I very much enjoyed the focus on applied concepts of the discussion and found it very insightful. I don't see the reference of emptiness so much, but more universal, perhaps.
Bev On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd agree with Ben; I don't think the list can be reduced to 'any and > all topics'. It's a Peircean list. > > Sung, I suggest that your assertions that because we 'think, write and > speak in signs' and that Peircean research was 'devoted to signs'...that > your subsequent conclusion that 'any topics that we 'think, write and > speak' are therefore valid on a Peircean list is a logical fallacy of > circular reasoning. You've reduced the meaning of 'sign' to emptiness. > > As for Stephen and his matriarchal/patriarchal claims, my view is that > they are analytically incorrect; I consider that he has ignored the > economic mode and societal infrastructure as primarily causal of both these > modes of organization (matriarchy/patriarchy) - but, since these factors > are neither Peircean nor even semiosic, then, I have no intention of > getting into a debate on this list. > > But I do acknowledge Stephen Rose's post - for often, even when a post > states that it is Peircean related - this relation may be as invalid as > Sung's illogical claim above - or, as well, a few posters seem > isolate-in-themselves, speaking only for and about their own focus. This > can result in a monologue or a dialogue engaged in only by one other > person. That's what the 'delete' button is for. > > Edwina > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Benjamin Udell <[email protected]> > *To:* [email protected] > *Sent:* Thursday, July 02, 2015 6:17 PM > *Subject:* Re: [PEIRCE-L] More on applying theory - culture, projection > > > > > > > > *Sung, all,Your post implies that we should emulate Peirce to a T but we > can't emulate Peirce to a T because we aren't Peirce. PEIRCE-L is for > Peirce-related discussion. Peirce himself was not focused on > 'Peirce-related' discussion. Instead those who carry on prolonged, > multi-post discussions of a given topic should clarify and thematize the > topic's relation to Peirce because that is what is promised to subscribers > and that is what most subscribers expect.That has been and will continue to > be the policy of peirce-l.Best, Ben Udell as co-manager, peirce-l.* > > On 7/2/2015 5:42 PM, Sungchul Ji wrote: > > Bev, Gary, lists, > > I agree with Bev, because Peirce's whole career was devoted to the study > of signs and "Peirce-related" is thus "sign-related", it seems to me. > Besides, as I learned it from Peirce, we THINK, WRITE, and SPEAK in SIGNS, > and hence whatever we post on these lists should be regarded as > Peirce-related in one way or another, including linguistic texts, chemical > equations, mathematical formulas, network diagrams, pictures, and whatever > else that may emerge in the future as NEW means of communication and > representation through the Internet. > > In other words, for me, semiotics is not yet closed. Its future should > not be confined to studying MACRO-SEMIOTICS as constructed by Poinsot, > Peirce, and others but should be open to studying both MICRO-SEMIOTICS as > currently being developed in biosemiotics (.e.g., DNA as a molecular sign) > and what may be called 'COSMO-SEMIOTICS' as may be developed in the future > (e.g., viewing spiral galaxies as cosmological signs). Imagine what > fantastic syntheses in philosophy Pierce's genius might be accomplishing > now were he alive today ! > > All the best. > > Sung > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Bev Corwin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I enjoy all of the discussions and would prefer more broad than >> restrictive frameworks. I consider restricting discussions as more >> technocratic tactic / approach and not Perice related in style. >> >> Bev >> >>
----------------------------- 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 .
