Dear Vince, lists, Again, temperature is only a representamen because we take it to be, based on its functional depencence on particle states. We - and other sign using organisms - can use all sorts of natural dependencies, relations, and properties as bases for sign production - that does not make them semiotic in and of themselves. Best F
Den 11/09/2014 kl. 18.15 skrev Vinicius Romanini <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>: Dear friends, I agree with Koichiro and Stan on this matter. The "measured" temperature of a system is indeed a representamen because it represents its "general" thermodynamic conditions (which is then the dynamic object of the representamen). The immediate object is the temperature as indicated by a particular thermometer. The immediate interpretant is the very indication on the scale of this thermometer, available to perception. The dynamic interpretant is the dissipation of heat as it produces changes towards a final state (and information if anyone is reading the particular thermometer). And the final interpretant is the final state the system would meet if it reaches thermodynamic equilibrium (and the knowledge about the measured temperature to become shared information). Vinicius
----------------------------- 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 .
