Dear Gary, lists

In the discussion of this P quote
:
"If you object that there can be no immediate consciousness of generality, I 
grant that. If you add that one can have no direct experience of the general, I 
grant that as well. Generality, Thirdness, pours in upon us in our very 
perceptual judgments, and all reasoning, so far as it depends on necessary 
reasoning, that is to say, mathematical reasoning, turns upon the perception of 
generality and continuity at every step (CP 5.150)

it may be too easy to get the impression that as there is "no immediate 
consciousness of generality", there must be, instead, perception as immediate 
consciousness of First- and Secondness from which generatlity is then, later, 
construed by acts of inference, generalization etc. But that would be to 
conform Peirce to the schema of logical empiricism which seems to have grown 
into default schema over the last couple of generations.
And that is not, indeed, what Peirce thought. What IS "immediate consciousness" 
about in Peirce? He uses the term in several connections. Sometimes he says it 
is a "pure fiction" (1.343), sometimes he says  it is identical to the Feeling 
as the qualitiative aspect of any experience (1.379) but that it is 
instantaneous and thus does not cover a timespan (hence its fictionality 
because things not covering a timespan do not exist).
But Feelings are Firstnesses and, for that reason, never appear in isolation 
(all phenomena having both 1-2-3 aspects). So immediate-consciousness-Feelings 
come in company with existence (2) and generality/continuity (3). That is why 
what appears in perception is perceptual judgments - so perception as such is 
NOT "immediate consciousness". It is only the Feeling aspect of perception 
which is immediate - and that can only be isolated and contemplated 
retroactively (but then we are already in time/generality/continuity). 
Immediate consciousness, then, is something accompanying all experience, but 
graspable only, in itself, as a vanishing limit category. Thus, it is nothing 
like stable sense data at a distance from later generalizations.

Best
F

-----------------------------
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