Post : Zeroth Law Of Semiotics
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2015/07/30/zeroth-law-of-semiotics/
Date : July 30, 2015 at 10:00 am

Peircers,

New (if not exactly novel) discussions of the so-called "Liar Paradox"
have broken out at several places on the web in recent weeks and these
always bring to my mind at least a number of critical ways in which the
Peircean paradigm of logic as semiotics differs from the fallback paradigm
that bedevils the thinking of those who have yet to see by Peirce's lights.

And that brings to my mind at least the following oldie but still goodie
that articulates what I take to be the issue at the root of this and many
other pseudo-problems.  (I have revised the title a bit for this edition.)

Zeroth Law Of Semiotics
=======================

Meaning is a privilege not a right.
Not all pictures depict.
Not all signs denote.

Never confuse a property of a sign,
just for instance, existence,
with a sign of a property,
for instance, existence.

Taking a property of a sign
for a sign of a property
is the zeroth sign of
nominal thinking
and the first
mistake.

Also Sprach 0*
2002 October 09
http://lyris.ttu.edu/read/messages?id=32824

--

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 .




Reply via email to