Peircers,
From time to time I come to the realization that there are ways of reading
Peirce that make no sense to me. When I stop to think about the potential
sources of that evident divergence from common sense, the first thing that
comes to mind is the fact that people come to reading Peirce with so many
different aims, backgrounds, and collateral experiences with the objects
that he wraps his signs and ideas around.
Thinking about that leads to all sorts of questions that I see no way of
beginning to address with any sense of coherence. All I can do is try to
give a good account of what makes sense to me and why. My experience with
failures to communicate over many trials tells me that the biggest and most
numerous rifts in our several understandings of Peirce all point back to
the visions of relations, triadic relations, and triadic sign relations
that dance in our various and sundry heads.
So that is what I'll take up first ...
Jon
--
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 .
