Edwina, List: EDWINA: I don't follow your interpretation of the Spink's comment - I see the Destinate as a synonym of Immediate; the Effective is Dynamic; and the Explicit is Final/Normal.
JON: Peirce clearly states, as we have quoted to each other several times now, "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. Hence it follows from the Definition of a Sign that since the Dynamoid Object determines the Immediate Object, which determines the Sign itself, which determines the Destinate Interpretant, which determines the Effective Interpretant, which determines the Explicit Interpretant, ..." If destinate=immediate, effective=dynamic, and explicit=final/normal, then Ii => Id => If; that is, Ii can be a Third when Id and If are Firsts, which we previously agreed is NOT the case. If Ii must be a First when Id is a First, and Id must be a First when If is a First, then If => Id => Ii; i.e., destinate=final, effective=dynamic, and explicit=immediate. Again, this is NOT the temporal sequence of the semiosic process; it is the taxonomic order of determination that results in 66 sign classes from 10 trichotomies. As Ben Udell has pointed out, it is also consistent with Peirce's use of words like "predestinate" and "destined" elsewhere. 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 .
