At 09:54 PM 11/29/2014, Gary Richmond wrote:
The Peirce quotation you offered concerns only an "absolute" first and that, no doubt, is an abstraction and, as such, cannot be experienced.
HP: If it cannot be experienced how do you know this abstraction is more than an artifact of language? I would say that Firstness now belongs to the ongoing <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia>qualia<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia> problem.
The question arises for any abstract verbal distinctions. For example, Edwina's "three 'pure' or 'genuine' modes, 1-1, 2-2, 3-3, or Firstness as Firstness, Secondness as Secondness; Thirdness as Thirdness."
Just as confusing are the converse failures to make distinctions that have empirical content. For example, Peirce's lumping abduction with logic.
Qualia problems will require more than philosophical and linguistic distinctions to clarify. We will need to know more about what is going on in brains.
Howard
----------------------------- 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 .
