Edwina, List: I will reply to the list one last time, just in case someone else would like to join the fun. I certainly am still interested in getting others' thoughts about my original question, especially since I feel like I am now right back where I started. If you prefer to continue our specific conversation off-list, that is fine.
Frankly, what you said yesterday made more sense to me, even though prior to that I thought (as you do) that Ii => Id => If. It seems like the immediate interpretant would have to be the most ambiguous of the three, while the final interpretant would have to be the most definitive--consistent with the alignment of immediate/dynamic/final with Firstness/Secondness/Thirdness; or perhaps I should say doubly-degenerate/degenerate/genuine Thirdness. After all, how can the truth be MORE ambiguous than a mere first impression? I wonder if the problem all along has been my incomplete grasp of the terminology. Furthermore, how would you respond to Mueller's argument in favor of If => Id => Ii? "Consider the il being of the nature of a First. Then by Peircean phenomenological principle this il can only rule dynamic and normal Interpretants of the same nature. But that is unacceptable. There must be the chance that a sign which given enough time for consideration would be interpreted (ni) as a Third is actually interpreted (di) as a Second. So the ni should precede the di and in analogy to the two objects the di the il." Note that "precede" here is not in the temporal sense (sequence of semeiosic process), but in the taxonomic sense (order of determination). In any event, what would still be really helpful to me are some illustrative examples. Assuming that you are correct about the taxonomic order of determination, what would be some signs that are shocking/percussive (Id=2) and either logical/relative (Ii=3) or gratific (If=1)? Contrary to that hypothesis, are there any signs that are shocking/percussive (Id=2) and either qualitative/hypothetic (Ii=1) or to produce self-control (If=3)? 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 .
