Then, you've lost me. I agree with the quote on the modal categories from Peirce below about what you term 'the rule of determinism' but I don't see how it moves you into a conflict over the sign classes.
I now see what you mean by your three Interpretants from Short's book, but, I'm not sure WHY you are focusing on this. All that you seem to be doing is pointing out how the three Interpretants can each be in a different categorical mode - and of course, this affects the Interpretation. And?? But the categorical modes have their 'rule of order'...If the Dynamic Interpretant is in a mode of Thirdness, then, the Final won't be in a mode of Firstness! With regard to the synonyms of Destinate, Effective, Explicit - which you see as Final, Dynamic and Immediate - I can only refer you to p. 197 of C. W. Spinks book: Peirce and Triadomania (a book that I think you would find very useful), where he writes that: "the Destinate Interpretant becomes the Immediate Interpretant of the fifth trichotomy, the Effective Interpretant becomes the Dynamical Interpretants (Active and Passive) of the sixth and seventh trichotomoies, and the Explicit Interpretant becomes the eight, ninth and tenth trichtomoies dealing with the "Normal Interpretant" (8.344). This set of synonyms fits in with my view. And I really think that you would find Spinks book excellent. He has a thorough study of the Interpretants in his chapter 6. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jon Alan Schmidt To: Edwina Taborsky Cc: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2015 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [PEIRCE-L] Order of Interpretant Trichotomies for Sign Classes Edwina, List: I am not addressing "the order of the semiosic process," I am simply trying to work out the order of the ten trichotomies that results in 66 sign classes after applying what I have been calling Peirce's rule of determination. "It is evident that a Possible can determine nothing but a Possible; it is equally so that a Necessitant can be determined by nothing but a Necessitant"--i.e., a Third can determine a First, a Second, or a Third; a Second can determine either a First or a Second; and a First can determine only a First. Short's examples are NOT the standard ten classes that come from the three trichotomies of Sign > Relation of Sign to Object > Relation of Sign to Interpretant. Rather, as I indicated, they come from the three trichotomies of Immediate Interpretant > Relation of Sign to Final Interpretant > Relation of Sign to Dynamic Interpretant. What you subsequently quoted from Peirce comes right after his rule of determination, but it is not entirely clear that the destinate-effective-explicit interpretants are the final-dynamic-immediate interpretants, in that order; I now believe that they are. Regards, Jon
----------------------------- 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 .
