Dear John N,

Let me expose my ignorance.
What is "suprasubjectivity?

With all the best.

Sung
__________________________________________________
Sungchul Ji, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Pharmacology and Toxicology
Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology
Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy
Rutgers University
Piscataway, N.J. 08855
732-445-4701

www.conformon.net







> But do note that what all relations have in common is suprasubjectivity
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Awbrey [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 9:55
> To: Edwina Taborsky
> Cc: Gary Fuhrman; [email protected]; Peirce List
> Subject: [PEIRCE-L] Re: Natural Propositions
>
> Re: Edwina Taborsky
> At: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.science.philosophy.peirce/13840
>
> Edwina,
>
> Setting terminology aside for just a moment, there is at present a general
> lack of understanding as to what constitutes (1) a relation, (2) a triadic
> relation, (3) a triadic sign relation.  Those subjects are treated by
> Peirce in his logic of relative terms and the corresponding mathematics of
> relations, all of which is clear enough in his early papers.  Without a
> grasp of that background, most of what he writes later is doomed to be
> mis-interpreted.
>
> Jon
>
> Edwina Taborsky wrote:
>> Gary F - thanks for this introduction.
>>
>> I think it's important to clarify that, first, the interactions between
>> the sign and the object; and the sign and the interpretant, are
>> relations - my use of this term has prompted serious criticism on the
>> Peirce list!  I continue to use the Peircean term of 'representamen' for
>> this mediate sign...rather than sign. I confine the term 'sign' to the
>> full triad of object-representamen-interpretant.
>>
>> And I think it's important to acknowledge that there are nine such
>> relations available to semiosis - not just the three of icon, index and
>> symbol - which refer anyway, only to the relation of the representamen
>> to the object and ignore the other two vital semiosic processes of the
>> representamen-in-itself and the relation to the interpretant.
>>
>> Edwina
> --
>
> academia: http://independent.academia.edu/JonAwbrey
> my word press blog: http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/
> inquiry list: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
> isw: http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/index.php/JLA
> oeiswiki: http://www.oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey
> facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/JonnyCache
>
>


-----------------------------
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 .




Reply via email to