In my view, the Immediate Interpretant is in a mode of Firstness and is only a 'possible' interpretation. The Dynamic Interpretant is in a mode of Secondness as is an 'actual' interpretation. The Final or Logical Interpretant is in a mode of Thirdness and is the 'nearest to truth'.
You ask: "How can Ii itself be a Possible and a Feeling, yet still be classified as Categorical or Relative?" The Immediate Interpretant is in the categorical mode of Firstness and thus, is only a feeling, a possibility, a quality. I'm not sure what you mean by the 'three divisions of each'. Are you saying that, for example, the Dynamic Interpretant, which is in a categorical mode of Secondness, and is an 'actuality'...is also...in 'three divisions'...by which I am guessing you mean, in the three categories of Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness? I don't see that. I can see that a triadic Sign can be made up of all three categories, but I don't see how ONE Relation (eg, that between the Representamen and the Immediate Interpretant)...can be made up of all three categories. The triadic Sign might, for example, not include any more intensive interpretation than the Immediate Interpretant (a rheme). Or, it might include TWO Interpretants - with the first one, the Immediate, being a rheme in Firstness and the next one, the Dynamic, being a dicent in Secondness...and it might not continue on to a Final Interpretant. Edwina ----- Original Message ----- From: Jon Alan Schmidt To: Edwina Taborsky Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2015 6:02 PM Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Order of Interpretant Trichotomies for Sign Classes Edwina, List: I guess I am confused about your comment stating that you are confused by my comment! Perhaps my difficulty stems from the different (but related) notions of "mode" and "modal" in this context--Firstness/Secondness/Thirdness, Possible/Actual/Necessitant, Feeling/Action/Thought. If Ii=Possible, Id=Actual, and If=Necessitant, then what are the three divisions of each? My guess, following Short, was Feeling/Action/Thought, which seems pretty consistent with L463 for Ii and EP2:489-490 for Id and If. But if Ii=Possible=Feeling, Id=Actual=Action, and If=Necessitant=Thought, then what are the three divisions of each? How can Ii itself be a Possible and a Feeling, yet still be classified as Categorical or Relative? Thanks, Jon On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: Jon - I'm confused by your comment! I don't see a 'trichotomy of each one'. The order of the three Interpretants is within the modal sense: Feeling/Action/Thought (Firstness, Secondness, Thirdness) and the terms for the Interpretant in this mode are: Immediate, Dynamic and Final. I've also seen the terms of Emotional, Energetic, Logical, and Possible, Actual, Habitual, for the same three Interpretants. And, Explicit, Effective, Destinate. But it's all the same: they operate within the three modal categories of Firstness, Secondness, Thirdness.
----------------------------- 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 .
