I never even vaguely suggested Thirdness always wins! Don't know where that came from. Or that Firstness and Secondness are not basic components of reality - ditto. You said that "Thirdness WOULD PREVENT such freedoms." My point is that it can't and doesn't: tychism and synechism live side by side, the former randomly acting on the latter occasionally. I don't think you mean to say anything inconsistent with that [though you may]; but your statement gives that [mis-]impression, to me anyway.
From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 8:31 AM To: Michael DeLaurentis; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Firstness, Secondness, Thirdness Michael- I'm not sure of your meaning. I think that Thirdness has a vital role to play in maintaining stability and continuity; thus, a key aspect is to inhibit randomness. BUT, randomness (Firstness and Secondness) are basic components of the universe, so, Thirdness doesn't always win. Peirce did suggest that eventually, possibly, the universe would 'freeze up' within its laws....but, hopefully, chance is more powerful. Edwina ----- Original Message ----- From: Michael DeLaurentis <mailto:[email protected]> To: 'Edwina Taborsky' <mailto:[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 8:12 AM Subject: RE: [PEIRCE-L] Firstness, Secondness, Thirdness Edwina - I'm not sure you mean to say what you do say in your final sentence. Chance "exists" completely independently of law, and indeed randomly acts to redirect material law [evolution] (if not mathematical law). It does not depend on the "reality" [??] of any other mode. So, yes, of course tychistic changes are unlawful - but they're not prevented by law per se. From: Edwina Taborsky [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 8:02 AM To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Firstness, Secondness, Thirdness I have said that I disagree that all three categorical modes are always present in a triadic Sign. My examples have been taken from the ten classes of signs provided by Peirce (2.254). Therefore, a sign with all three relations in a mode of Firstness or Secondness does exist. Sung asked - how can there be anything without Form; he seems to be under the misapprehension that Thirdness provides the Form - and I reject such an assumption. First, I don't separate matter and form except intellectually. Matter cannot exist without form. But form is not Thirdness. Thirdness is the laws-of-habitual formation, which enables continuity of type. But matter can certainly exist without continuity - and when it does, for example, it can be in a mode of Firstness (a local, instantaneous formation of matter) or Secondness (a local current-time formation of matter that exists only in interaction with another form of matter). The laws of continuity (Thirdness) need not have any part in these two modes of organization. Indeed, the reality of these two modes provides the vital potentiality for chance, for innovation, for the development of novel biological species, for the testing of adaptations and so on. Thirdness, or the mode of habits and continuity, would prevent such freedoms. Edwina No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4745 / Virus Database: 4007/8110 - Release Date: 08/27/14
----------------------------- 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 .
