful, hilly
cemetery outside of town, directly below the Pinchot monument. It's hard to
find, and has a very small tombstone and stone urn (which was broken, but a
group went the next day with epoxy to fix it, some plants to grow next to
it, etc.) Very sad. Demetra wants to have something dignified added their.
Monday: For the unveiling of the centenary plaque at Arisbe, I was asked by
Jaime Nubiola to say a few words about Arisbe (the web site). Nathan,
Andre, and Demetra, this year's Peirce Society president spoke before me.
Of course I commented on all that has developed at Arisbe since Joe's death
thanks, especially, to Ben Udell. I also commented on our Transactions
special ed. on Joe, and encouraged folk to read, in particular, Cathy's
introduction.
We then were given an excellent tour of the house which, as you may or may
no know, has become a center for environmental and other research
concerning that area in PA. I was surprised both how well Arisbe had been
refurbished, but mainly at how many people are doing research there; maybe
10 or so were there when we toured.
There were other interesting aspects to that trip including our visiting
the elegant Pinchot chateau with its vast, stunning grounds, and the
Columns Museum which has a Peirce room with many interesting artifacts.
After the banquet we returned to the Columns to view videotapes of
interviews with some folk who as youngsters had known Peirce and his wife.
Earlier, Josh Black, an NZ student of Cathy's studying at Sheffield U., and
I bought a walking tour pamphlet, but after walking great distances to see
a few nice houses and some "remarkable trees," we stopped 1/4 of the way
through at site #13, our Inn, had a drink, and called it quits.
James and I drove Cathy and Josh back to NYC where Josh caught a train to
Boston to catch his plane to the UK, and Cathy caught a bus to Newark
Airport on the way back to New Zealand. I'll miss her a lot.
So that does it! Personal highlights, of course, but I think representative
of the kinds of experiences folks at the Congress and on the Milford trip
had.
Cheers!
*Gary Richmond*
*Philosophy and Critical Thinking*
*Communication Studies*
*LaGuardia College of the City University of New York*
*C 745*
*718 482-5690 <718%20482-5690>*
-----------------------------
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 .
